Player can be driver and gunner at the same time... only solution

[katipo66 94]

Yes i like the idea of better control, AI driving is ridiculous and the forward forward left left is completely face palm, I doubt it will ever get improved, and saying find someone online to drive for you is retarded when People playing SP.

[Rumsfield 1]

I always prefer a competent human driver. But, when I can't get one to drive the tank/apc, for which I am the gunner/commander in, I simply drive it myself then stop and switch to the gunner seat when I need to shoot a target. This is silly, but I got used to it. It would be amazing if there was a better option.

[nuxil 2]

player as driver & gunner is possible if you configure your models for it.

would be hard for vanilla content since config files needs to be rewritten.

poc:

[metalcraze 290]

I like how people complain they want a better driver and then suggest eliminating the driver completely. Just instant-response WASD arcade tank movement.

Even when playing with a human driver he will not instantly do what you want and often not to the letter either.

And if you are fighting with an unprotected tank in a forest or a city you are doing something wrong anyway.

A typical "why dis is no BF3" agenda.

Saying that - it's possible to mod in unrealistic stuff.

[Bouben 3]

I like how people complain they want a better driver and then suggest eliminating the driver completely. Just instant-response WASD arcade tank movement.

Even when playing with a human driver he will not instantly do what you want and often not to the letter either.

And if you are fighting with an unprotected tank in a forest or a city you are doing something wrong anyway.

A typical "why dis is no BF3" agenda.

Saying that - it's possible to mod in unrealistic stuff.

Man, please, stop with the BF3/4 bullshit. It seriously pisses me off how many times it was mentioned already when somebody wants to bring a compromise for sake of better gameplay. I am OFP player since 2001 and have never enjoyed Battlefield series nor COD series so go somewhere else with your rage against "BF agenda". Arma is so unrealistic in so many ways and in some even less realistic than BF or COD yet you still mention those two games regularly. You are so short-sighted.

[laverniusregalis 10]

Man, please, stop with the BF3/4 bullshit. It seriously pisses me off how many times it was mentioned already when somebody wants to bring a compromise for sake of better gameplay. I am OFP player since 2001 and have never enjoyed Battlefield series nor COD series so go somewhere else with your rage against "BF agenda". Arma is so unrealistic in so many ways and in some even less realistic than BF or COD yet you still mention those two games regularly. You are so short-sighted.

I don't care, this would be a bunch of bull████ if it happened. Take it to a mod, I'll grab a pitchfork if it's brought to vanilla A3.

And don't even try to say that it's less realistic in virtually ANY way than BF or CoD. Those games are like Quake with equipment which actually exists.

[iceman77 18]

Take it to a mod, I'll grab a pitchfork if it's brought to vanilla A3.

Why? It already existed in vanilla OFP (& Arma1 I believe)... The M1AbramsAuto caused no harm what so ever.

Edited November 12, 2013 by Iceman77

[EDcase 87]

I don't care, this would be a bunch of bull████ if it happened. Take it to a mod, I'll grab a pitchfork if it's brought to vanilla A3.

And don't even try to say that it's less realistic in virtually ANY way than BF or CoD. Those games are like Quake with equipment which actually exists.

That's a mighty big attitude for a newcomer.

The point of ARMA is that you can CHOOSE how to play.

Since the AI are not capable of driving efficiently (and probably never will be) then a compromise must be accepted.

...and if you don't like it, don't use it.

[[aps]gnat 28]

I don't care, this would be a bunch of bull████ if it happened. Take it to a mod, I'll grab a pitchfork if it's brought to vanilla.

Agree, and I'm not a "newcomer"

Mod it, fine, but there's no way this arcade stuff belongs in vanilla ArmA.

[Bouben 3]

I don't care, this would be a bunch of bull████ if it happened. Take it to a mod, I'll grab a pitchfork if it's brought to vanilla A3.

And don't even try to say that it's less realistic in virtually ANY way than BF or CoD. Those games are like Quake with equipment which actually exists.

