Fatigue Feedback (dev branch)

[Greenfist 1863]

It's the weight of all the stuff you're carrying. Actual capacity depends on your... well capacity; backpack size etc.

edit. Dark ninja beat me to it.

Is it really weight and volume combined? I did not know that.

[BL1P 35]

Ahh as i thought nobody really knows :)

Its the magical unicorn units invented by BIS :)

[John Kozak 14]

Yeah, the bar definitely needs some points of reference. Like colour segments; green, yellow, red. Or little ticks along it. So you could say something like "max load 3 quarters" or "below red". That doesn't sound as tacticool as "20kg" but would be much better than now.

Well, "load up to 3 ticks" indeed doesn't sound good :D But colors may work, yes.

Edited July 1, 2014 by DarkWanderer

[Alwarren 2765]

You seem to forget that Arma is a platform for many game types. What the devs are doing with this overkill fatigue and weapon sway change, is to rest diversity to the platform, by limiting the platform usability to only one thing: PvP military operations

Correct me if I'm wrong but it seems the enableFatigue command still works. Problem solved.

[Variable 322]

Reading the spotrep about the fatigue and weapon sway made me very happy. Thank you BIS for addressing the concerns of the community!

[Brisse 78]

No. Please don't turn this into a game of numbers. Common sense goes a long way when you choose loadout. It's not hard to understand that a AT Mine is going to be heavy, and that the chemlight barely affects you.

[BL1P 35]

Reading the spotrep about the fatigue and weapon sway made me very happy. Thank you BIS for addressing the concerns of the community!

+1 To this.

---------- Post added at 10:38 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:33 AM ----------

No. Please don't turn this into a game of numbers. Common sense goes a long way when you choose loadout. It's not hard to understand that a AT Mine is going to be heavy, and that the chemlight barely affects you.

Actually it doesn't seem correct at the moment.

I can carry say two titan AT rockets in my back pack or fill up that space with Stanag mags now the two AT rockets should weight a lot more than the same capacity as stanags but they weigh the same it seems as far as fatigue is concerned.

in fact the item weight seems to have no effect on fatigue at all only the capacity of the items you are carrying.

Weapons etc seem to have weight effect but items stored dont.

[Brisse 78]

Actually it doesn't seem correct at the moment.

I can carry say two titan AT rockets in my back pack or fill up that space with Stanag mags now the two AT rockets should weight a lot more than the same capacity as stanags but they weigh the same it seems as far as fatigue is concerned.

in fact the item weight seems to have no effect on fatigue at all only the capacity of the items you are carrying.

Weapons etc seem to have weight effect but items stored dont.

Items actually don't have seperate weight and capacity (or volume) parameters in the config files. It's all just one single parameter called "mass". I think the STANAG's have "mass = 10;" A uniform is "mass = 40;" if i recall correctly.

[BL1P 35]

Items actually don't have seperate weight and capacity (or volume) parameters in the config files. It's all just one single parameter called "mass". I think the STANAG's have "mass = 10;" A uniform is "mass = 40;" if i recall correctly.

Thanks that explains a lot for me.

[roberthammer 582]

It's a shame - it could work same as in ACE2 > http://freeace.wikkii.com/wiki/Features_of_ACE2#Model_Makers_6

which you have 3 proper parameters to make it realistic as possible

[John Kozak 14]

No. Please don't turn this into a game of numbers. Common sense goes a long way when you choose loadout. It's not hard to understand that a AT Mine is going to be heavy, and that the chemlight barely affects you.

I have bad news for you. You need to count mags and shots in a mag.

[Brisse 78]

I have bad news for you. You need to count mags and shots in a mag.

I'm sorry, I don't understand what you meant. Are you saying the game changes the mass of the magazine as you consume the ammunition? I'm pretty sure it does not do that. There is no mass parameter in the cfgammo class. It is defined in cfgmagazines only.

[KeyCat 131]

Reading the spotrep about the fatigue and weapon sway made me very happy. Thank you BIS for addressing the concerns of the community!

+1 and QFT

Looking forward to the new improvements!

/KC

[John Kozak 14]

I'm sorry, I don't understand what you meant. Are you saying the game changes the mass of the magazine as you consume the ammunition? I'm pretty sure it does not do that. There is no mass parameter in the cfgammo class. It is defined in cfgmagazines only.

