General Discussion (dev branch)

[scavenjer 112]

26 minutes ago, scratch_one said:

Dude, you don't know what are you talking about.  It is a bullshit now. For many ways. The drunk tailshaking it is just the most annoying thing i mentioned.
I don't want this. My friends called it a brick model. For some reason i guess.

 

I moving into the appropriate topic, sry :/

Already mentioned this to oukej, check the fixed wing flight model thread, though I have to point out that the neophron and wipeout were both using very unrealistic and way too agile flight models, easily being able to outturn 4.5 gen air superiority fighters like the gryphon.

 

Which is ludicrous, especially with the kinds of payload they can carry.

[winse 22]

@oukej, a little question:

 

There are a couple of helmets in game: H_HelmetO_ViperSP_hex_F and H_HelmetO_ViperSP_ghex_F. They're awesome looking, but due to builtin TI's they can't be used in MP as they're actually a cheat. Would it be possible to add a non-TI versions of those helmets to game?

[fn_Quiksilver 1636]

24 minutes ago, winse said:

@oukej, a little question:

 

There are a couple of helmets in game: H_HelmetO_ViperSP_hex_F and H_HelmetO_ViperSP_ghex_F. They're awesome looking, but due to builtin TI's they can't be used in MP as they're actually a cheat. Would it be possible to add a non-TI versions of those helmets to game?

 

Non-TI variants wouldnt make much sense, as the helmet model has IR and thermal imaging lenses all over it. I agree the helmet is OP, but the solution is to remove it from the scenario.

[winse 22]

31 minutes ago, fn_Quiksilver said:

 

Non-TI variants wouldnt make much sense, as the helmet model has IR and thermal imaging lenses all over it. I agree the helmet is OP, but the solution is to remove it from the scenario.

That's how we do now. But a lot of players ask us for it to be added. Helmet is very cool-looking and Viper uniform looks uncomplete without it. So I try to investigate as much options as possible before say "no".

 

Besides, I'm not talking about changing existing versions of helmets and/or changing existing editor units. Just about addition of alternative versions of the helmets so mission maker would have choice.

[fn_Quiksilver 1636]

Partially submerged building on Malden gives AI a hard time

 

 

located here

 

[SuicideKing 233]

So a number of issues that I've noticed on stable:

 

1. Revive: AI appear to be shooting "downed" soldiers

2. Sound: When in Spectator (maybe even otherwise, not sure), the Nyx recon makes weird static noises like an old dial up modem.

3. Sound: Carl Gustav is too quiet

4: Sound: SPG Technical is too quiet

5. LSV AI: The AT LSVs drive right up to armour and shoot them at very close range (<30m). 

6. Missiles: When using the Rhino's ATGM (LG) via datalink, if the selected laser has a dotted square around it, the missile when fired in top attack mode does this crazy loop thing before circling around and sometimes hitting the target. Not sure if intentional or not.

[Imperator[TFD] 444]

17 minutes ago, SuicideKing said:

So a number of issues that I've noticed on stable:

 

1. Revive: AI appear to be shooting "downed" soldiers

 

 

I thought this was normal?

Maybe outside the Laws of War though.

[Tankbuster 1746]

26 minutes ago, SuicideKing said:

So a number of issues that I've noticed on stable:

 

1. Revive: AI appear to be shooting "downed" soldiers

 

 

This is happening in stable. They are 'executing' incapacitated players.

[fn_Quiksilver 1636]

1 hour ago, Tankbuster said:

This is happening in stable. They are 'executing' incapacitated players.

 

did incapacitated units lose their "setcaptive" state?

 

also what revive/incapacitation system?

 

I still execute "setCaptive", no troubles here. I think the ACE3 team moved over to using "setUnitTrait ["camouflageCoef",..." instead of setcaptive.

[Tankbuster 1746]

Are incap'd players supposed to be captive true? Is that how it works?

I'll check their captive status in a moment.

I'm using BI revive.

[fn_Quiksilver 1636]

13 minutes ago, Tankbuster said:

Are incap'd players supposed to be captive true? Is that how it works?

I'll check their captive status in a moment.

I'm using BI revive.

 

i dont know, its just how ive always done it ... put the person on the ground, setcaptive true, and then false once they're back up

 

setcaptive just adds them to "sideFriendly" which is friendly to all factions

 

setUnconscious should do that automatically (no need for setCaptive) unless they changed something ... in that case im happy i didnt bother to remove the setcaptive stuff

[scavenjer 112]

Something I noticed: the Rhino cannot lock onto a laser designator of a strider or one used by infantry, I tried to enable data link, putting an infantry of the same faction as the tank in the strider, etc, I'm not sure what I'm doing wrong.