Oh really? Have you ever tried to throw a grenade in any of the Arma series' games? And how did you like destroying tanks with machine-guns in Arma 2 for couple of years? And how do you like AI units taking bullets in their chest while still being perfectly able to shoot back? How do you like AI inability to peak and shoot from a cover, AI not running away from grenades or throwing them back? How do you like absence of proper stealth and stealth kills in Arma with no knifes at all? And don't even want me to mention sound-engine of BF3/4 (even the first two games had it on a completely different, more realistic level than Arma has now).

Both COD and BF have these issues sorted long ago and for example in BF when you reload a weapon with a bullet already in the chamber it stays there so you have one extra bullet to shoot, just like IRL. Not happening in Arma. Quite a few would-be-good-in-arma features for a Quake, hm?

Gnat;2556081']Agree' date=' and I'm not a "newcomer"

Mod it, fine, but there's no way this arcade stuff belongs in vanilla ArmA.[/quote']

Yeah. "Arcade" prohibited. Idiotic allowed. Wannabe-realistic (non-functional) demanded. Gameplay damaged. How productive.

[laverniusregalis 10]

Oh really? Have you ever tried to throw a grenade in any of the Arma series' games? And how did you like destroying tanks with machine-guns in Arma 2 for couple of years? And how do you like AI units taking bullets in their chest while still being perfectly able to shoot back? How do you like AI inability to peak and shoot from a cover, AI not running away from grenades or throwing them back? How do you like absence of proper stealth and stealth kills in Arma with no knifes at all? And don't even want me to mention sound-engine of BF3/4 (even the first two games had it on a completely different, more realistic level than Arma has now).

Both COD and BF have these issues sorted long ago and for example in BF when you reload a weapon with a bullet already in the chamber it stays there so you have one extra bullet to shoot, just like IRL. Not happening in Arma. Quite a few would-be-good-in-arma features for a Quake, hm?

Yeah. "Arcade" prohibited. Idiotic allowed. Wannabe-realistic (non-functional) demanded. Gameplay damaged. How productive.

Then leave.

Ahem, first of all...

>Implying ARMA3's grenades are like those of ARMA2

>Implying that the ability for 30 human players with LMGs to shoot at a tank all at once, somehow survive long enough to kill it is likely

>Implying AI is perfect

>Implying stealth isn't possible

>Implying ARMA is perfect

>Implying all of that is reason enough to turn this into arcade garbage

No. Just stop. If you don't like it, don't let the door slam you on the way out.

That's a mighty big attitude for a newcomer.

The point of ARMA is that you can CHOOSE how to play.

Since the AI are not capable of driving efficiently (and probably never will be) then a compromise must be accepted.

...and if you don't like it, don't use it.

I've been playing since ARMA1, you presumptuous nut.

The point is that even though ARMA isn't perfect, it does what it tries to do well: Giving us a decent niche title with a focus on realism. WE COME HERE SO WE DON'T HAVE TANKS THAT ARE CREWED BY ONE PERSON! Also, Gnat kind of knows his stuff. Don't insult the Gnat.

Edited November 13, 2013 by steamtex

[Kerc Kasha 102]

Because pressing WSAD to make the AI drive for you is so much more realistic than allowing you to directly control it when there's an AI in the driver seat.

Seriously some of you need to lay off the bleach

Edited November 13, 2013 by Kerc Kasha

[laverniusregalis 10]

Because pressing WSAD to make the AI drive for you is so much more realistic than allowing you to directly control it when there's an AI in the driver seat.

Seriously some of you need to lay off the bleach

I'll assume you're directly insulting us.

NONONONONONONONONO, you people..... It 'simulates' giving orders to the AI. Besides, most of the time we just click the map to tell the AI where to go or drive the damn tank ourselves and designate targets for the gunner. It's not perfect but it's a helluva lot better than just being a one-man tank crew.

[iceman77 18]

it's a helluva lot better than just being a one-man tank crew.

Somewhat offtopic! Memory lane... but believe it or not 1 man tank crews used to be extremely exploitable even without being able to operate the turrets at the same time as driving. Where having any additional (player) crew was a severe hindrance in pure PvP. 1 player could hop between commander and gunner seats. Stay in commander and tab lock, switch to gunner and kill the target @ ~2km in the fog haha. As players couldn't acquire locks with "tab" in the gunner seat like they can now. Only by right clicking on the target directly from the gunner's seat.

