Fatigue Feedback (dev branch)

[andersson 285]

Quite sad and funny. What the old system needed was a stamina bar. So they added a stamina bar and for some reason completely revamped the system. Now we have a stamina bar that doesn't correlate to the experience so we would be better off without it, with a system that doesn't add anything more than what we had before except confusion/irritation.

[Kerc Kasha 102]

Quite sad and funny. What the old system needed was a stamina bar. So they added a stamina bar and for some reason completely revamped the system. Now we have a stamina bar that doesn't correlate to the experience so we would be better off without it, with a system that doesn't add anything more than what we had before except confusion/irritation.

 

Yes it's absolutely ridiculous, they've gone back to square one and not only have they not improved upon the previous system they've made it worse.

It's less transparent and even more obnoxious, except now for everyone instead just those not willing to learn the system

[teabagginpeople 398]

I was taken aback when I seen the new "sprint bar" iteration in the rc build, can't call it anything else right now. I genuinely thought they were working to make it hit even some of the goals laid out before releasing.

They do realise from all the constructive criticism about weight, confusion, sway penalty, that its probably not in good shape to ram out.

[teabagginpeople 398]

I realise it's a bit of a shark tank in here right now, but any devs willing to chime in?

[Alwarren 2767]

That's why you never change a working system. Why was it changed in the first place? People that didn't like it disabled it, and the rest happily played with it. The best course of action at this point IMO would be a global/server side "disable fatigue" difficulty setting, add the fatigue bar to the old system, and continue using the old system. This weird hybrid we have right now is not going to get any better, and it only limits your offensive options, not your defensive.

[stormhawkv 19]

I was thinking of alternatives to fulfill the design goals for the new stamina system by using better methods than those we have seen. Some time ago I noticed that rifles using larger cartridges than 6,5mm and belt-fed machineguns don't fit into backpacks even though their mass value would allow them to do so. This is just the type of exception that could be used to limit loadouts without making larger rifles so heavy that no sane person would choose them over one of the standard service rifles.

 

For instance rifles that are heavier than 110 mass units (5 kg) could take up both weapon slots. The launcher slot then appears with a red overlay when you attempt to pick up a launcher and a tooltip is shown saying "Your current primary is too cumbersome to carry a launcher." or something alike. The same happens when you attempt to pick up a sniper rifle while carrying a launcher but with the primary slot turning red and a different tooltip of course. Combining ghillie suits with backpacks and/or helmets could be prevented the same way. However, the mass values of some rifles need to be adjusted for this to work because they are too inconsistent within the "classes". People wouldn't understand why they can use the TRG-21 EGLM but not the MX3GL, or the Rahim but not the Mk18 ABR. At this opportunity I would like to refer to this thread.

 

But first and foremost there needs to be a connection between the stamina bar and sway (which is currently too much btw). If this critical requirement is not met, the system will be way less transparent than what we have now and you can just as well throw it down the drain together with the rest of the changes.

[Kerc Kasha 102]

That's why you never change a working system. Why was it changed in the first place? People that didn't like it disabled it, and the rest happily played with it. The best course of action at this point IMO would be a global/server side "disable fatigue" difficulty setting, add the fatigue bar to the old system, and continue using the old system. This weird hybrid we have right now is not going to get any better, and it only limits your offensive options, not your defensive.

 

I'm not really a fan of such a phrase as it's usually something echoed by those afraid of change. The very fact that people turned off the system (and lets be fair here, it would be a majority) would be a major issue in the eyes of the developers.

But I believe one of the main issues with the old system was the lack of a stamina bar, some tweaking to fatigue gain algorithim might have also been necessary but apart from that I think it would have been perfect. However, even if they did reach this point there would still be players wanting a more casual experience in this regard who would opt to disable it entirely, doubly so with this new system which is even more punishing than the last with the net benefit of being completely unappealing to realism oriented communities aswell.

 

If they absolutely wanted to appease the casual crowd and the realism crowd at the same time it needs to be a difficulty setting, the fact that this scratched off the whiteboard so early is incredibly short sighted. The only possible reason I can fathom to not opt to make it a difficulty setting would be because it might confuse players if one server is running one system and the next is running another altogether but I would hope they do not have such low opinions on their player's intelligence to think such a thing possible.

