Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I can't express how much I'm annoyed by fuel tank damage and instant explosions. Well, ok, fuel tank could be fragile, especially on civilian vehciles. But even complete destruction of fuel tank (or any other part of the vehicle) should not cause grenade-like explosion. A car might burn in some cases but all civilians and some military vehicles simply don't have anything to cause such powerful explosions which kills everybody around. Still, for some reason any damage to fuel tank cause Civilian Boxer to explode like it has HE-Frag shell in it's trunk.

I'm agree with other your points also, but issue with new MRAPs have a little bit different nature: apparently Tempest received it's soft tent due to misconception about purpose of such vehicle. Theoretically, the main purpose of Tempest is transporting units and cargo from point A to point B as quickly and safely as possible. Right now Tempest is armored everywhere except it's most significant part - the cargo bay. There is no point in additional armor and more powerful engine if the truck is still incapable to transport it's crew safely; even a single enemy with machinegun will turn this "MRAP" into a death trap to everybody in it's cargo bay, so the only things this new truck can transport with certainty is corpses. It's like extremely armored truck that is too heavy to move or a tank with a huge turret made from cardboard - it might look impressive but in fact it's completely useless.

When I first heard of the new Tempest trucks I could have sworn that the developers said is was a truck made to be mine-resistant. I don't think it was said to be small-arms resistant. Maybe the truck was specifically designed for areas that have a lot of unexploded ordinance but not a lot of enemy fire. In all honesty, the truck seems very good to me, but maybe I'm just pleased too easily.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
When I first heard of the new Tempest trucks I could have sworn that the developers said is was a truck made to be mine-resistant. I don't think it was said to be small-arms resistant. Maybe the truck was specifically designed for areas that have a lot of unexploded ordinance but not a lot of enemy fire. In all honesty, the truck seems very good to me, but maybe I'm just pleased too easily.
Yep, I checked last announcement and you're seems to be right, BI mentioned Tempest as a "mine-resistant vehicle" but we still have a fully-protected of Tempest in game right now, the Repair one. So I don't see a point in such excessive protection of cheap tools and insufficent protection of soldiers. Besides, I'm pretty sure that most of the folks in cargo bay will be injured by a blast wave and probably lose their ability to hear for some time since they are completely exposed to environment.

I like Tempest too, especially Repair version because it looks exactly like its real-life counterpart, that is why I'm dissapointed by how BI impemented them. There could be so many intresting scenarios with unarmed MRAP truck (driving thorugh enemy territory, hostage rescuing, retreats etc), and getting in truck wouldn't mean signing your own death-and-respawn sentence. Also, COOP missions could benefit from fully-MRAP Tempest too because players wouldn't be able to kill everybody in a truck long before it reaches its destination.

I hope that BI will reconsider and turn Tempest Repair into Tempest Armored.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
When I first heard of the new Tempest trucks I could have sworn that the developers said is was a truck made to be mine-resistant. I don't think it was said to be small-arms resistant. Maybe the truck was specifically designed for areas that have a lot of unexploded ordinance but not a lot of enemy fire. In all honesty, the truck seems very good to me, but maybe I'm just pleased too easily.

When it comes to MRAPs there is no such thing. One comes with the other. Somebody posted the technical specifications of the RL-vehicle => It should be at least protected against any small arms fire up to 7.62mm (like all other MRAPs should be, too).

As said before, I could damage the engine by shooting at the front windscreen with few rounds of 6.5mm ..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For me, the current DEV-version feels much slower than official build, unless small physX items (that I increased lately in my mission) are very performance hungry. Having 58 men, 11 vehicles, 38 small items (buckets and other) gave much stutter in one of the medium villages. Felt like there would have been near 100 men. Always possible I have messed something myself, but so far blaming the DEV-build. ;)

Also seems that I am getting better performance when using server.exe to play alone than playing in normal SP way.

Edit: FPS seems good, getting 59 FPS (with diag_fps), but it dosent feel smooth which shows especially when turning camera.

Edited by SaOk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I can't express how much I'm annoyed by fuel tank damage and instant explosions. Well, ok, fuel tank could be fragile, especially on civilian vehciles. But even complete destruction of fuel tank (or any other part of the vehicle) should not cause grenade-like explosion. A car might burn in some cases but all civilians and some military vehicles simply don't have anything to cause such powerful explosions which kills everybody around. Still, for some reason any damage to fuel tank cause Civilian Boxer to explode like it has HE-Frag shell in its trunk.

