Weapon Resting & Deployment Feedback

[ceeeb 147]

I found a couple of bugs with weapon deployment:

0027325: Deploying a weapon when prone near a building results in player under ground

0027327: Player permanently retains some view slope after deploying weapon on a non flat surface

[madmonkey119 13]

AFAIK, you can only check 3 states of  weapon deployment so far : Rested, Deployed, or Normal. However, the stance indicator displays two more states : canDeploy and RestedCanDeploy. Are there any commands or event Handler that return some usable variables for those 2 states ?

 

What about "WeaponCanDeploy" and "WeaponRestedCanDeploy" to go along with the "WeaponRested" and "WeaponDeployed" EHs? Did I miss something here ?

Agreed. I would like to be able to tap into these features via script. With the possibility of script to disable weapon resting and deploying as well.

[Cress 0]

Any chance they can make the bullets come from the barrel of the gun and not the barrel in my characters crutch

this ruins game play, can have your gun rested on a rock and fire and the rock explodes even tho the barrel is past the rock and clear of any objects

 

 

something similar happens when prone too on the brow of a hill and trying to shoot down.

This Really does ruin game play and should be above all other issues

[oukej 2910]

Resurrecting the thread in order to gather votes and feedback regarding an adjusted weapon deployment behavior when prone on the ground.

With this change the ground weapon deployment becomes much less restrictive. It also fixes several visual issues (levitating legs).
On the other it may remove the proper feeling of having a weapon deployed and pivoting around one fixed point. It also allows the player to aim quite high in the sky even while still deployed.

There are pros and cons. Lets see whether you'd prefer such behavior of ground weapon deployment despite the various other issues that come with it.

[.kju 3244]

Is this a pure engine change, or something with configs/model to adjust/tweak?

[oukej 2910]

4 minutes ago, .kju said:

Is this a pure engine change, or something with configs/model to adjust/tweak?

Sadly not, we're sorry. It's a pure engine change (simplification of gnd deployment) with not much premise of configurability at this point. From our side - the vertical aiming limits are quite an issue we're concerned about and would like it improved. But it may not happen - just so you know that we're - in a way - "offering" this change "as is".

 

[lexx 1363]

Just tried it. On the one hand, visually it looks rather ehh, because the bipod is pretty much always floating in the air... but on the other hand, for the very first time it is possible to deploy the bipod on hills and still be able to hit anything. Going by gameplay over graphics, I'd keep the new version.

[haleks 8212]

15 minutes ago, oukej said:

[...] when prone on the ground.

 

Speaking of being prone - and sorry for being off-topic - animations are a bit weird in that stance : characters don't adapt well to slopes and have a tendancy to go "through" the ground when they move.

Can we hope for some improvements on this? I reckon it would do wonders immersion-wise, just like those changes on weapon resting.

[lex__1 422]

34 minutes ago, oukej said:

Sadly not, we're sorry. It's a pure engine change (simplification of gnd deployment) with not much premise of configurability at this point. From our side - the vertical aiming limits are quite an issue we're concerned about and would like it improved. But it may not happen - just so you know that we're - in a way - "offering" this change "as is".

 

Thank you for solving this Issue. It's much better than it was before. ceased to immerse in textures, Viva.

These tickets can be closed:

https://feedback.bistudio.com/T123368

https://feedback.bistudio.com/T85691

But in the future development of Arma would like to see the implementation of this Ticket.

https://feedback.bistudio.com/T82167

[da12thMonkey 1943]

I'm not a fan of the current vertical limits.

 

There's a big mismatch in the ability to fire from a low point up to an elevated position compared to firing from an elevated position down to targets below. Such as here firing between the beach up and the high bluffs on Stratis

You can see that someone lying prone on the (flat) beach far below can have a vertical field of fire that far exceeds most typical point-to-point elevation differences in the game. Angles that a person would not even really be able to fire at when prone (actual high-angle shooting position), let alone while maintaining support from a bipod.

Arguably, the second instance is the one where a bipod is more likely to be employed from the prone position and have a larger range of motion with bipod support.

