General Discussion (dev branch)

[JWLEE 1]

I like the new frame of destruction model (color remaining).

But fire with destruction model is really bad. It looks like there is vehicle and fireball, not vehicle burning in flame.

I think that is because of two different script (fire and destruction model) is on its own.

It will be great to make burning vehicles look better.

[nikiforos 450]

But fire with destruction model is really bad. It looks like there is vehicle and fireball, not vehicle burning in flame.

I totally agree with you here. The most realistic fire came with ACE 2 , small fire that could develop to a large fire. I really hope we will see a mod in the near future giving us realistic fire.

I would also like to mention that BlastCore also creates smaller fires not fireballs like the original ones.

[chrys45 1]

Added: New "Arsenal" module (when placed on top of a unit, Zeus can configure its loadout)

Finally, thanks BIS !! Please add a safe option to zeus.

[Kydoimos 915]

Has anyone noticed that the offroad gunner can now tell the AI driver where to go - even if he is in a different group, outranks the player, and already has a waypoint? Is there a way to prevent this? Is it a bug? Has this always been the case? Or is this a dev branch change?

---------- Post added at 21:04 ---------- Previous post was at 20:59 ----------

Has anyone noticed that the offroad gunner can now tell the AI driver where to go - even if he is in a different group, outranks the player, and already has a waypoint? Is there a way to prevent this? Is it a bug? Has this always been the case? Or is this a dev branch change?

Uh, it's the same on stable!

[faire 10]

I think the sway reduction is too big. The sway should be predictable and intensive enough to challenge players to learn to shoot with precision. May be it should be lowered in prone (to current dev-branch state of things) until we get the weapon resting.

[Kerc Kasha 102]

Has anyone noticed that the offroad gunner can now tell the AI driver where to go - even if he is in a different group, outranks the player, and already has a waypoint? Is there a way to prevent this? Is it a bug? Has this always been the case? Or is this a dev branch change?

---------- Post added at 21:04 ---------- Previous post was at 20:59 ----------

Uh, it's the same on stable!

Pretty sure it's been this way since operation flashpoint, the gunner is the commander of that particular vehicle and that bypasses any rank/group

[Bouben 3]

I think the sway reduction is too big. The sway should be predictable and intensive enough to challenge players to learn to shoot with precision. May be it should be lowered in prone (to current dev-branch state of things) until we get the weapon resting.

Agreed.

[raven_jj 1]

I think sway on stable version is perfect. It may not be realistic, but it nicely shows the difficulty of shooting at long distances (though it's still easier than real life, I think introducing wind and weapon resting will even each other out).

Just like Coulum said

The thing is I think people misunderstand what "medium, close range and long range" is in reality. In reality long range shooting is in and around 1km. above 1500 metres is extreme. 2300 is ridiculous. So right now with the dev branch sway close medium and long range shots are easy, while extreme ranges require a bit of concentration but are more than possible for anybody to achieve. This is a problem in my eyes.

It also has another merit. It's a great way to simulate suppression effects. To shoot straight at long distances you have to be focused, calm and actively compensate for sway, you can't just "point your mouse to kill" everyone as before. When you get stressed, you shoot all over the place.

But in the end you could always have "realistic sway" in difficulty options. It would probably satisfy both "twitch shooters" and those who want more realism.

The only thing that has to change is implementing new animations for tired running and introducing suppression tiredness and "sway" for AI.

[twisted 127]

I think sway on stable version is perfect. It may not be realistic, but it nicely shows the difficulty of shooting at long distances (though it's still easier than real life, I think introducing wind and weapon resting will even each other out).

Just like Coulum said

It also has another merit. It's a great way to simulate suppression effects. To shoot straight at long distances you have to be focused, calm and actively compensate for sway, you can't just "point your mouse to kill" everyone as before. When you get stressed, you shoot all over the place.

But in the end you could always have "realistic sway" in difficulty options. It would probably satisfy both "twitch shooters" and those who want more realism.

