General Discussion (dev branch)

[TheMasterofBlubb 10]

@Yoshi_E wasnt there a proximity fuse. Why isnt it triggering?

[Pheonixxx69 0]

When will it be possible to walk inside and on transport in ARMA?? For example as in joint operations combined arms https://youtu.be/YQOlL2EoLNo? 

[oukej 2911]

On 5/12/2018 at 2:00 PM, pr9inichek said:

Not fixed

7 hours ago, TheMasterofBlubb said:

@Yoshi_E wasnt there a proximity fuse. Why isnt it triggering?

The Titan doesn't have such a big trigger radius and overall the missile isn't rly good at transsonic or faster taregets. (It's primarily against helicopters and slow flying jets.) But then one vid shows an Ababil near miss. Is that reliably reproducible for u pls?

[winse 22]

7 hours ago, oukej said:

The Titan doesn't have such a big trigger radius and overall the missile isn't rly good at transsonic or faster taregets. (It's primarily against helicopters and slow flying jets.) But then one vid shows an Ababil near miss. Is that reliably reproducible for u pls?

Titan is for slow targets.. Hm.. And how are we considered to fight supersonic planes from the ground then, taking into account different versions of titan - is everything ground units have in game?

[Yoshi_E 179]

It would be perfectly fine, if titan AA would be limited to infantry AA weapons, but its not. AA tanks use the same missile and are on the same way useless against Jets, and this is a problem.

The only ground unit that is effective against jets is the centurion or the nyx AA (jupp that tiny thing). If you don't have a centurion or a jet on your own, your chances are slim to take down a modern jet.

 

It might be best to just change the ammo on the AA tanks from titan to something more effective, if you need them to fight jets.

 

8 hours ago, oukej said:

The Titan doesn't have such a big trigger radius and overall the missile isn't rly good at transsonic or faster taregets. (It's primarily against helicopters and slow flying jets.) But then one vid shows an Ababil near miss. Is that reliably reproducible for u pls?

 

It can reliably reproduced.

I think its a problem on how missiles aim, or attack their target.

For the ATGM this was observed here: https://feedback.bistudio.com/T128199 their "overshoot" distance is quite small, about 1m.

For the Titan AA the same thing can be observed as seen in @pr9inichek video with a larger "overshoot" distance of about 5-10m

[Yoshi_E 179]

@oukej All missile behave this way, they only work thanks to their proximity detection. They never actually manage to hit a target.

For the Titan AA it is a problem, as that distance is often not enough to trigger an explosion / cause damage.

 

Here tested with Mk-49 Spartan SAM. 

 

 

[jukk 4]

1 hour ago, Yoshi_E said:

@oukej All missile behave this way, they only work thanks to their proximity detection. They never actually manage to hit a target.

For the Titan AA it is a problem, as that distance is often not enough to trigger an explosion / cause damage.

 

Here tested with Mk-49 Spartan SAM. 

 

 

Does this behaviour depend on the direction of attack? Like if you fire the missile to the rear of the aircraft instead?

[scavenjer 112]

@oukej

I understand that the infantry titan is for helis only, but the AA tanks genuinely suffer from this quite a lot, their cannons are near useless against fast moving jets and their missiles are quite pitiful.

 

It's one of the main reasons I've lobbied for the titans to be removed off the AAs and given the Spartan missiles instead.

 

I know the dev team is now only there for minor stuff and bug fixing, but simply having the option for 2x Spartan missiles (1 mag or 2) on the AA tanks would help a lot, essentially give them a loadout option so they can choose between titans and Spartans.

 

Honestly, the dynamic loadout you introduced with jets DLC should've been extended to AFVs, it's a missed opportunity that could've solved some issues people have with the AFV loadouts.

 

Like @Yoshi_E I've noticed that the missiles don't seem to have a proper proportional navigation system (or at the very least not properly configured).

 

I've personally seen this behaviour on ASRAAMs and most other AA missiles, the only one that seems less affected is the BIM-9X and I think that's mostly due to the insanely high maneuverability.

 

Ofcourse I don't know what code you guys use for the navigation and the specifics of it, these are just my two cents.

[Damian90 697]

@oukej

 

I have a small suggestion about crew displays in ground vehicles. Can size of the fonts like ammo type, ammo count etc. be made smaller, this is because when we for example replace standard loadouts with our own via replacement configs, there are problems with numbers and letters not fitting their boxes. Also if more than 3 main gun ammo types are in the vehicle loadout, display do not show them.

