Fatigue Feedback (dev branch)

[Greenfist 1863]

Why do I get the feeling that this is all a big misunderstanding? The exaggerated sway was partly unintentional and the rapid exhaustion rate with heavy loads was a bug. The complaining people thought this was completely deliberate and got out their pitchforks and torches. This startled BI who thought that people wanted nothing like it at all. So they not only fixed the obvious errors but toned it down beyond recognition. But it turns out that the angry mob was just ignorant. Either of the fact that the system was not finished or that they were playing the game "wrong".

---------- Post added at 13:18 ---------- Previous post was at 13:17 ----------

At the core, all the tools are already there. If fatigue is a problem for a certain game type, it can be disabled. Alternatively, BIS could add a new entry to description.ext with a "fatigue scale", i.e.

fatigueFactors[] = [<weightScale>, <swayScale>];

I thought this was already planned? Or was it just for the sway?

___________________

Today's dev branch:

Fixed: AI soldiers: dynamic error influenced by fatigue and damage

Sounds sweet. :)

Edited August 1, 2014 by Greenfist

[pettka 694]

This is strange, the fatigue should not have been changed recently, the system should still be in place and settings haven't been changed for nearly two weeks :icon_wink: We are going to investigate that, thanks a lot for letting us know :icon_twisted:

[das attorney 858]

Yes - keep fatigue.

Don't let a good system be edited out because of shouting on the internet.

[BL1P 35]

Yes - keep fatigue.

Don't let a good system be edited out because of shouting on the internet.

I second that motion.

[mr_centipede 31]

This is strange, the fatigue should not have been changed recently, the system should still be in place and settings haven't been changed for nearly two weeks :icon_wink: We are going to investigate that, thanks a lot for letting us know :icon_twisted:

I believe it's related to this changelog: http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?149636-Development-Branch-Changelog&p=2731471&viewfull=1#post2731471 (post 325)

or maybe also post 328 - 21-07-2014

EXE rev. 126064 (game)

•Changed: Small changes to fatigue formulas

•Changed: Minor tweak to weapon sway formula

[enex 11]

I'm curious of what obstacles is facing Inertia implementation.Originally it was scheduled for boot camp release ; )

[blackpixxel 53]

Yes, I cannot wait to have weapon intertia and TKOH flight model on devbranch!

[Bouben 3]

I'm curious of what obstacles is facing Inertia implementation.Originally it was scheduled for boot camp release ; )

With an introduction of the inertia system, there will be even more complaints from players used to run-and-gun.

Edited August 1, 2014 by Bouben
grammar

[St. Jimmy 272]

I believe it's related to this changelog: http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?149636-Development-Branch-Changelog&p=2731471&viewfull=1#post2731471 (post 325)

or maybe also post 328 - 21-07-2014

EXE rev. 126064 (game)

•Changed: Small changes to fatigue formulas

•Changed: Minor tweak to weapon sway formula

I also believe it's related to that changelog but there are more changes in that 21-07-2014 changelog that made some difference.

[Phantom Six 25]

I would not throw fatigue out for a the sake of rambo whiners who cannot carry MGs and rockets and be able to run like they're on steroids. Its immersive and realistically, people shouldn't be carrying that much gear. If you remove fatigue, you take away the point of having an ammo bearer and watching your gear. I remember in ACE you'd just black out and fall down instead of get tired like in Arma 3. Honestly, fatigue is really immersive and promote some gameplay such. If person doesn't like it, just turn off the fatigue. Probably best thing to have is like back when Arma 2 implemented losing gears in water (yes or no). You can add a description.ext "Using fatigue system, yes or no" instead of completely removing it.

[MavericK96 0]

With an introduction of the inertia system, there will be even more complaints from players used to run-and-gun.

I'm all for inertia/realism as long as it doesn't make the movement feel clunky, as it did in ArmA 2.