[andersson 285]

I was thinking of alternatives to fulfill the design goals for the new stamina system by using better methods than those we have seen. Some time ago I noticed that rifles using larger cartridges than 6,5mm and belt-fed machineguns don't fit into backpacks even though their mass value would allow them to do so. This is just the type of exception that could be used to limit loadouts without making larger rifles so heavy that no sane person would choose them over one of the standard service rifles.

 

For instance rifles that are heavier than 110 mass units (5 kg) could take up both weapon slots. The launcher slot then appears with a red overlay when you attempt to pick up a launcher and a tooltip is shown saying "Your current primary is too cumbersome to carry a launcher." or something alike. The same happens when you attempt to pick up a sniper rifle while carrying a launcher but with the primary slot turning red and a different tooltip of course. Combining ghillie suits with backpacks and/or helmets could be prevented the same way. However, the mass values of some rifles need to be adjusted for this to work because they are too inconsistent within the "classes". People wouldn't understand why they can use the TRG-21 EGLM but not the MX3GL, or the Rahim but not the Mk18 ABR. At this opportunity I would like to refer to this thread.

Thats the way it was in OFP and I prefer what they have in A3.

What I wish for is the old system back, what we have in stable. Then make it disabled as default so most servers are without and the ones with special interest can enable it on their servers. Then add a stamina bar to that system which can be toggled on off in the UI settings.

 

Then BI have reached their goals, all of them, and new users of this game will have a fun experience running forever while they cater for the sim guys too.

 

edit: for sure tweaks could be done in the old system too, but the base is very good imho and I like it very much.

[Kryptongame 14]

To be honest I agree the old system with the new hitboxes, fall damage, etc is what is needed. Or at least give us back the low sway and faster regeneration that was present 2 weeks ago in dev branch. Current stable fatigue with better hitboxes and whatever would probably be an improvement over stamina. I literally see no correlation between stamina bar and actually being fully rested...so what's the point of the stamina bar besides jsut sprint?? More confusion issues than begote, I'm so confused really.

[stburr91 1009]

As much as I didn't care for the old (current stable) fatigue system, it is (along with a stamina bar) what most posting here want. I can live with that, but what I can't live with is any more sway being introduced. Nothing takes the fun out of a game (or makes it unplayable) faster than not being able to hit targets that are shooting at you. Getting killed because of excessive sway is just plain not fun, and ruins the game.

 

 

I'm not really a fan of such a phrase as it's usually something echoed by those afraid of change. The very fact that people turned off the system (and lets be fair here, it would be a majority) would be a major issue in the eyes of the developers.

But I believe one of the main issues with the old system was the lack of a stamina bar, some tweaking to fatigue gain algorithim might have also been necessary but apart from that I think it would have been perfect. However, even if they did reach this point there would still be players wanting a more casual experience in this regard who would opt to disable it entirely, doubly so with this new system which is even more punishing than the last with the net benefit of being completely unappealing to realism oriented communities aswell.

 

If they absolutely wanted to appease the casual crowd and the realism crowd at the same time it needs to be a difficulty setting, the fact that this scratched off the whiteboard so early is incredibly short sighted. The only possible reason I can fathom to not opt to make it a difficulty setting would be because it might confuse players if one server is running one system and the next is running another altogether but I would hope they do not have such low opinions on their player's intelligence to think such a thing possible.

 

 

I completely agree that the best approach it to make fatigue/stamina and sway adjustable. As I've said before, these game play mechanics are not one size fits all.

[Greenfist 1863]

By the way, the sway (amount) is already adjustable: player setCustomAimCoef 0.5

I suspect there will be some similar simple commands for adjusting stamina too.

[stormhawkv 19]

Thats the way it was in OFP and I prefer what they have in A3.

 

Me too, but they seem to be determined to change it and the old system from OFP is somewhat more favorable than having 10 kg marksman rifles and 22 kg sniper rifles. That should be the load of a heavy weapons team, not the load of a sniper team.

[St. Jimmy 272]

What's the sway people are talking about in here? I don't see any problem with that. Hold breath and you've steady aim.

/I got to add that the sway has been like this for months already, at least I don't see any difference.

 

I agree with the mass changes. A sniper rigle doesn't weight three times as much as a Titan Launcher. What the hell is going on?

[andersson 285]

I guess they are too deep into this to revert? 

The fatigue to stamina overhaul was not an easy task - it took several months of prototyping and internal discussions, together with various tests of proofs of concept. We came to the decision to change the fatigue system based on many factors, some of them already described in OPREP and posts here, some not yet mentioned. Did you know that most of MANW entries had fatigue disabled for all units by default?