 

I'm assuming it's this large to allow supported firing from a downward slope, to an adjacent elevated position

But I don't really think that's a scenario where one would typically be firing from prone anyway

Don't get me wrong! I know why it's this way for prone shooting in general. I just don't think it should extend to deployed shooting at this extreme height

[lex__1 422]

59 minutes ago, da12thMonkey said:

You can see that someone lying prone on the (flat) beach far below can have a vertical field of fire that far exceeds most typical point-to-point elevation differences in the game. Angles that a person would not even really be able to fire at when prone (actual high-angle shooting position), let alone while maintaining support from a bipod.

Arguably, the second instance is the one where a bipod is more likely to be employed from the prone position and have a larger range of motion with bipod support.

 

In this position it is important to deploy bipod when you look the lowest point, under the Mountain.
Need a little addictive for a new job Bipod.
Set the sight to any low point, then press the Key-expand bipod. You can shoot at any point under the Slope.shoot at any point under the Slope.

But the new system does not allow to get the same result when to deploy bipod in the window (or on the parapet), as before, the position of the weapon will depend on the upper horizontal plane of the Place.

[Malcain 35]

2 hours ago, lexx said:

Just tried it. On the one hand, visually it looks rather ehh, because the bipod is pretty much always floating in the air... but on the other hand, for the very first time it is possible to deploy the bipod on hills and still be able to hit anything. Going by gameplay over graphics, I'd keep the new version.

It's not just graphics, it's about being able to deploy bipod in the air.
Going by realsim over gameplay, I'd not keep the new version. There are already enough animation problems mentioned above, like going through the ground when prone, let's not add even more.

[lex__1 422]

2 minutes ago, Malcain said:

There are already enough animation problems mentioned above, like going through the ground when prone, let's not add even more.

The new system does not immerse the character in the Ground.

[Malcain 35]

7 minutes ago, lex__1 said:

The new system does not immerse the character in the Ground.

 

Nor does the old one, at least I haven't expirienced that behaviour.  I mentioned "going through" the ground issue as not related to bipods.
What I meant is I'd rather stick to see less weird things like that, than being able to deploy bipod "whenever" I want.
In the end, I see more cons over pros, as pros are not that important and game-changing to justify weird behaviour and animation.

[cyruz 103]

Personally I'll take gameplay over realism all day long. I've lost track of the amount of times I've watched an AR or MMG prone, stand up, move a few feet and repeat this process time and time again trying to find a spot where they can get on target. Anything that helps with that is a massive improvement.

[lex__1 422]

9 hours ago, Malcain said:

Nor does the old one, at least I haven't expirienced that behaviour.  I mentioned "going through" the ground issue as not related to bipods.
What I meant is I'd rather stick to see less weird things like that, than being able to deploy bipod "whenever" I want.
In the end, I see more cons over pros, as pros are not that important and game-changing to justify weird behaviour and animation.

https://feedback.bistudio.com/T123368#1759525

In this ticket I tried to combine all the problems around the bipod. I understand that the new bipod mechanics does not eliminate all the problems associated with the narrow implementation of the bipod mechanics in the game. I am glad that the new mechanics of bipod solves two problems, but I support that I want to see more mechanics and animation around bipod.

Spoiler

Herbs often more than it is possible it is possible to trample down.
https://youtu.be/G5gkSvm14DA
Players should look for different ways to develop bipod on hills.
https://youtu.be/h9K9br_3tIA
In a game there are four keys and actions of these keys could help to apply these actions to bipod.

lift a weapon corner

lower a weapon corner

Keys in actions https://youtu.be/9Zgv3ZyF3F4

lift a tower

lower a tower

Keys in actions

In the game bipod are rigidly fixed in two points. For the second point the variable differential is necessary.

 

[Malcain 35]

13 minutes ago, lex__1 said:

https://feedback.bistudio.com/T123368#1759525

In this ticket I tried to combine all the problems around the bipod. I understand that the new bipod mechanics does not eliminate all the problems associated with the narrow implementation of the bipod mechanics in the game. I am glad that the new mechanics of bipod solves two problems, but I support that I want to see more mechanics and animation around bipod.

