General Discussion (dev branch)

[Brisse 78]

"Adjusted flare size, intensity and coloring of flashlight accessory"

While you are at it, can't you give the flashlight a hotspot in the middle, which will also boost it's range slightly? It really deserves this, and even todays weapon mounted lights have better performance than this supposedly future flashlight we have ingame. The flood light of the light is okay, but it needs a hotspot.

[CaptainAzimuth 714]

It's a very simple explanation. It's largely because of the AI, with additional design concerns for MP/PvP.

AI because they don't have advanced detection behavior to account for such cases, and it would probably take plenty of time to implement. Result without accounting for the AI would be them just ignoring you as if you were setCaptive'd or treating you like any other enemy. If you watch the video where Ivan demonstrated it at E3, I think, you'll see the former.

Design because in PvP MP you could easily pretend to be the other army or get team killed. There are no telltale signs that would give you away IRL. You don't speak much differently, faces do not have to stand out due to the custom nature of faces. It would be akin to TF2's spy, but without the ability to friendly-fire hostility check or bumping into each other to check for collision. If anything, it would require different mechanics and adjustments to the current side mechanics.

Depends on the situation. For special operations, it would work perfectly. Don't get seen by your enemies or friendlies, done it before in early early Alpha. Than again in real life, if a guy isn't where he's supposed to be, well... something's already up.

Anyhow, anyone try out the new friction mechanics yet?I reckon it wont make too much of a noticeable difference.

[Brisse 78]

Anyhow, anyone try out the new friction mechanics yet?I reckon it wont make too much of a noticeable difference.

There seems to be a slight difference. It's easiest to notice with the quadbike, and very hard to notice with other vehicles.

[blackpixxel 53]

Recoil Bugs

Both Bugs are still in the game:

#1: There is no recoil after a fast rotation. Only the first shot will kick the weapon, while the following shots will hit the same spot. After some time the recoil starts working again.

#2: Different recoil animations for some rifles in different firemodes. Totally unrealistic. In addition to that the fullauto recoil looks unrealistic and shakes the soldiers upper body about 15 cm to the back.

I really hope that BI fix those really anoying bugs soon.

[insumsnoy 4]

"Added: Controls action for locking turret on an object" - Has anyone found the key bind for this? I cant find it in the controls menu.

EDIT: Never mind I just found it. It is near the bottom in Controls>Weapons for anyone else looking for it.

[Varanon 892]

It's not a technical limitation of the engine, so it's obviously by design. Demanding some justification aside from the explanation they have already given and maintained for a over year probably isn't going to get that changed. How is this even relevant to the dev branch, anyway? This limitation has been part of the game since alpha.

It has not been part of the Alpha. It's a recent change. Only after last patch, half of the loadouts don't work anymore. It used to work before that. So, no, it's not maintained over a year at all.

I post it into the dev branch because a) I don't want to start a thread specifically about it, and b) there's no thread about the latest patch, and c) it's a very recent change, so the dev branch is as good as anything.

Edited June 19, 2014 by Varanon

[maddogx 13]

It has not been part of the Alpha. It's a recent change.

Err, nope. It was even reported as a "bug" one day after the alpha was first released.

It was also the official position from BI since the beginning of the alpha that this limitation was intentional, but I can't be arsed to dig up which blog or video they said it in. This was a reversal from one of their first A3 videos, which showed the possibility to take enemy uniforms.

Only after last patch, half of the loadouts don't work anymore.

What "loadouts"? You were talking about not being able to take an enemy uniform.

EDIT: perhaps you've been assigning enemy uniforms via script, in which case you'll want this recently introduced script command.

Edited June 19, 2014 by MadDogX

[Jona33 51]

It has not been part of the Alpha. It's a recent change. Only after last patch, half of the loadouts don't work anymore. It used to work before that. So, no, it's not maintained over a year at all.

I post it into the dev branch because a) I don't want to start a thread specifically about it, and b) there's no thread about the latest patch, and c) it's a very recent change, so the dev branch is as good as anything.

Do you mean the addUniform/forceAddUniform thing rather than picking up an OPFOR uniform when in game?

[.kju 3244]

The change of addUniform behavior brakes missions.

BI should have introduced a new command for the new desired functionality instead (of changing the addUniform).

[Varanon 892]

What "loadouts"? You were talking about not being able to take an enemy uniform.

EDIT: perhaps you've been assigning enemy uniforms via script, in which case you'll want this recently introduced script command.

Sigh.. sorry, yeah, that's what I mean.. the fact that the script command addUniform no longer adds a uniform to a unit unless it's the same faction. It will break a lot of missions. Heck, setCaptive basically makes you civilian, I wonder if that also means you can't add a uniform of the correct faction to a captive unit ?

Yes, forceAddUniform will enforce this, but it will break a ton of missions now that addUniform no longer works. I don't understand the decision behind it.

[maddogx 13]

I don't understand the decision behind it.

