Fushko 59 Posted April 11, 2015 So you release a DLC to gain additional development revenue fair enough.. You include it in some mods like KOTH, to introduce/trial the dlc fair enough.. You have a policy that BIStudios does not support pay to win.... ??? 1. Before the Marksman DLC, as I run out of ammo, I resupply or pick-up a gun and ammo of the next person I kill. I can spawn and run with DLC in game, but not pick up DLC content of a person I killed, yet that person can of me if he has purchased it. 2. So I have the option to equip with Marksman DLC content in KOTH, but when running with DLC content excessive "buy DLC content" advertising on screen particularly during game play/combat. Running with DLC content pops up a solid popup box to buy DLC content in the centre of the screen, blocking view or aim at enemy infront of you. If you want to introduce DLC into an existing functional game, with the expectation of continued support from the existing community in buying the DLC, how about you leave the game functional and fair to all. Limit your advertising/reminder that the DLC we are using is available to but to the side of the screen or as a death screen as we are respawning, by not impeding/limiting the existing players in game experience. Leave it to us to decide if your content is worth contributing toward. Regards Ned KOTH is not made by BI in the slightest. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
gibonez 18 Posted April 12, 2015 I wish people would learn the difference between missions and mods. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
UltimateBawb 1 Posted April 12, 2015 Please stay on topic. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
zakiechan 11 Posted April 12, 2015 Noticed a bug with the DMS sight revision. Zeroing the sight, then switching back to the reflex mounted on top, the entire package will auto re-zero to 200m. Ideally both sights should zero independently, zero setting remaining at user set level would be acceptable as well Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ceeeb 147 Posted April 12, 2015 (edited) They haven't been nerfed, their descriptions have been changed to match their actual zoom level. From what I see the sights still don't have any real consistency between the zoom reported by the UI, and the actual zoom. For this data I assume soldier zoomed in view = 1x, although it is also reasonable to assume default soldier view = 1x (double all actual zoom levels below): [table=width: 800, align: left, class: grid] [tr] [td]SCOPE:[/td] [td]UI zoom[/td] [td]Actual zoom:[/td] [td]Actual/UI zoom:[/td] [td]Comments[/td] [/tr] [tr] [td]none (ironsights, collimators)[/td] [td]-[/td] [td]0.5x-1x[/td] [td]-[/td] [td]-[/td] [/tr] [tr] [td]ARCO, MRCO, RCO[/td] [td]2x[/td] [td]3x[/td] [td]1.5[/td] [td]-[/td] [/tr] [tr] [td]DMS[/td] [td]2x-4x[/td] [td]3x,6x[/td] [td]1.5,1.5[/td] [td]-[/td] [/tr] [tr] [td]Kahlia[/td] [td]5x-11x[/td] [td]7x,16.5x[/td] [td]1.4,1.5[/td] [td]-[/td] [/tr] [tr] [td]LRPS[/td] [td]6x-25x[/td] [td]9.375x,37.5x[/td] [td]1.56,1.5[/td] [td]-[/td] [/tr] [tr] [td]Mk17[/td] [td]1x-2x[/td] [td]0.5x,1x[/td] [td]0.5,0.5[/td] [td]-[/td] [/tr] [tr] [td]MOS[/td] [td]2.5x-5x[/td] [td]3.5x,7.5x[/td] [td]1.4,1.5[/td] [td]-[/td] [/tr] [tr] [td]Nightstalker[/td] [td]4x-10x[/td] [td]4x,10x[/td] [td]1,1[/td] [td]Actual zoom is correctly reported through optics HUD[/td] [/tr] [tr] [td]NVS[/td] [td]5x[/td] [td]2.885[/td] [td]0.577[/td] [td]-[/td] [/tr] [tr] [td]TWS[/td] [td]4x-10x[/td] [td]5x,11.7x[/td] [td]1.242,1.17[/td] [td]-[/td] [/tr] [tr] [td]Binoculars[/td] [td]-[/td] [td]7.98x[/td] [td]-[/td] [td]-[/td] [/tr] [tr] [td]Laser Designator (AAF/NATO)[/td] [td]6-60x[/td] [td]3.02-30x[/td] [td]2,2[/td] [td]Actual zoom is correctly reported through optics HUD[/td] [/tr] [tr] [td]Laser Designator (CSAT)[/td] [td]8-42x[/td] [td]4-21x[/td] [td]2,2[/td] [td]Actual zoom is correctly reported through optics HUD[/td] [/tr] [tr] [td]Rangefinder[/td] [td]3-60x[/td] [td]1.667-37.5x[/td] [td]1.8,1.6[/td] [td]-[/td] [/tr] [/table] To be consistent across all scopes, all values in the last column should be the same number (looks like BI's target value was 1.5x). Edited May 3, 2015 by ceeeb Revised table to use zoomed ironsights as 1x, was previously 2x (ie, halved all actual values) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AveryTheKitty 2626 Posted April 12, 2015 To be consistent across all scopes, all values in the last column should be the same number (looks like BI's target value was 3). Half life 3 confirmed? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
