Fatigue Feedback (dev branch)

[Greenfist 1863]

The command setSkill exists which includes the parameter "endurance".

Not sure to what extend you can influence fatigue by means of this; maybe it should be rebalanced to allow for a more extreme effect. Then again, maybe it's too late for that. Still, I don't see the need for a setFatigueParameters command or similar.

The "endurance" does not exist in Arma 3.

[galzohar 31]

Laying down for 10 seconds and then continuing to run is not the intuitive nor realistic solution for being tired. In real life you'd pace yourself down and move slower, but not stop. Stopping in real life is a good way to NOT get where you want at the maximum possible speed. Running/walking slower should be the fastest way to move around when tired, but currently is simply is far from what we have, as in Arma the optimal speed is obtained by a rotation of jogging and laying down on the ground. This really needs to be fixed.

[jcae2798 132]

Just wanted to stop by after seeing the new enhanced fatigue. I remember when it first changed, i hated it. Then it grew on me and i liked it. Now these changes again seem more aggressive. Again i am hating it. But i am sure i will come to terms over time. What bothers me though is i play a lot of SP missions and since the AI are mostly to dumb, i usually try planning multiple roles by carrying extra weight. Guess i gotta pay that price. It does suck though... Have a simple command to control how fast it reacts would be nice rather then disabling it altogther...

[Hsiulung 1]

Laying down for 10 seconds and then continuing to run is not the intuitive nor realistic solution for being tired. In real life you'd pace yourself down and move slower, but not stop. Stopping in real life is a good way to NOT get where you want at the maximum possible speed. Running/walking slower should be the fastest way to move around when tired, but currently is simply is far from what we have, as in Arma the optimal speed is obtained by a rotation of jogging and laying down on the ground. This really needs to be fixed.

I second that because IRL you can't recover that fast from fatigue as in Arma.

[ivan keska 45]

Can't gear mock ups be made and worn on real soldiers then that data gets noted and used to improve the in game system, thus we have a more realistic stamina system but to recover from fatigue should take longer. That way we get the stamina we want and the recover system wont effect you much if your mobile infantry or just operating on foot in a small area, but if going long distances on foot quickly you'll be effected the most and if you enter combat you will be a a much bigger disadvantage then you would be now.

Also once you reach a certain weight limit you shouldn't be able to sprint and only run for a short distance, because lets face it people don't move very quickly when carrying a load out as heavy as what i'd imagine a .50 cal rifle with like 10 mags, 4 field kits, 8 grenades, a ghillie suit, a carrier with plates, a pistol with 3 mags, backpack with atleast 1 missile in it and/or lots of explosives, and a rocket/missile launcher would weigh. Which i'm guessing would most likely be over 100 pounds, and i'm guessing anyone whos carried that amount before knows you move slow, don't want to go very far, and when you jog with it you stop pretty soon after your start. So if you want to carry the entire teams arsenal on your person, you should be useless if you have to move. As oppose to now were you can manage such a load out rather well.

[fareast 20]

it annoys me that weight doesn't affect the sprint speed..a 100% load guy holding a binocular can sprint as fast as a naked guy..only marching and walking that shouldn't be affected by players load imo..

[chortles 263]

@ FarEast: I'm guessing that BI chose to represent the difference as "the weighed-down guy has to push himself harder to reach the same speed as the lighter guy".

[Sterlingarcherz101 15]

Hear devs are doing some upgrade or reiteration of the arma fatigue system. Any details?

[chortles 263]

Hear devs are doing some upgrade or reiteration of the arma fatigue system. Any details?

And where did you hear that?

[Sterlingarcherz101 15]

And where did you hear that?

Twatter. ;)

[killzone_kid 1330]

Twatter. ;)

I think he meant do you have a link?

[Sterlingarcherz101 15]

Fatigue is a feature we're working on doing another iteration of as we tweet.

---------- Post added at 11:58 ---------- Previous post was at 11:56 ----------

https://mobile.twitter.com/Arma3official/status/616910285723566080

[killzone_kid 1330]

Fatigue is a feature we're working on doing another iteration of as we tweet.

---------- Post added at 11:58 ---------- Previous post was at 11:56 ----------

https://mobile.twitter.com/Arma3official/status/616910285723566080

Thanks!

[CaptainAzimuth 714]

Sweet. I always thought the Fatiugue wasn't harsh enough. =D

[Alwarren 2767]

Oh man, I hope it will not be watered down and made insignificant like they did with the weapon inertia.

[CaptainAzimuth 714]

Well the weapon inertia isn't too too bad, but what would be interesting to see, is a ragdoll pass out for anyone that tries running for ever.

[rübe 127]

With the upcoming expansion in mind, it might be worth a shot to take things like temperature and humidity into account. :cryy:

+1 for absolutely not watering it down. Or else. :cool:

[chortles 263]

If it were insignificant it wouldn't be outright disabled on servers... but don't get your hopes up, the attitudes underlying the official reports on the original systems development suggest that it'll still be game-y, just tweaked.

[fn_Quiksilver 1636]

If it were insignificant it wouldn't be outright disabled on servers... but don't get your hopes up, the attitudes underlying the official reports on the original systems development suggest that it'll still be game-y, just tweaked.