Neither do I. All I can say is, I saw this coming. ;)

[Phantom Six 25]

It would've been logical to make a new command called sideadduniform rather than completely change what addUniform does. Now if someone adduniform on their missions with uniforms other than their faction, it will not work and will break the missions. It is best to not change a command that was working for a good while and just make a new command for that purpose instead. Instead of make addUniform to forceAddUniform, keep addUniform functionality to what it use to do and add a new command something like sideAddUniform instead. That'll save the hassle of breaking many missions with custom loadouts.

[rübe 127]

It would've been logical to make a new command called sideadduniform rather than completely change what addUniform does. Now if someone adduniform on their missions with uniforms other than their faction, it will not work and will break the missions. It is best to not change a command that was working for a good while and just make a new command for that purpose instead. [...]

Call me nuts, but I strongly disagree.

Have you ever had the pleasure to write something in PHP?

:232:

Syntax should be fixed/cleaned up (too) if necessary (and it happens a lot, because it's really hard to name things right the first try). And it's much better (for all of us) if a few mission are broken - which is no big deal. There most likely won't be an opportunity to start over from scratch for Arma4 (and then do it right the first try... - a thing that has never happend before in human history of building things out of zeros and ones...).

And this applies to more than just syntax. Anyone remembers how the moon-phases (broken since OFP) never got fixed (due to backwards-compatibility - height of sea level is influenced by it, so...), and were still broken in Arma2? Boy did that suck. D:

PS. Anyone knows if we - finally - have correct moon phases now in Arma3?

Let me guess...

[maddogx 13]

Something interesting is hitting the dev branch on monday. Linking here for maximum visibility. :)

There will be a config change in order to enable unique silencer sounds for each weapon; that means any creators of weapon addons will need to adjust their configs before the Bootcamp update arrives.

Also, if I understand the new system correctly, this change will allow for some other interesting possibilities regarding weapon barrel attachments.

Edited June 20, 2014 by MadDogX
clarification

[tpw 2315]

The latest dev build and release 1.22 have reintroduced the horrible amplified vertical oscillating weapon sway when fatigued, that appeared a few months ago and was thankfully removed. Hope they remove it, it's even more pronounced this time around.

[Fushko 59]

The latest dev build and release 1.22 have reintroduced the horrible amplified vertical oscillating weapon sway when fatigued, that appeared a few months ago and was thankfully removed. Hope they remove it, it's even more pronounced this time around.

I noticed it and it's REALLY bad. I doesn't even seem to go when you're not fatigued anymore.

[LSD_Timewarp82 21]

Can agree to that, its like Aiming with "Morbus Parkinson"

And i dont get it how such things can happen, a few month old issue appears again. Unbeliveable

Edited June 20, 2014 by LSD_Timewarp82

[maddogx 13]

Can agree to that, its like Aiming with "Morbus Parkinson"

And i dont get it how such things can happen, a few month old issue appears again. Unbeliveable

It's a prototype feature which still needs tweaking, and as such may not work as intended. (Just like the current no-recoil bug, which seems to be related to the new weapon inertia feature.)

When such things land on stable it's definitely a massive problem (and should be reverted or hotfixed ASAP!), but on the dev branch these things are not entirely unexpected. That's what the dev branch is for, i.e. testing these new features and giving feedback.

The main problem (aside from accidental deployment to stable) is that BI are dumping these things onto dev branch without any warning or explanation.

[LSD_Timewarp82 21]

Yeah too bad, i am mostly on Main branch, only when intersting optimization were done i´ll switch to dev branch to test these.

But when such old things land again on main branch it makes me think how the devs might work and releasing this without testing it before. And thats why i said Unbeliveable

[maddogx 13]

• Added: New English protocol of Dan Brown
  

What? The Dan Brown? ;)

[St. Jimmy 272]

Can agree to that, its like Aiming with "Morbus Parkinson"

And i dont get it how such things can happen, a few month old issue appears again. Unbeliveable

It doesn't look natural but it does it's job well. Stop shoot and move again and you can hit very well even for greater distance.

And it fades away after resting. At least I didn't see that when I wasn't fatigued anymore.

/This was before today's update.

[LSD_Timewarp82 21]

It doesn't look natural but it does it's job well. Stop shoot and move again and you can hit very well even for greater distance.

And it fades away after resting. At least I didn't see that when I wasn't fatigued anymore.

/This was before today's update.

I dont want to use new movement to avoid an issue which shouldnt be ingame. At least not after its been fixed months ago. Ridiculous.

[2nd ranger 282]

What? The Dan Brown? ;)

I tried the new voice out, and it turns out to be the actor who did Cooper and Reynolds. Daniel Brown is his name.

[maddogx 13]

I tried the new voice out, and it turns out to be the actor who did Cooper and Reynolds. Daniel Brown is his name.

Ah, that makes more sense. :)

He's going to be voicing a character in some upcoming mission / campaign / bootcamp thingy. I guarantee it.

[roberthammer 582]

Ah, that makes more sense. :)

He's going to be voicing a character in some upcoming mission / campaign / bootcamp thingy. I guarantee it.

You know , Bootcamp needs a insulting Drill instructor like from Full Metal Jacket or from Vietcong Game :D