I'm agree with other your points also, but issue with new MRAPs have a little bit different nature: apparently Tempest received its soft tent due to misconception about purpose of such vehicle. Theoretically, the main purpose of Tempest is transporting units and cargo from point A to point B as quickly and safely as possible. Right now Tempest is armored everywhere except its most significant part - the cargo bay. There is no point in additional armor and more powerful engine if the truck is still incapable to transport its crew safely; even a single enemy with machinegun will turn this "MRAP" into a death trap to everybody in cargo bay, so the only things this new truck can transport with certainty is corpses. It's like extremely armored truck that is too heavy to move or a tank with a huge turret made from cardboard - it might look impressive but in fact it's completely useless.

Absolutely, these explosions caused by taking out "FUEL" and any other non-critical parts like tracks need to go. The damage/health system of the vehicles needs a rework badly. If I find the time I'll write a ticket about it the next days.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with the vehicle explosions, some slow burning effect would be better. So far I have driven probably 1000 times to some small fence with civ truck that then explodes before any AI-teammates manage to get out or few meters away. It would be more realistic if only some smoke/steam would buff out, maybe flame burst if driving very fast to rock. But civ vehicles should never explode. Also as seen in mythbusters, firing to fuel tank dont even cause burning (or very rarely).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I agree with the vehicle explosions, some slow burning effect would be better. So far I have driven probably 1000 times to some small fence with civ truck that then explodes before any AI-teammates manage to get out or few meters away. It would be more realistic if only some smoke/steam would buff out, maybe flame burst if driving very fast to rock. But civ vehicles should never explode. Also as seen in mythbusters, firing to fuel tank dont even cause burning (or very rarely).

Yep, and even if there'd rarely be an explosion, it shouldn't do deadly area damage at all IMO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I pretty much like all of the new stuff, great work BI! However, I think the handling of the new jet (especially the Wipeout) feels kind of weird when flying low. But I'm not the best pilot. so the problem might be in fact my flying skills.

Also, I don't want to nit-pick, but.... does someone else think some of the new buidlings (burger kiosks) look a little out of place in the overall picture of Altis?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the armoured trucks have normal glass - need bulletproof glass ( this trucks are design t for save the crew for rifle fire and HE fragments ) the onlys where can kill the glass is a bullet from the big anti material riffles and higher ;)

trucks need one mirror more ;) two on one side. one ist to limited ( hemtt for example )

truck engine you can kill from the front ! with a riffle. the engine is on the rear from the armoured cap - kill from rear or sides ( and then more than from a normal rifle )

tactical armoured vehicles have bulletproof wheels ;) the trucks need one or two bullets from the side and the wheel is complete down. ( normal you need more than a RPG for kill a wheel complete )

is worth a change at all tactical armoured wheeled vehicles - bullet-proof tires with emergency running properties !! this is standard actual then is the ai problem their kill ther cars on little stonewalls - solved to ;)

truck covers look like a copy from zamak - has not the same look in colours with the rest ruck !

kuma - kuma has a wrong sized camouflage scheme to the other aaf vehicles ;)

ghost hotel have no ruin models , it dissolves complete ( yes its over the model limit on the 25meter ) Maybe we can in the future only on this big buildings destroy the exterior walls ! (same on the main airport building - to big to kill - here the same -) for a good ruin look , is enough to kill the exterior walls.

Edited by JgBtl292

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wipeout gatling gun bug when reproduced with unitplay. The soundfx of the gun keep looping for ever

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah i was so damn hoping to be able to play some Zeus this weekend and downloaded the last patch whith such hope. But i got disappointed. :(

Please Bohemia get Zeus running again!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I agree with the vehicle explosions, some slow burning effect would be better. So far I have driven probably 1000 times to some small fence with civ truck that then explodes before any AI-teammates manage to get out or few meters away. It would be more realistic if only some smoke/steam would buff out, maybe flame burst if driving very fast to rock. But civ vehicles should never explode. Also as seen in mythbusters, firing to fuel tank dont even cause burning (or very rarely).