 

For example if I replace standard coax mg loadout in Slammer, to a larger 2000 rounds belts, the last 0 do not fit it's coax mg ammo count box on the display.

 

Same goes with adding MARUK ATGM's, their names do not fit respective box on the display. Don't mind the ammo loadouts, it's just me playing around to see how this works. ;)

 

[jone_kone 158]

20 minutes ago, scavenjer said:

@oukej

I understand that the infantry titan is for helis only, but the AA tanks genuinely suffer from this quite a lot, their cannons are near useless against fast moving jets and their missiles are quite pitiful.

 

It's one of the main reasons I've lobbied for the titans to be removed off the AAs and given the Spartan missiles instead.

 

I know the dev team is now only there for minor stuff and bug fixing, but simply having the option for 2x Spartan missiles (1 mag or 2) on the AA tanks would help a lot, essentially give them a loadout option so they can choose between titans and Spartans.

 

Honestly, the dynamic loadout you introduced with jets DLC should've been extended to AFVs, it's a missed opportunity that could've solved some issues people have with the AFV loadouts.

 

Like @Yoshi_E I've noticed that the missiles don't seem to have a proper proportional navigation system (or at the very least not properly configured).

 

I've personally seen this behaviour on ASRAAMs and most other AA missiles, the only one that seems less affected is the BIM-9X and I think that's mostly due to the insanely high maneuverability.

 

Ofcourse I don't know what code you guys use for the navigation and the specifics of it, these are just my two cents.

 

Completely agree on most points. The shoulder launched AA Titans should preferably not be against helis or slow airplanes only. Leave it up to the operator to be able to retain a lock and fire on a fast moving jet?  It is again much a mission balancing issue. If you have the Tigris or the AA Nyx in the mission, they are easily also very effective against infantry. If you want to make a mission where a lightly armed force is defending against a force supported by jets, then currently you don´t really have many options regarding AA.

 

With the introduction of the Jets DLC it seems the AA-assets was mostly forgotten (and now we use repainted Carrier systems as SAM-sites). 

 

Something that would be interesting to explore would be a missile type like the starstreak missile. AA and AT  magazine variants with SACLOS would require skill by the player to achive hits (M_Titan_AA_SACLOS & M_Titan_AT_SACLOS?).

 

 

 

 

 

[TheMasterofBlubb 10]

I would suggest using the Titans on vehicles with a huger proximity fuse and radar guidance(and IR additionally) so you dont have to remake them to much.

 

[scavenjer 112]

1 hour ago, TheMasterofBlubb said:

I would suggest using the Titans on vehicles with a huger proximity fuse and radar guidance(and IR additionally) so you dont have to remake them to much.

 

Neither of these would fix the core issues though..

They already have the Spartan missiles, those are actually designed to work against jets, they've fit better with no need for adjustment.

[heavygunner 179]

Or just give them NASAMS treatment and give them the AMRAAM model.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NASAMS

 

So yeah there are enough possibilities, the question is if BIS wants to  go away from the Gepard/K30 Biho like AA, which also only have Stinger-like shortrange IR missiles to assist the gun, which are more for following tanks and securing other tanks while they do their thing,to a system like Pantsir for point or area defense.

 

[a_killer_wombat 120]

Just noticed that the markings on the MX rifles read 6.5x38mm when it should be 6.5x39mm according to the magazine info.

 

 

[the_one_and_only_Venator 163]

15 minutes ago, a_killer_wombat said:

Just noticed that the markings on the MX rifles read 6.5x38mm when it should be 6.5x39mm according to the magazine info.

-snip-

Well I guess it's an American rifle. They aren't that much into the metric system...

[.kju 3245]

Quote

Tweaked: AI will now stick more to the right side on roads 

Tweaked: AI may drive a tiny bit smoother when crossing bridges

 

its said these are data changes. cant see anything in the config diff though. how is this done? were the models adjusted?

[froggyluv 2136]

That was a pretty grim sitrep -after seeing the highlight being Apex Protocol Singleplayer only to have it read, "we aint doing it but the good news we feel like its already awesome".....seriously? The rest was just telling us what our own community is offering which we already know. Man, if there was ever a time to light a torch for a glimpse of a future project...