No, I mean there are numbers anyway :) Having a number for mass would be just an indication of how long you can run with this loadout, just like number of mags is an indication of how long you can fight with it. It's not that ArmA will suddenly turn into EVE Online.

[Brisse 78]

Yea, okay! Now I understand what you meant :D

Personally I would prefer if we could turn the ammo counter off in difficulty settings. That way you have to keep count without the game helping you.

[Tonci87 163]

Yea, okay! Now I understand what you meant :D

Personally I would prefer if we could turn the ammo counter off in difficulty settings. That way you have to keep count without the game helping you.

Only if there is a way to check the weight of the current magazine.Otherwise there would be no way to know if you just loaded a half empty one.

[seba1976 98]

Would you care to explain why the gameplay mechanics I mentioned are exclusively PvP? If the AI is balanced in tandem with these new changes, I don't see what the issue is. How is not being able to carry a dozen mags and a launcher and still be highly mobile an exclusively PvP concept? I want to have to consider my loadout, my movement, my cover, etc. whether I'm against a human or an AI. I don't want to have to pretend that they matter.

That's exactly the point. The AI behaviour will never be changed to consider these things. Just as they don't hold their breath to take shots at you now, much less will they move considering when to run and when to stop, etc. You believe so because you think BIS will modify the AI FSMs. They're not. They can't. They prefer to go for these changes that are easy. The new animation system is a good example. It is good for us, but it makes the AI get stuck like they didn't in A2.

The restrictions they can stream line to the AI right now are going to be bad, you'll see. ACE tried that approach back in Arma 1, and lot's of online communities didn't use ACE as a result. The AI wouldn't stop to take care of themselves, so we had AI falling uncouncius, and standing up after a few minutes, just to fall again, and so on. BIS can only acomplish a similar effect, depending on the restrictions they choose to apply, but the AI will not plan for these changes as you would, they will just suffered the effects.

I don't see the connection between realism and platform restriction.

You don't? Take for example the difficulty to fire a rifle. If concessions (in detriment) of realism were not made, by the time you could effectibly shot your rifle towards the AI, you would have 20 shots coming your way. Flashpoint didn't have much recoil, then Arma 1 introduced lots of it, then Arma 2 reduce the heck out of it, and it was better gameplay. Then Arma 3 introduced it again (plus weapon sway) in a way that you practicaly can't use the standing stance to shoot the AI (because they don't get suppressed by just poping shots at them), so every simulation you add, has the potential to restrict the platform.

[Brisse 78]

(because they don't get suppressed by just poping shots at them)

Actually, they do, but it's not very noticable.

[twisted 127]

Reading the spotrep about the fatigue and weapon sway made me very happy. Thank you BIS for addressing the concerns of the community!

this, these things are importnat and it was a great read. carry on please.

[-Coulum- 35]

Some great work BIS. I'm really glad to see all this fatigue as well as the weapon handling and the intricate connection between the two. And of course the oprep was also very nice.

Looking forward to what you guys will create next.

Actually, they do, but it's not very noticable.

Mmm? What makes you think that?

[striike 10]

Weapon sway is the #1 reason me and many friends stopped playing Arma 3. Thank you for finally addressing this unrealistic crap! Now to see if BI actually fixed it, or just broke it again.

[raspu86 92]

Way to go Bohemia (finally ;) )! I would love to see big guns like sniper rifle and lmgs to be more demanding on your fatigue and weapon sway tough. Those things are really heavy! Right now I could'nt notice a difference between an assault rifle and for example the Lynx sniper rifle.

[Greenfist 1863]

Way to go Bohemia (finally ;) )! I would love to see big guns like sniper rifle and lmgs to be more demanding on your fatigue and weapon sway tough. Those things are really heavy! Right now I could'nt notice a difference between an assault rifle and for example the Lynx sniper rifle.

But guns already have different weights, and when the proper inertia is published there will be even bigger difference in swaying, I think.

[Brisse 78]

Right now I could'nt notice a difference between an assault rifle and for example the Lynx sniper rifle.

But you will, once they release the new inertia system. I think we will se it on the devbranch within a few days.

[roberthammer 582]

We should point out that a third aspect, weapon intertia, is not likely going to make it into Bootcamp Update and will be enabled short thereafter.

from latest SITREP

:( it seems we have to wait a little more for that ...