[blackpixxel 53]

I'm all for inertia/realism as long as it doesn't make the movement feel clunky, as it did in ArmA 2.

For some reason Arma 3 feels much more clunky than Arma 2 did.

Your rotation point is in your head and not in the center of your feets. This is unrealistic and causes massive problems when turning next to a wall (you sometimes start swimming in walls/towers because of that).

A second issue is when you change directions while walking. The character does not respond correctly and slides arround like if he is moving on an ice surface. It looks even more stupid because the legs are also doing completely wrong things. They stop moving when your character is still sliding or they begin to move to late.

In Arma 2 il always works as expected.

[-Coulum- 35]

I'm all for inertia/realism as long as it doesn't make the movement feel clunky, as it did in ArmA 2.

I am quite confident BI isn't trying with all their might to avoid that. Infact I think that all they're going to be doing is making it so that when you turn quickly with a weapon while aiming down the sights, it will take time for your character to align the weapon properly again. So his sights will be misaligned and he will not be aiming towards the centre of the screen. Then after a short time (depending on weapon weight) the sights will become aligned and the weapon will be focused on the middle of screen as it is normally. That is what I imagine based on what little BI has said so far. Basically when your character will play an animation that will limit who effectively you can shoot for a few moments depending on what weapon you are using (and I really hope loadout and fatigue as well, though I am doubtful). Anyhow, that is just speculation, but I am positive that Devs have said they absolutely do not want to limit player speed like in arma 2.

Right now fatigue and the effects of running have been so reduced so much that they are barely an issue or hardly influence on gameplay in this current Dev release.

It's a wasted opportunity to have a truly tactical element of gameplay like this essentialy lost.

I too agree that fatigue and weaponsway are becoming a glorious opportunity that is being missed. For me and many others (especially the hardcore guys from arma 2) just one more step and it would be perfect, but BI doesn't want to take that step it sometimes seems.

However I do acknowledge that BI do want to keep the game relatively accessible to mainstream players with a bit of heart. I guess making certain features a bit easier is one way to do that. Really I don't expect them to make ACE for vanilla. Just as those who want less realism have every tool available to mod that in, those who want hardcore have the same tools to do so. I feel this is BIS plan. To get a level of realism that is just a taste of hardcore while establishing new features that can be easily added upon to take it to fullon hardcore. They have already said they want to make it possible to easily modify sway (and I hope fatigue also) through scripting. It already is possible through modding.

Anyhow, I personally am a fan of full fledged realism, and I hope they take another step that direction, but I also appreciate the fact that they are laying down a solid foundation for full realism mods, and that they are still introducing a reasonable amount of realism into the vanilla game. I hope they up it up a notch and really test how much a new player can handle before the game becomes "too hardcore" to bother trying to master.

This is strange, the fatigue should not have been changed recently, the system should still be in place and settings haven't been changed for nearly two weeks We are going to investigate that, thanks a lot for letting us know

Sway is the biggest penalty for fatigue really. And it has been decreased alot. Without it people come to realize that the system isn't as good as it they originally thought and that there isn't much penalty for running around with lots of gear. It leads to findings like this:

I was thinking that people are exaggerating maybe, but this is beyond funny.

I just set my fatigue to 100 % and could still happily shoot far-away targets. STANDING.

I 100% agree with twisted and the others here, why oh why do you add a feature and then water it down to a point were it isn't even noticeable anymore, just because some people complained they can't sprint for ten kilometers anymore. Seriously, put the original sway back in, the way that it is now in stable is perfect. For once, please stick with a feature that added a lot of tactical depth to the game. Never before had I even wasted a though on whether to take e.g. a pair of NVG's along, or an extra load of magazines. Now I started to add ammo bearers to my missions because prior to the bootcamp update, everybody could carry their own armory on the back.

So, please, put it back. It is really sad to see a great feature being bashed back into mainstream just because of "King of the Hill" players complaining about not being able to carry a tank anymore.