No. I think I have made my point pretty clear, but I'll try to rephrase:
Adding new issues to the game in order to fix other issues is not a solution and shall not be deployed until there is a solution.

It is like switching from apples to oranges. Some people like apples, some people prefer oranges. So what's the point? Either add oranges without taking apples out, or wait until you can do it, so there are no split of opinions.

[cyruz 103]

8 hours ago, Malcain said:

No. I think I have made my point pretty clear, but I'll try to rephrase:
Adding new issues to the game in order to fix other issues is not a solution and shall not be deployed until there is a solution.

It is like switching from apples to oranges. Some people like apples, some people prefer oranges. So what's the point? Either add oranges without taking apples out, or wait until you can do it, so there are no split of opinions.

 

Well either way, someone will be unhappy, that's pretty much the point of this thread, to ascertain if people would prefer to keep the old implementation or the new one... Still voting for the new one here.

[a_killer_wombat 120]

After some testing, here are my thoughts on the new system compared to old system:

 

Pros:

• More freedom to easily move the weapon horizontally.
• Weapon is kept level rather than being tilted when deploying on a slope while facing perpendicular to the gradient (e.g.slope is N to S, weapon pointed E or W).

Cons:

• Too much freedom to aim upwards

Overall, I prefer the new system compared to the old system. However, the new system could be improved further by significantly reducing the amount of freedom the player has to aim upwards. 

 

My suggestions: 

• Bipod should automatically un-deploy when the player aims above a certain level (in relation to the ground).
• It would be great if the Bipod legs automatically visually extend and retract depending on the distance of the weapon in relation to the ground. E.g. When the player aims upwards, the bipod legs extend.

 

 

[lex__1 422]

13 hours ago, Malcain said:

No. I think I have made my point pretty clear, but I'll try to rephrase:
Adding new issues to the game in order to fix other issues is not a solution and shall not be deployed until there is a solution.

It is like switching from apples to oranges. Some people like apples, some people prefer oranges. So what's the point? Either add oranges without taking apples out, or wait until you can do it, so there are no split of opinions.

I see fewer problems with the new system. In the old system, there were no apples, there were not even bones from the apples. It was a solid, not adapted to the terrain system bipod, with a serious problem of immersion in objects and textures, or it bent and broke the character’s body on an uneven surface, acquiring unnatural poses.
The new system gives more freedom around bipod, more review. Viewing angles are not clamped, and are less dependent on the geometry and angle of the surface, where the bipod unfolds. Animation does not break the character's body. Immersion in the texture of an object occurs with a small probability, it is practically impossible to use it in mercenary ways.
The minus of the new system has not changed, the deployment of the bipod on the fence (parapet, window), the viewing angles are clamped and depend on the surface geometry.
What problems do you see in the new system?

[Malcain 35]

1 hour ago, lex__1 said:

I see fewer problems with the new system. In the old system, there were no apples, there were not even bones from the apples. It was a solid, not adapted to the terrain system bipod, with a serious problem of immersion in objects and textures, or it bent and broke the character’s body on an uneven surface, acquiring unnatural poses.
The new system gives more freedom around bipod, more review. Viewing angles are not clamped, and are less dependent on the geometry and angle of the surface, where the bipod unfolds. Animation does not break the character's body. Immersion in the texture of an object occurs with a small probability, it is practically impossible to use it in mercenary ways.
The minus of the new system has not changed, the deployment of the bipod on the fence (parapet, window), the viewing angles are clamped and depend on the surface geometry.
What problems do you see in the new system?

Please spare me from repeating the whole page of the thread and re-read what minuses are described above, even by dev itself, there is even a screenshot which looks rather ridiculous.  You continue to speak about pros ignoring the cons.
I don't need an easy gameplay, there are cons with bipod in irl too, even tho different from the game, they do exist, so can you stop trying to justify what you like ignoring all other points? Thanks in advance.