Part of the problem with the implementation of Fatigue is lack of a HUD element. In real life we can feel ourselves getting fatigued. In game, we need GUI elements to help players understand why they are slowing down.

From a game design view, its okay to penalize players for certain behavior, but to some extent you should also provide them the tools/ability to manage and overcome the challenge. If you don't, they get frustrated at constantly being 'beaten' by a hidden game mechanic.

The final result is servers disabling fatigue to keep their player-base.

I designed some months ago a fatigue modifier (http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?189278-RELEASE-Modified-Fatigue-System), and feedback is that -- while it may impinge on the intended design -- it is far more agreeable, and penalizes the players who try to cart the kitchen sink around, while not overly penalizing the lightly-equipped players. The default effect is about 3* less severe fatigue.

The best bet from a scenario designers perspective is to have a configurable fatigue system where we can decide what level of fatigue simulation we want, set constraints such as max fatigue and adjust rate of increase.

However from BIS perspective that might not be such a great idea to have each MP server with different fatigue, which will result in a confused playerbase ("whats the fatigue set at on this server??").

If I was BIS I would not make it configurable, but I am not BIS so I want it configurable :D

The bottom line is, if BIS wants to see fatigue simulated on more servers, I believe they will have to concede some realism and reduce the default rate of fatigue increase, at least for lightly-equipped soldiers.

Also, if I were the developer I would severely reduce or disable the effect of fatigue on AI, since they have no idea how to manage fatigue. Once they are programmed to manage their fatigue, then re-introduce it to AI.

[CaptainAzimuth 714]

Part of the problem with the implementation of Fatigue is lack of a HUD element. In real life we can feel ourselves getting fatigued. In game, we need GUI elements to help players understand why they are slowing down.

I will NEVER understand this. That's just it, the player slows down, that's the indicator. If your slower, just rest a bit. Why do people need to add all sorts of numbers or bars to clog up an already packed HUD? There's even more signs of Fatigue.

Symptoms of Fatiuge

-Character slows down

-Character suffers from heavy breathing, swallowing

-Character suffers from gradual aiming stability loss

-Character starts seeing throbbing red/white blur around screen

Yet people still want a bar? Literally, wtf.

[Defunkt 431]

Oh man, I hope it will not be watered down and made insignificant like they did with the weapon inertia.

I welcome iteration but I too hope they don't accede to those who basically won't be happy until they can sprint all day with a .50 cal and a launcher.

What I think needs improvement (though admittedly I haven't played a lot lately);

- Load should have a greater effect on movement speed (not only endurance).

- Fatigue should better reward light loads (or more severely penalise heavy loads), I didn't think the difference was marked enough last time I looked.

- Recovery time shouldn't be skewed so heavily in favour of stance (particularly lying down). Dropping to a knee makes sense, lying down just looks daft.

[Imperator[TFD] 444]

The bottom line is, if BIS wants to see fatigue simulated on more servers, I believe they will have to concede some realism and reduce the default rate of fatigue increase, at least for lightly-equipped soldiers.

The problem isn't the lightly-equipped soldiers complaining about fatigue Quik, it's the Arnie wannabes toting around their MMG + Titan + Carryall + Grenadier vest stuffed to the brim with rockets and ammo who complain about why they cannot run any further than 200m before bitching about how they're slow.

Personally I love the vanilla fatigue system and feel it brings great tactical decision making to the individual level regarding loadouts however as you said the lack of an obvious in-your-face GUI element to reveal to those who aren't the brightest candle on the cake that perhaps their 1-man army loadout isn't the wisest decision.

[rübe 127]

Yet people still want a bar? Literally, wtf.

Yeah, I don't get it either. Indicators of fatigue are plenty and rather obvious (i.e. nicely done).

Why do people need to add all sorts of numbers or bars to clog up an already packed HUD?

That's another thing. IMHO it would be cool if - at least the more advanced HUD features - only would be available with special goggles/helmets. Otherwise you need to "physically" look at some gadget (like a map or other objects, e.g. the weapon itself for zeroing and such stuff) - similar to how the action menu should finally get rid of so many actions in favor of having to push actual buttons (e.g. in the interior of vehicles).

I mean, come on! It's the future! :cool:

Give those damn goggles an actual purpose already; some just for sun protection, others with pip and tricks and all kind of fancy overlays. And then you probably also have tradeoffs (nightvision vs. goggle with overlay, or different overlays/information with different goggles and such stuff) which is always a fun factor (and then make it so that such equipment can take damage and fail, bwahaha).

Oh well... maybe for the next iteration of the game?

:rolleyes:

[Grumpy Old Man 3545]

Yet people still want a bar? Literally, wtf.

That's a development in recent games which is absolutely terrifying and shows nothing but a lack of creativity.

Why do you need a big red text on the top of the screen in full caps saying what's going on?

Arma is doing fine without the need of any bars/numbers/hud elements.

Stuff like the stance indicator might be necessary to get used to recently introduced mechanics, they're fine as long as you can disable them.

Agree to ruebe,

there's so much missed opportunities (which might have been planned to be in the game) at least for the tactical glasses.

[St. Jimmy 272]

IMO fatigue could be tuned so you don't get fatigued as fast as now but also the recovery time is increased. Then things like if you've binocs, nothing or a gun in your hand shouldn't affect fatigue and movement speed. Heavy and medium loadouts should have more difference.