 

The system basics are easy, but it's deeper than it seems - the scripting commands provided with new stamina make it easy to create a different system, possibly even similar to fatigue, that is going to work according to creators needs. That's a huge step forward compared to fatigue, which either was there or not.

 

We believe, and our tests have shown us, that the stamina system rewards tactical use of load, environment and tempo - it's always better for both the mobility and aiming precision to fight fresh, without unnecessary weight and in a suitable environment. And the best part we have seen is that players (be it experts or fresh recruits) understand the system, its limitations and the ways it punishes them for non-tactical decisions. But we might have been wrong in our conclusions, or even their parts. We are glad for all the feedback, which we are going to evaluate, and there may be some tweaks to stamina system. The general gain in transparency of the system is great and it's seen even in the reactions - while some factors of fatigue were subject of urban myths, the new stamina is generally understood at least on some theoretical level.

 

I would like to encourage to give it a proper try, not in some lab environment of detailed measurement in virtual reality, but in real games, be it missions, campaign or any game mode. From the experience we have gathered during the development, the actual feel is different from expectations based on explanations  :icon_twisted: Some of You have already done so, and we aim to gather as much feedback as possible. Thank You for caring about Arma 3 - we are making the game together.

 

I wouldn't be surprised if the stamina was disabled in most MANW entries to win more votes as the mission then cater for more players, including the ones who prefer to play with stamina enabled. If stamina would be enabled in a MANW entry one can assume most "casual" players wouldn't try it properly. This doesn't necessarily mean that the system is bad, it's just not mainstream.

So I think that conclusion in the quote above was BI's first wrong step. And maybe that lead to the impossible mission to make a system to cater all players, even those that don't like stamina and disable it in whatever form. I understand if people want to play without stamina/fatigue, it makes perfect sense not to. Sometimes you just don't have the will or time to walk and you just want to get into the action and have fun.

As always BI listens to feedback (an amazing developer!) and are trying to improve it with the result right now that players do not fully understand the system. The stamina bar is misleading and the avatar feedback/equipment penalties are not intuitive. They should have scrapped this and improved the old system with commands, stamina bar and tweaks. More months doesn't bring back the months already wasted...

 

Well, maybe I am a part of a small minority and I will be proven wrong when it hits the stable. But I doubt more missions will have stamina enabled, even if this system would be an improvement to the old.

[en3x 209]

 

I guess they are too deep into this to revert? 

 

I wouldn't be surprised if the stamina was disabled in most MANW entries to win more votes as the mission then cater for more players, including the ones who prefer to play with stamina enabled. If stamina would be enabled in a MANW entry one can assume most "casual" players wouldn't try it properly. This doesn't necessarily mean that the system is bad, it's just not mainstream.

So I think that conclusion in the quote above was BI's first wrong step. And maybe that lead to the impossible mission to make a system to cater all players, even those that don't like stamina and disable it in whatever form. I understand if people want to play without stamina/fatigue, it makes perfect sense not to. Sometimes you just don't have the will or time to walk and you just want to get into the action and have fun.

As always BI listens to feedback (an amazing developer!) and are trying to improve it with the result right now that players do not fully understand the system. The stamina bar is misleading and the avatar feedback/equipment penalties are not intuitive. They should have scrapped this and improved the old system with commands, stamina bar and tweaks. More months doesn't bring back the months already wasted...

 

Well, maybe I am a part of a small minority and I will be proven wrong when it hits the stable. But I doubt more missions will have stamina enabled, even if this system would be an improvement to the old.

 

 

I quite like the way you place arma not as platform for mainstream gaming but as game that not only caters to a specific group but it

picks demographic and sticks to it.That brings uniqueness on the expense of mainstream which makes sense.

 

Whoever don't like fatigue won't like stamina sway so they won't play with it.Whoever liked old fatigue slowdown might dislike

new stamina system which penalizes on aim and not on movement.

[iratus 71]

 

Well, maybe I am a part of a small minority and I will be proven wrong when it hits the stable. But I doubt more missions will have stamina enabled, even if this system would be an improvement to the old.

 

 

They push stamina to stable to see how "the crowd" reacts to it. Let's face it: On devbranch you only find people that are more involved in the development of Arma and it's systems. Most of those people would have at least a basic understanding of how fatigue worked, thus are not the target demographic of stamina.