[haleks 8212]

39 minutes ago, froggyluv said:

That was a pretty grim sitrep -after seeing the highlight being Apex Protocol Singleplayer only to have it read, "we aint doing it but the good news we feel like its already awesome".....seriously? The rest was just telling us what our own community is offering which we already know. Man, if there was ever a time to light a torch for a glimpse of a future project...

 

So that's it then... SP players have close to no reason to go and play on Tanoa.

Man, I kinda regret buying it. Sure it's always cool to have more and more assets and terrains, but if one has no reason (or possibility) to use or explore them outside of official content, why bother?

Malden, wich was free, has much more to offer to the SP crowd; the Apex DLC oughtta be shipped with content tailored for the different player bases, just like the base game, right now, it feels like the biggest letdown of the Arma3 history (at least for us weird SP players). >_<'

[Janez 531]

I just noticed that crouched strafing right in lowered weapon mode is a lot slower then strafing left. Seems like a bug.

 

Also, is vsync now supposed to be adoptive or something? Anytime I drop below 60 FPS, it stutters badly for couple of seconds, goes to around 30 - but not necessarily exactly 30 - and then goes back to 60. So, constant stuttering with vsync when there is anything going on.

 

GTX1060 3GB, stable 1.82.

[oukej 2911]

16 hours ago, .kju said:

its said these are data changes. cant see anything in the config diff though. how is this done? were the models adjusted?

Changes in AIpathOffset in terrain's class RoadTypesLibrary

[fn_Quiksilver 1636]

Requesting small tweak:

 

When using "setFlagOwner" script command, the flag starts from the top of the flag pole and slides down to the bottom before attaching to the player. It would be nice if there was an alternative "instantaneous" syntax to skip the animation phase transition.

 

Also, if we use the new "setFlagAnimationPhase" script command to first lower the flag to the bottom of the pole, then using the "setFlagOwner" command will snap it back to the top of the pole to commence the downward transition. It would be good if the "setFlagOwner" command would respect the current animation phase as the starting position for its animation phase transition.

 

tl;dr

 

1. setFlagOwner command needs an alternate syntax for instant transition. 

<flag> setFlagOwner [<unit>,<bool:instant or smooth>];

 

2. setFlagOwner command should respect the current animation phase of the flag as set by "setFlagAnimationPhase"

[SuicideKing 233]

On 5/15/2018 at 8:18 PM, froggyluv said:

(It's primarily against helicopters and slow flying jets.) But then one vid shows an Ababil near miss. Is that reliably reproducible for u pls?

 

Can't help but notice that it's going way over it's IRL top speed of around 480kmph, in the second half of the video.

[da12thMonkey 1943]

8 hours ago, fn_Quiksilver said:

It would be nice if there was an alternative "instantaneous" syntax to skip the animation phase transition.

 

Can't use forceFlagTexture to skip it?

[fn_Quiksilver 1636]

11 minutes ago, da12thMonkey said:

Can't use forceFlagTexture to skip it?

 

that creates a separate flag than the one managed by the flag poles. if you use "setFlagOwner" and "forceFlagTexture" at the same time, there would be a flag sliding down a flag pole AND and flag on the players back already, at the same time. We could do some fiddle with "setFlagTexture" to hide the descending flag pole and a temporary "forceFlagTexture" on the player which is removed once the "flag" command returns a non-null value. we may have to do something like that for proper visual representation, but it seems a bit fiddly

[h - 169]

On the topic of scripting command improvement hopes, I wouldn't mind if we got a additional 'lifetime' parameters for the createVehicle/Agent etc commands  :

type createVehicle [position, timeToLive]
createVehicle [type, position, markers, placement, special, timeToLive]

playSound and playSound3D should have 'get' versions, even better if there was an event for this

<playedSound> //returns the most recent soundsource and the name of the most recent sound played
playSound "alarm";
playedSound; // returns [<source>, "alarm"]

<playedSound3D> //returns the most recent soundsource and the name of the most recent sound played
playSound3D ["A3\Sounds_F\sfx\blip1.wav", player];
playedSound3D; // returns [<soundsource>, "A3\Sounds_F\sfx\blip1.wav"]

or

addMissionEventHandler ["playedSound", {
    params["_soundSource", "_sound"];
}];

Also command for getting the length of the sound file wouldn't get frowned upon..