Not only this aspact loses transitional contents. Many things are changing so abrupt. Or details are too low. Or there is no proper interaction between two steps.

Simply, it feels too fake.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I pretty much like all of the new stuff, great work BI! However, I think the handling of the new jet (especially the Wipeout) feels kind of weird when flying low. But I'm not the best pilot. so the problem might be in fact my flying skills.

Also, I don't want to nit-pick, but.... does someone else think some of the new buidlings (burger kiosks) look a little out of place in the overall picture of Altis?

Gyros Anax and Gyros Basileus instead hmm?

Redburger and Bluburger is probably some in house joke to tf2. I can see them being used in lol-missions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, the shiny new burger kiosks look like they've been built recently by some enterprising fellow looking to profit from NATO's presence on an otherwise derelict island.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gyros Anax and Gyros Basileus instead hmm?

Redburger and Bluburger is probably some in house joke to tf2. I can see them being used in lol-missions.

No, not because of the burgers, but because of the colorful, kind of childish look of all the kiosk buildings. I like them, but they won't really fit in stylistically.

Joke or not, they are part of the standard Altis map now and not merely fun objects that you can place specifically for "lol-missions".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On the To-199 Neophron, are the FOD doors on the intakes and LERX inlets using altitude as a controller for when they open/close?

I'm just noticing when I fly Neophron at low-level, that the air intakes are closed - which seems a bit unrealistic when the aircraft is in flight. Is it possible to adjust the animation controller in some way so that this doesn't happen so much? AFAIK real aircraft that have FOD doors (like MiG-29 for example) use indicated airspeed to operate the doors (they open just below take-off speed) and perhaps only when the landing gear are down.

Might work better if it's possible to have the FOD doors conditional of the gear being down as well as being at low altitude, or just lower the altitude envelope at which the doors activate to being something closer to zero altitude.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now that I finally tried the official ZGM missions on our dedicated server I can confirm that they have low fps in Zeus view :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What was i expecting from two new locations

Hotel

http://static.panoramio.com/photos/large/6248033.jpg

Stadium

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/06/Old_greenpoint_stadium.jpg (2696 kB)

I know this is too much but i would like to see some of those in game and like to see two mohawks to land on stadium giving logistic and stuf and on that new stadium i can only fit one... XD i like hotel little bit but i would like to be higher more floors my opinion but still i like it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
For me, the current DEV-version feels much slower than official build, unless small physX items (that I increased lately in my mission) are very performance hungry. Having 58 men, 11 vehicles, 38 small items (buckets and other) gave much stutter in one of the medium villages. Felt like there would have been near 100 men. Always possible I have messed something myself, but so far blaming the DEV-build. ;)

Also seems that I am getting better performance when using server.exe to play alone than playing in normal SP way.

Edit: FPS seems good, getting 59 FPS (with diag_fps), but it dosent feel smooth which shows especially when turning camera.

DEV it is much slower...the same place on the editor with just player on it, vsync off same settings stable=155 fps DEV=130 ( its not a big deal with high fps but add some AIs and more and you will need that extra 25 fps) . Just double tested. To play WIN decent i had to lower my VD to 750/500 :( this is on a 3930k 4.7 and tri sli gtx 680. On lower end PCs the impact might be worst.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can confirm that playing the official ZGM missions on a dedicated server is currently impossible. FPS is at about 3 for Zeus and there is a lot of crackling audio. As boggler already mentioned, when pressing ESC the fps in the background will be normal but once you return to the game it's horrible again.

Custom Zeus missions don't seem to be affected, so there must be something wrong with the official missions.

This should be easily reproducable for everyone:

1. Start a dedicated server with an official ZGM mission

2. Try to play as Zeus

3. Discover horrible fps

Happens every time on latest devbranch.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The new planes still can't reach mach 1...

Bad performance for 2035.

Edited by Mitrail

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The new planes still can't reach mach 1...

Bad performance for 2035.

the speed of the planes are good. but the nose drop i dont like. also that you get such a "über"-fov in planes and cars.

doesn´t look real.

btw. the a-10 in 2014 is going to reach mach 0,56. so for that kind of aircraft it will not be much faster in 2035.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The new planes still can't reach mach 1...

Bad performance for 2035.

They're not supposed to.

Yay!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now

×