If there were 2 players, a player in the commander seat and he got a locked target, the gunner (player) couldn't see the lock box. Thus it was very advantageous in pure PvP to roll with 1 man tank crews and let 1 person operate both the commander and gunner, simply because he could see the lock boxes in both seats even after he switched seats.. Even when servers did away with the lock boxes you could still bring up the command menu and blip the lock box. At most you'd bring a driver if he knew wtf he was doing and didn't interfere with the commander/gunner exploit of the other player. IE; hopping in one of the unoccupied comm/gunner seats "i'll help you out buddy!!".. I used to /wrists at that point lmao.

I would ask nicely at first for them to get out. Which was usually refused. Then I'd have to try and explain the exploit in the heat of battle, and ask the person again to please hop out of my tank. Usually an argument would ensue telling me I was wrong & we'd die. Then it'd usually go something like this; I'd ask the person how the fuck he thought I just went 70:1, in a 1hr c&h without any AI what so ever, if I didn't know what I was talking about. lmao. Things have changed a bit now though. They've really put screws to tab lock believe it or not! That shit used to be 360* and you didn't even need to be looking toward the said target to get a lock. Not to mention how absurdly easy it used to be to shoot down helos with sabot rounds.. I used to relish getting to the AO first to kill the daylights out of the first full chopper load of unsuspecting noobs haha. I also relished talking to the opposition while i was about to let a round off. Fun times. /sigh

Edited November 13, 2013 by Iceman77

[Kerc Kasha 102]

I'll assume you're directly insulting us.

NONONONONONONONONO, you people..... It 'simulates' giving orders to the AI. Besides, most of the time we just click the map to tell the AI where to go or drive the damn tank ourselves and designate targets for the gunner. It's not perfect but it's a helluva lot better than just being a one-man tank crew.

I know what it's supposed to simulate but functionally it's exactly the same, the only difference being is the AI will randomly disregard orders (like you will be moving *FAST* down a road and it will suddenly slow down because of a street sign on the side of the road as if it's trying to obey road rules). Having it be direct control will leave you with the exact same system but working better because there's no AI in between your orders and the actual act to screw it up.

[doveman 7]

Sounds like a good idea to me. Can be a mod or an option that servers can disable if they want but giving orders to AI drivers is atrocious so this would be a big improvement.

[Mirek 166]

Want crewofone tanks? Play Planetside 2. Its free and has what you want.

[metalcraze 290]

Man, please, stop with the BF3/4 bullshit. It seriously pisses me off how many times it was mentioned already when somebody wants to bring a compromise for sake of better gameplay.

Why exactly making tanks completely unrealistic and arcade by eliminating the driver = better gameplay?

Can you give a clear explanation? IRL tanks are just as bad in urban and forest terrain, you can't just give your semi-blind driver telepathic orders. Making them super-maneuverable non-blind machines of ultimate doom will improve the gameplay how?

As I've said - if AI is truly the issue - then AI is the issue. Complain about AI, demand AI to be improved. Don't demand to ruin the game.

Edited November 13, 2013 by metalcraze

[maturin 12]

Explain how it ruins the game. Really. Name one serious difference.

THE CONTROLS ARE THE SAME. You give the exact same orders. THE CAPABILITIES ARE THE SAME. The difference is that you're simulating a human driver... with a human driver. Instead of a human driver... with a computer that can only move in straight lines if it's lucky.

Making them super-maneuverable non-blind machines of ultimate doom will improve the gameplay how?

So a human driver makes a tank a super-maneuverable machine of doom? And by the way, a turned out driver has better situational awareness than a scoped-in commander. So a manual driving tank is still less useful than having a real driver. But it somehow ruins the game? Just because BF does it? You are a fanatic.

IRL tanks are just as bad in urban and forest terrain

But the AI is useless. And you know it will never be improved so that it can stand in for a player. Seriously, pressing W to give a move forward order is the same as pressing W to move forward directly. Except the former is fucking broken because the AI doesn't know how to back up. REALISM!