x3kj 1247 Posted April 12, 2015 (edited) Half life 3 confirmed? We already have Arma 3 life, and its bad enough... no need for another half of that To be consistent across all scopes, all values in the last column should be the same number (looks like BI's target value was 3). There may be reasons beyond mortal comprehension... although there may also be reasons within mortal comprehension... for example a better visual look of the scope model for the selected zoom factor. I doubt you would notice the difference between 2.8 and 3.0 ... Edited April 12, 2015 by Fennek Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ceeeb 147 Posted April 12, 2015 There may be reasons beyond mortal comprehension... although there may also be reasons within mortal comprehension... for example a better visual look of the scope model for the selected zoom factor. I doubt you would notice the difference between 2.8 and 3.0 ... Agreed, the UI values don't need to be exact either, and the actual zoom could have been fudged a bit either way to suit the scope reticule artwork too. The NVS, TWS and nightstalker do need a bit more work to match the rest at the moment. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
x3kj 1247 Posted April 12, 2015 I think thermal and NV sights are with less zoom because of balance. Thermal gives extreme advantages, so limited zoom offsets this bonus a bit. It's still a game after all Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
warden_1 1070 Posted April 13, 2015 You have a policy that BIStudios does not support pay to win.... ??? Pay to win would have been making it so the new DLC had guns that were crazy good so everyone buys the DLC then modifying them so they are mediocre (EA/DICE style) BHI does not support and does not produce any pay-to-win type of content.... like really just buy the DLC to support BHI so they will add more features we request. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CaptainAzimuth 714 Posted April 13, 2015 Pay to win would have been making it so the new DLC had guns that were crazy good so everyone buys the DLC then modifying them so they are mediocre (EA/DICE style)BHI does not support and does not produce any pay-to-win type of content.... like really just buy the DLC to support BHI so they will add more features we request. BIS*... not BHI... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Brisse 78 Posted April 13, 2015 BIS*... not BHI... I prefer BI, because BIS is so easy to confuse with Bohemia Interactive Simulations, which is the developer of VBS series. :) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Vanz0r 39 Posted April 15, 2015 Effective out to 800m? Are you kidding me? Did you know that the longest recorded sniper kill in history was made with the .338 Lapua Magnum? It was made in November 2009 by Corporal of Horse Craig Harrison at a range of 2 475 meters. He used a Accuracy International L115A3 chambered for the .338 Lapua Magnum. And as far as I can recall it took him 9 shots to get a hit... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CaptainObvious 95 Posted April 15, 2015 And as far as I can recall it took him 9 shots to get a hit... Doesn't change the fact that the round is effective beyond 1500 meters. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kbbw123 115 Posted October 4, 2015 Navid has a faulty reload anim with iron sight Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cosmic10r 2331 Posted October 4, 2015 And as far as I can recall it took him 9 shots to get a hit... You getting a lot of cold bore first shot hits at 2000m? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