 

But to see the effect the popular gamemodes and mods have to turn fatigue/stamina on again. I doupt the makers will do that out of their own accords. Maybe BIS contacted some of them (or player enable fatigue false does not work with stamina).

[2legsakimbo 1]

the sway seems ok to me after sprinting for about 200-300m then hitting the deck and firing. I can reliably hit inside a window at about 500m away. not sniper accurate, but if i rest it becomes that accurate pretty darn quick..

 

the weight and volume of weapons is another story altogether. I'd prefer BIS made it as close to what people would expect as possibl e- ie based on real weight and space. otherwise it becomes confusing.

[Alwarren 2767]

I'm not really a fan of such a phrase as it's usually something echoed by those afraid of change.

It's not about that, at all. I usually welcome changes. For the better. Right now, we HAD a system that worked and was established. This has been replaced by a weird chimera of a system that, so far, nobody really seems to be happy about, neither the casual crowd nor the milsim fans. It would have helped if the system had a bit more testing done.

 

IF you replace a system, it is much better to iterate on the existing and build upon that than throwing out out a a very late point and trying to rebuild it from scratch. We see what comes out of it.

[djotacon 190]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N5xIcUH8f7w

embedding the video so it's more visible on the thread.

 

 

xDDD

 

 

To answer all:

 

The entire community -even the milsim- arent you or this post.

 

To me is crytal clear that some kind of "radical" posters are inside this thread using the weapon of "ranting/lobbying" to gain more attention, but to me if a system dont work, the people - if they can - dont use it or remove it.

 

If the devs need add more and more aggrevise sway/fatigue I see using my cristal ball a pletora of new mods with new "fatigue-removal" feature.

 

I post before the right anwers to this and to me is very obvious that devs has is own vision about his own game.

 

I suggest to all that instead trying impose his own vision about "right game" make a game for himself with his likes and preferences to play (I think a mod is better suitable for his programs skills but who knows).

[roshnak 41]

xDDD

 

 

To answer all:

 

The entire community -even the milsim- arent you or this post.

 

To me is crytal clear that some kind of "radical" posters are inside this thread using the weapon of "ranting/lobbying" to gain more attention, but to me if a system dont work, the people - if they can - dont use it or remove it.

 

If the devs need add more and more aggrevise sway/fatigue I see using my cristal ball a pletora of new mods with new "fatigue-removal" feature.

 

I post before the right anwers to this and to me is very obvious that devs has is own vision about his own game.

 

I suggest to all that instead trying impose his own vision about "right game" make a game for himself with his likes and preferences to play (I think a mod is better suitable for his programs skills but who knows).

 

Uh, weren't you one of the people that was "ranting/lobbying" about not liking the new weapon sway when it was first introduced?

 

Also, everything you have said could be said about not liking the original fatigue system in the first place. If this was just about the devs' vision, then we wouldn't have this change to the stamina system based partly on "community feedback."

[Alwarren 2767]

Remember, if it's your opinion then it is constructive critizism. If it's the other guy's opinion, it's ranting ;)

Send from my tablet, so pardon any autocorrect bollocks

[machineabuse 11]

If the restructuring of the weapon mass system to an even greater state of brokenness isn't a clear enough indication of spending dollars to save pennies I don't know what else to say.

[haleks 8212]

I guess they are too deep into this to revert?

That's what I fear; at this point I don't think the RC build will change much besides bug-fixes...

Geez I still can't believe they're scrapping the Fatigue system - my only hope now is that ACE or another mod team will be able to bring it back from the dead somehow...

[inlesco 233]

I suppose the recent major stamina system changes and removal of fatigue is a sign BIS has decided to appeal to the more competitive edge (OFP era) as it currently promotes a faster pace of gameplay (perfect for tireless PvP and TvT sessions, I'd say).

 

Too bad they didn't think of leaving a fallback method - so people can play with the "old" fatigue system without issues. 

 

So, in essence, back to the roots of OFP style gameplay regarding stamina, eh? I remember the old times of DM in Nogova with everyone carrying a G36. Fun times. Although they might be impossible to recreate with the current player-base.

[pierremgi 4889]

Playability and realism. Sometimes incompatible, sometimes outstanding success in Arma to meet both.

 

The good question is: is fatigue/stamina parameterizable  with difficulty, like HUD, extended armor and so on?  If not, I guess many addons will correct this mistake.