Using a UAV's laser worked perfectly fine.

Also first noticed this on a vanilla pvp server, I couldn't lock onto a laser from a friendly infantryman, even with LOS on it, it simply woudln't appear on the sensor.

 

Is this intended behaviour?

@oukej

 

[danny96 80]

I want to report bug:

Playable Commander sitting at Gunner position in a tank cannot control the tank movement.

 

Reproduction:

1) Open EDEN

1) Spawn a player unit (whatever one you like, doesn't matter)

2) Spawn a tank & set commander as playable, then switch seats with gunner so commander gets the gunner seat

3) Play Mission

4) Use Team Switch to your Tank Commander sitting on Gunner position and try WSAD..no reaction

 

I wanted to set-up a Singleplayer mission where you control multiple tanks from different parts of the map but it's not possible i guess:(.

[Yoshi_E 179]

1 hour ago, scavenjer said:

Something I noticed: the Rhino cannot lock onto a laser designator of a strider or one used by infantry, I tried to enable data link, putting an infantry of the same faction as the tank in the strider, etc, I'm not sure what I'm doing wrong.

Using a UAV's laser worked perfectly fine.

Also first noticed this on a vanilla pvp server, I couldn't lock onto a laser from a friendly infantryman, even with LOS on it, it simply woudln't appear on the sensor.

 

Is this intended behaviour?

@oukej

 

If its not working i would prob report it as a bug.

[heavygunner 179]

I guess it's not a feature that you can lock onto lasers between sides, probably realistic too with having different wavelengths n' stuff?

[scavenjer 112]

Yeah, someone else I know said it worked for them, but it certainly didn't when I tested it.... just weird man.

[The Spirit of Morpheus 2]

On 16.4.2018 at 1:47 AM, The Spirit of Morpheus said:

It may be more realistic now, but the cargo capacity is UNBEARABLY low... BI, please do something! 

 

At least, add an option (for the next game/platform update) to use the old storage system, if needed... 

 

T.S.O.M. 

 

If this is the wrong thread, then in which thread/which forum section I should request this?

 

Thanks for Enlightment,

 

T.S.O.M.

[SuicideKing 233]

19 hours ago, Imperator[TFD] said:

 

I thought this was normal?

Maybe outside the Laws of War though.

No...as of 1.80 incapacitated soldiers were captive. I saw that they changed something in the logs with that revive overhaul they did, but I couldn't test it in MP, and I didn't think they'd actually do this.

16 hours ago, fn_Quiksilver said:

setUnconscious should do that automatically (no need for setCaptive) unless they changed something ... in that case im happy i didnt bother to remove the setcaptive stuff

yeah it seems they have...man F3 Simple Wounding System was simple but at least we only had to update it once a year :/ ...

[POLPOX 778]

In today's update? Interesting. So, can we create something like a broken watch after a nuclear blast?

[lexx 1363]

Nice. I'm curious if this was added to be used in vanilla content or if it is only meant for modders.

[Damian90 697]

Hey, anyone noticed that Scorcher model was reversed to it's previous original version with unrealistically small turret ring, compared to the fixed version prior Tanks DLC?

 

Also I think Kuma had the same fate.

 

Tasks already created in the Arma3 bug tracker.

[teabagginpeople 398]

41 minutes ago, Damian90 said:

Hey, anyone noticed that Scorcher model was reversed to it's previous original version with unrealistically small turret ring, compared to the fixed version prior Tanks DLC?

 

Also I think Kuma had the same fate.

 

Tasks already created in the Arma3 bug tracker.

speculation but perhaps clashed with turn outs or interiors.

[Alacazain 2]

All vehicles with posibility to be turned out on combined with looking on a darter/Tayran drone creates a bug. Every time you look on the drone the player in the vehicle will be automatically be turned out. Exposes to threat of being sniped/ambushed. For exemple if you have a UAV Drone and use an artillery combination. Every time you look on it your player will be turned out.

[POLPOX 778]

Things are progressing than I expected. I can't wait more!

[R3vo 2654]

54 minutes ago, POLPOX said:

Things are progressing than I expected. I can't wait more!

That's indeed a nice feature.