P.S. Those who suggest something, shall understand that this change is proposed as-is which means there is a high probability it will stay like that forever or for a very long time. I understand why most would vote for it - it removes challenges in bipod use, however it may end up ugly in the long run where everyone brainlessly press bipod button as they see a target, given the vertical limits and stuff. I don't know why shall this be up to community because up to my expirience, most players prefer easier gameplay at first.
I dont justify clunky things, there is a space for improvement,  I just don't consider this change as an improvement. It's a replacement of one cons to other cons which I consider a bad practice in general.

[lex__1 422]

9 hours ago, Malcain said:

Those who suggest something, shall understand that this change is proposed as-is which means there is a high probability it will stay like that forever or for a very long time. I understand why most would vote for it - it removes challenges in bipod use, however it may end up ugly in the long run where everyone brainlessly press bipod button as they see a target, given the vertical limits and stuff. I don't know why shall this be up to community because up to my expirience, most players prefer easier gameplay at first.
I dont justify clunky things, there is a space for improvement,  I just don't consider this change as an improvement. It's a replacement of one cons to other cons which I consider a bad practice in general.

What is the interest, to have a bipod and not be able to use them for their intended purpose?
I can attach a lot of photos where the old bipod system creates a more ugly look.
The fatigue system was implemented in Arma3, and the bipod system was not adapted for use in the environment. This led to the fact that the system of fatigue began to receive a lot of negative feedback and many complaints about the work of the bipod system. https://feedback.bistudio.com/T82167

What is the interest, to have a bipod and not be able to use them for their intended purpose?
I can attach a lot of photos where the old bipod system creates a more ugly look.
The fatigue system was implemented in Arma3, and the bipod system was not adapted for use in the environment. This led to the fact that the system of fatigue began to receive a lot of negative feedback and many complaints about the work of the bipod system.
The new system eliminates the two main problems of the old bipod system, as in these videos:

A real bipod has more uses than is implemented in the game, and a new, faster application of bipod is not a new problem.

[Malcain 35]

2 minutes ago, lex__1 said:

The new system eliminates the two main problems of the old bipod system, as in these videos:

A real bipod is more functional than it is in the game, and a new, faster application of bipod is not a new problem.

Regarding second video: is that really still in game? I think it was fixed long time ago? I don't play on Altis anymore, but I haven't expirienced this issue on other maps, last time I saw that was 2016 which is the date of the video. So, it's not related,

First video is a bit too much too, I didn't have that much of an issue on Malden, however I usually used bipods after picking a good position for it, so it's hard to tell.
And yeah, in IRL I doubt it is that easy - you come to a rock and deploy bipod in a second at any place. This is not right.

[lex__1 422]

3 minutes ago, Malcain said:

Regarding second video: is that really still in game? I think it was fixed long time ago? I don't play on Altis anymore, but I haven't expirienced this issue on other maps, last time I saw that was 2016 which is the date of the video. So, it's not related,

First video is a bit too much too, I didn't have that much of an issue on Malden, however I usually used bipods after picking a good position for it, so it's hard to tell.
And yeah, in IRL I doubt it is that easy - you come to a rock and deploy bipod in a second at any place. This is not right.

Yes, in the new bipod system there is a visual flaw, like a bipod in the air, but this should not create an obstacle for unfolding the bipod anywhere.
In the new system, you will not be able to do something like the videos, but at 1.84 it works.

[Malcain 35]

5 minutes ago, lex__1 said:

Yes, in the new bipod system there is a visual flaw, like a bipod in the air, but this should not create an obstacle for unfolding the bipod anywhere.
In the new system, you will not be able to do something like the videos, but at 1.84 it works.

Not only the visual flaw but unrealistic angle of view like in a posted screenshot:
|

It also changes the gameplay being less restrictive to a position of the bipod deployment, which i do not like. But looks like currently I'm the minority here so let's see how it goes.
(And I do not think you can go underground with the current version using bipod, at least not on malden/Tanoa and some other custom maps, it was an old bug right after release)