NO ONE has suggested that manual driving be made standard or anything more than an option. NO ONE has suggested crewing tanks with only one soldier.

This thread is a good acid test of ArmA fanboy idiocy.

Spoken as someone who loves pretty much every bit of obscure realism that ACE churns out. But you can't sabotage gameplay for the appearance of realism.

[almanzo 144]

Why exactly making tanks completely unrealistic and arcade by eliminating the driver = better gameplay?

Can you give a clear explanation? IRL tanks are just as bad in urban and forest terrain, you can't just give your semi-blind driver telepathic orders. Making them super-maneuverable non-blind machines of ultimate doom will improve the gameplay how?

As I've said - if AI is truly the issue - then AI is the issue. Complain about AI, demand AI to be improved. Don't demand to ruin the game.

exactly. Driving a tank in an urban enviroment is clunky, and as it is now you can even go to third person view to manuver. I would love to see AI learn to drive better, but I am completely against player being able to operate a tank alone. As someone else said, that is why people go to arma to play with tanks. You can't operate a tank alone in real life, and neither should you in ARMA.

[maturin 12]

RTFT.

And really, you can already give your semi-blind driver telepathic orders by clicking on the map.

Third person already reduces tank driving to fantasy mode, whereas as manual drive would just make them drive like real tanks. Realistic results with unrealistic methods vs. unrealistic results with realistic methods. Which is better? The latter, if you're a butthurt fanatic who hates BF!

[Bee8190 10]

I wouldn't mind this idea as the ai are incompetent of anything and -

Forward FAST FAST FAST LEFT LEFT FAST LEFT FAST LEFT FAST RIGHT FAST....makes me want to jump out off the fucking window

[laverniusregalis 10]

I know what it's supposed to simulate but functionally it's exactly the same, the only difference being is the AI will randomly disregard orders (like you will be moving *FAST* down a road and it will suddenly slow down because of a street sign on the side of the road as if it's trying to obey road rules). Having it be direct control will leave you with the exact same system but working better because there's no AI in between your orders and the actual act to screw it up.

Except the commander can't reach the fucking controls from his seat, and he isn't about to climb out of his seat in battle?

Explain how it ruins the game. Really. Name one serious difference.

THE CONTROLS ARE THE SAME. You give the exact same orders. THE CAPABILITIES ARE THE SAME. The difference is that you're simulating a human driver... with a human driver. Instead of a human driver... with a computer that can only move in straight lines if it's lucky.

So a human driver makes a tank a super-maneuverable machine of doom? And by the way, a turned out driver has better situational awareness than a scoped-in commander. So a manual driving tank is still less useful than having a real driver. But it somehow ruins the game? Just because BF does it? You are a fanatic.

But the AI is useless. And you know it will never be improved so that it can stand in for a player. Seriously, pressing W to give a move forward order is the same as pressing W to move forward directly. Except the former is fucking broken because the AI doesn't know how to back up. REALISM!

NO ONE has suggested that manual driving be made standard or anything more than an option. NO ONE has suggested crewing tanks with only one soldier.

This thread is a good acid test of ArmA fanboy idiocy.

Spoken as someone who loves pretty much every bit of obscure realism that ACE churns out. But you can't sabotage gameplay for the appearance of realism.

So play with real people, or mod it in.

Heh.

[-Gews- 1]

As someone else said, that is why people go to arma to play with tanks.

Technically speaking, people go to Steel Beasts Professional PE to play with tanks ;)

Anyways, this topic perhaps should have read "Improve player control of AI drivers for tanks".

Instead of allowing the player to be the gunner, commander and driver at the same time, perhaps a better solution would be to improve player controls of AI. Right now you can go "FORWARD - FASTER - TURN RIGHT - TURN RIGHT" and it's extremely janky.

A more fluid system would be better and those repeated voice commands are also very annoying.

[-Coulum- 35]

Well I personally don't have much problem with the current system. Just wish the ai would just follow you're exact direction. Sometimes I command them forward and they try to path find. They should just trust me and go forward.

I think the suggested solution would be a bit to fluid and hive minded for my liking. That being said I wouldn't be up in arms if implemented - I am usually an infantry soldier anyhow.