The only thing that has to change is implementing new animations for tired running and introducing suppression tiredness and "sway" for AI.

agree. hope the vocal minority doesnt drown out what is one or two of the features in arma3 that bring it substantially closer to duplicating how tricky shooting well can be - especially over longer distances. yes its challenging, but making aimed controlled shots should be challenging, unless you're looking for run and spray n pray.

the lowering the lateral sway a bit was fine (not as much as now, BIS you have overcompensated) and taking a little longer to get fatigued. but seriously, dont throw it all out in a knee jerk reaction.

[faire 10]

I second that. As I said lowering sway a prone might help to offset the lack of weapon resting and help players with the transition - it would allow them to know that if they can maneuver well enough to gain good prone position the will have advantage in the fire fight.

[Variable 322]

I also think the sway and fatigue in the stable branch are very good. I hope BIS wasn't scared off by the inevitable complaints of some of the players. Even they will adjust. Keep the faith BIS!

[das attorney 857]

Question for devs following on for this change:

Changed: Fuel explosion power for land vehicles

If I put a few vehicles in a row (spaced about 5m apart) and then destroy the first one with a machine gun, they will blow up simultaneously. Is this a known issue? I would have thought that there would at least be some delay between the cars blowing up.

If I put 30 vehicles in a row, they blow up in this sequence:

Block of 4 cars, 1 car, 4 cars, 1 car, 4 cars and so on.

I know that it is unlikely for 30 cars to be placed in a row in game, but just used as demonstation.

I searched FT and couldn't find tracker. Do you want ticket/repro?

Thanks.

Scratch that - looks like it is a well known issue:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5dsUznP9Dpc&feature=youtu.be

Edited July 18, 2014 by Das Attorney

[DancZer 65]

You can do that with a GoKart too. It looks like that the fuel is a C4.

Edit: Is there only one blow up damage for all vehicle?

[danil-ch 165]

Movement sounds are still broken. :(

http://feedback.arma3.com/view.php?id=19807

[metralla 19]

You can do that with a GoKart too. It looks like that the fuel is a C4.

Edit: Is there only one blow up damage for all vehicle?

This is already fixed in dev branch and tested personally :dance:, explosions are more logical as it were :icon_hm:. But personally I think I still have much to do with the damage system that I hope can be improved if possible:protest:.

[insumsnoy 4]

Yes it seems to be fixed in latest dev build. I tested using the same scenario as was shown in that video.

[das attorney 857]

Interesting texture on destroyed offroads:

[Fushko 60]

Interesting texture on destroyed offroads:

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/101800212/weird.jpg

This is an improvement. It's WIP but still a massive step forward, the black textures were butt-ugly and unrealistic.

[13islucky 10]

This is an improvement. It's WIP but still a massive step forward, the black textures were butt-ugly and unrealistic.

Yea, but look at the tail lights. Kinda stretch into the CoM of the vehicle.

[metralla 19]

I wonder if the players are aware actually seeing these changes and many more on the development and progress of the current game, in my opinion and after having tried many hours the game I dare say that this game should not be treated as version release but as a Beta version continued.

What you think about this?

Edited July 19, 2014 by Metralla

[Fushko 60]

Yea, but look at the tail lights. Kinda stretch into the CoM of the vehicle.

I was aware of that, this is why I said "It's WIP"

[faire 10]

I wonder if the players are aware actually seeing these changes and many more on the development and progress of the current game, in my opinion, and after having tried many hours the game I dare say that this game should not be treated as version release but as a Beta version continued.

What you think about this?

I have got an even better idea: what if BIS just stopped improving anything and called it a release afterwards? :)

Sorry for OT, I couldn't resist.

[metralla 19]

I have got an even better idea: what if BIS just stopped improving anything and called it a release afterwards? :)

Sorry for OT, I couldn't resist.

You think bootcamp is an upgrade? I think not, and you? :idea:

[ProfTournesol 956]

You think bootcamp is an upgrade? I think not, and you? :idea:

An improvement, particularly for newbies, for sure.

[themaster303 22]

I wonder if the players are aware actually seeing these changes and many more on the development and progress of the current game, in my opinion and after having tried many hours the game I dare say that this game should not be treated as version release but as a Beta version continued.

What you think about this?

this is the dev-version section, and not a "what do you think" thread. your post is complete of topic.

so pll, back to topic and report errors and bugs