Edited August 2, 2014 by -Coulum-

[Variable 322]

This is strange, the fatigue should not have been changed recently, the system should still be in place and settings haven't been changed for nearly two weeks :icon_wink: We are going to investigate that, thanks a lot for letting us know :icon_twisted:

I'm so relieved to have read that... Thanks Pettka.

[darkiron 1]

I saw the feedback on fatigue was close.

But I hope fatigue was rework very soon !

It's ugly, I can't follow my team !!

[Alwarren 2767]

I saw the feedback on fatigue was close.

But I hope fatigue was rework very soon !

It's ugly, I can't follow my team !!

Drop stuff you don't need. Ask your team to help you carry stuff. Ask them for a break. If it is AI, they will wait for you. Really, people need to learn that stamina, like ammo, is a resource that needs to be weighted against other stuff. They need to learn that having 20 mags in your pack might be a bit of overkill.

[Varanon 892]

Yeah, finally a reason to have ammo bearers, which was pointless before.

[msy 22]

With an introduction of the inertia system, there will be even more complaints from players used to run-and-gun.

You are wrong, with the new feature AI are better at cheating.

[Bouben 3]

You are wrong, with the new feature AI are better at cheating.

I think you have quoted a wrong post (?).

[alleycat 28]

What config values in weapons handle how "cumbersome" a weapon is?

[Alwarren 2767]

This is strange, the fatigue should not have been changed recently, the system should still be in place and settings haven't been changed for nearly two weeks :icon_wink: We are going to investigate that, thanks a lot for letting us know :icon_twisted:

Just as a heads-up, this is not fixed in the latest dev build (dunno if it was supposed to, just putting it out there). "player setFatigue 1" will not cause any noticeable weapon sway, and by simply kneeling I was able to kill a whole row of blue guys in the virtual arsenal while not even holding my breath..!

[zimms 22]

• Changed: In addition to stance, resting (fatigue decay rate) when stationary is now also dependent upon:
  

  
  

  • Weapon type (smaller weapons increase resting effect)
    
    
  • Weapon position (lowered state increases resting effect)
    
    
  • Rotation (turning on spot decreases resting effect)
    
    

I'm not sure if I like the bolded part.

If I understand this correctly, I just have to switch from my Zafir to my pistol for increased fatigue decay.

That doesn't sound like this is how it's supposed to be.

Edited August 4, 2014 by zimms

[pettka 694]

I'm not sure if I like the bolded part.

If I understand this correctly, I just have to switch from my Zafir to my pistol for increased fatigue decay.

That doesn't sound like this is how it's supposed to be.

To explain the idea behind this change: As I understand it, if I stood somewhere holding a light gun in my arm and having Zafir shouldered after a long patrol, it would possibly feel better than the other way around - standing with a heavy machinegun in my hands would exhaust me a nick more I would say :icon_twisted:

[mr_centipede 31]

To explain the idea behind this change: As I understand it, if I stood somewhere holding a light gun in my arm and having Zafir shouldered after a long patrol, it would possibly feel better than the other way around - standing with a heavy machinegun in my hands would exhaust me a nick more I would say :icon_twisted:

I think I can buy that... since it really is a lot easier on the hand after you shoulder the heavier gun.

If you want to expand it (fatigue feature) you can separate it into arm fatigue, leg fatigue and overall fatigue. With arm fatigue, you will increase fatigue the longer you shoulder your weapon and thus increase the sway... So it would be more advisable to lower your weapon whenever possible.

But I think that sounds too complex, for an already complex system (I think). So for now, the current system good enough for me

[Greenfist 1863]

You seem to recover about twice as fast with the gun lowered. The difference is a little smaller with pistols, but the rate is much bigger with them.

It looks like the current fatigue decay rates with lowered weapon are about the same ones as before with a raised weapon.

The default rifleman lying down recovers 2.9% of fatigue per second with the rifle and 3.7% with sidearm.