2nd ranger 282 Posted October 4, 2015 I'm aware that the following feedback has little relevance considering the DLC has been out for so long, and wouldn't have been very useful even before the release because it's mostly about personal preference, but it might be pertinient to any weapon packs BIS releases in the future. More of an AAR, really: I hardly use any of the guns outside of SP. I don't really like using them in co-op because I feel like it's cheating. Some people have snarkily referred to it as the Pay to Win DLC, and I think that's somewhat justified. I don't play PVP but I imagine if DLC weapons are available, alot of people are running around with the marksmen rifles. It would be a different story if the standard weapon calibres were a bit more lethal, but pretty much all of the DLC weapons kill in one shot most of the time, and there isn't much of a penalty for using them in regards to weight or inertia, except for the MGs. I think the machine guns were needed, but oddly I don't find myself using them either. I'd almost prefer that the MGs were available as static weapons - I think the AAF should have been given a new static, lower-tech MG to replace the HMG that everyone else uses, since the AAF didn't benefit at all from the DLC which I found odd. Also, since the DLC included two weapons that were not marksmen rifles, I feel like it could also have included a couple of regular rifles to supplement the stock ARs, rather than including two marksmen rifles each for NATO and CSAT. In regards to future weapon DLCs, I'd just suggest that there be more of a variation in calibres, rather than having every weapon fire a heavy, super-lethal round. I don't regret paying for the DLC at all and the weapons themselves are high-quality assets that I'm glad are available if I need them. I just don't use them as much as I should. 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
en3x 209 Posted October 4, 2015 Navid has a faulty reload anim with iron sight Test without mods.Only vannila counts on developer branch. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Locklear 214 Posted October 5, 2015 Navid has a faulty reload anim with iron sight Thank you for reporting! The bug is apparently on our side, I'm gonna look onto that. // edit: Should be fixed in the next Dev-Branch update. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MadocComadrin 12 Posted October 10, 2015 I hardly use any of the guns outside of SP. I don't really like using them in co-op because I feel like it's cheating. Some people have snarkily referred to it as the Pay to Win DLC, and I think that's somewhat justified. I don't play PVP but I imagine if DLC weapons are available, alot of people are running around with the marksmen rifles. It would be a different story if the standard weapon calibres were a bit more lethal, but pretty much all of the DLC weapons kill in one shot most of the time, and there isn't much of a penalty for using them in regards to weight or inertia, except for the MGs.There are some PVP issues, but a lot of that is mission-specific balancing. For example, the bolded part of your quote is an issue (IMO) in King of the Hill. Mixing a DLC MMG and a perk that makes fatigue much less significant means that MMGs become much more powerful in close quarters. Throw in the fact that you can put a decently magnified scope on one and you have a weapon that is effective from close quarters to long range (ranges relevant to the mission at least), and has a beefy enough caliber to not only kill in one hit, but to still be quite lethal penetrating through walls and such. I would love a DLC that adds more faction-based variation. What global arms dealer is making bank off this conflict, selling hardware to all sides? Too many things are the same for each faction. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
fn_Quiksilver 1636 Posted October 11, 2015 Too many things are the same for each faction. Thats the result of budget constraint. If everyone was willing to pay $120 for ArmA, $30 per DLC, they would have enough $$$ to add unique assets for every class. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MadocComadrin 12 Posted October 12, 2015 I'm aware that there were some budget constraints (and that a lot of the content that was shown well before the alpha was scrapped). I'm not angry about what BIS couldn't/didn't do, I'm interested in what they can do now. I think a good vehicle and static weapon DLC with a mix of free and restricted content could make things more interesting. Alternatively, jam pack the expansion full of more vehicles and variations. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
