Targeting improvements

[Vasily.B 529]

 

The best solution is creating a mod like ACE3, or ULTIMATE SOLDIER to play in your private servers exactly like you want and leave the rest of the people enjoy the devs vision of the game without constant complaint and nerfs.

Negative - first there are servers coming to reality - in real you got Targeting pod, and you can mark target for bomb, secondly there is CCIP on hud in some planes, but it doesnt look like in game now.

Third - there are servers that dont want to use it for balancing sake and other reasons, fourth - there are players who like it or not, so there are 4 reasons to make it optional.

Your reason is "enjoy the devs vision of the game" - first - we can enjoy  it, if its not breaking gameplay (and its breaking - look very arcade, its not integrated into plane onboard displays), or its optional, and other mods can ovveride/improive it.

[djotacon 190]

Its not a NERF its an OPTION. 

Servers that like the boring gameplay can keep it, while servers that dislike it can remove it.

 

Meh, there's no option there, this is a real feature for the right path to fly a plane, if you have problem with this feature dont use it, but leave enjoy of this to the rest of the people.

 

 

Negative - first there are servers coming to reality - in real you got Targeting pod, and you can mark target for bomb, secondly there is CCIP on hud in some planes, but it doesnt look like in game now.

Third - there are servers that dont want to use it for balancing sake and other reasons, fourth - there are players who like it or not, so there are 4 reasons to make it optional.

Your reason is "enjoy the devs vision of the game" - first - we can enjoy  it, if its not breaking gameplay (and its breaking - look very arcade, its not integrated into plane onboard displays), or its optional, and other mods can ovveride/improive it.

 

Negative for what?, for who? for you?... :angry:

 

 

Just out of curiosity are you going to protest every change to the jets that are in the pipeline. the targeting will fall into line with all planned changes.

Because there are alot of changes coming and there will not be options for them. So I'd suggest you get pushing for mission balancing that revolves around the core and not asking for the other way around.

 

Exactly, I see the same complaint with every plane that caming in the near future. Using my cristal ball I can see petitions to the devs for create WWII like planes to avoid targeting systems... :lol: :lol: :lol:

[senseichen 20]

Meh, there's no option there, this is a real feature for the right path to fly a plane, if you have problem with this feature dont use it, but leave enjoy of this to the rest of the people.

 

 

 

Negative for what?, for who? for you?... :angry:

 

 

 

Exactly, I see the same complaint with every plane that caming in the near future. Using my cristal ball I can see petitions to the devs for create WWII like planes to avoid targeting systems... :lol: :lol: :lol:

 

Its actually negative for a lot of people.

I have seen the overall population of KoTH servers drop ever since BI added this. As well as countless friends who have spend thousands of hours, only to quit after this update.

[djotacon 190]

Its actually negative for a lot of people.

I have seen the overall population of KoTH servers drop ever since BI added this, as well as many friends who had put thousands of hours into the game leave because of this update.

 

Nope, the overall population is running away because the KOTH is merely a TVT mode with more than three years of existence ( the people can be bored too.. )

 

The people need more ITALO DISCO!!!

 

[ineptaphid 6413]

Regarding targeting improvements, I found this vid on YT showing how to use KH-29L missiles in Arma2 with ACE. It was a nice system-took a bit more skill than just auto lock and fire, but was still straighforward. it shows the whole process in the first 40 seconds or so-worth a look.

 

[xxgetbuck123 945]

Regarding targeting improvements, I found this vid on YT showing how to use KH-29L missiles in Arma2 with ACE. It was a nice system-took a bit more skill than just auto lock and fire, but was still straighforward. it shows the whole process in the first 40 seconds or so-worth a look.

 

 

If a mod can do it in Arma 2 I'm sure they could do this in engine level Arma 3 haha. This is the kinda stuff we need. Though the scrolling may be a problem but who knows I never used it. 

[Vasily.B 529]

Nope, the overall population is running away because the KOTH is merely a TVT mode with more than three years of existence ( the people can be bored too.. )

 

I love when one man say for 100 peoples. Here on forum this is NEGATIVE for me and few users. Even developers writed somewhere its WIP, so stop please.

@ineptaphid - it was one of my beloved feature in ACE 2 :)

[peegee 118]

If a mod can do it in Arma 2 I'm sure they could do this in engine level Arma 3 haha. This is the kinda stuff we need. Though the scrolling may be a problem but who knows I never used it. 

The video example is pretty much the same what we have now? Except he can't lock on to targets without acquiring the target first.

[Vasily.B 529]

The video example is pretty much the same what we have now? Except he can't lock on to targets without acquiring the target first.

Now you can press R to cycle through enemy targets.

[ineptaphid 6413]

The video example is pretty much the same what we have now? Except he can't lock on to targets without acquiring the target first.

Well the difference is that at the moment all you need to do is press "Lock" and so long as there is a vehicle somewhere in front of you it will find them-In the video you had to make visual contact and aim at the target.Also meant you could target buildings and structures etc.

[oukej 2910]

I'd like to ask you to avoid discussing what player of this or that are like. Who's the most hardcore 1337 Arma player, who shouldn't have a say and how is Arma meant to be played. Pls respect each other and don't faul by dismissing other people's opinions based on what or how they play.

• ad KotH balance - we've contacted Samatra directly prior to targeting chances with a head's up that we may affect the balance in KotH and he can pass any feedback directly to us. He acknowledged it and has not passed any request towards us since.
   
• ad fully diegetic elements vs. game UI - It's meant to be diegetic, it's an internal part of vehicle, not a meta game helper...right, but it doesn't look like so ;) Which is also maybe something that can cause confusion (magic helper). We've mentioned right at the beginning that we prefer diegetic elements whenever we can afford them and if not immediately we'll try to make the elements diegetic later on.
  Whether we should publish these elements before we are able to make them purrfect is however a valid concernt. This approach allowed us to get feedback and perhaps adjust our priorities. Without it there might have been no CCIP and no plan for turning it into a proper HUD/HMD element.
   
• ad scripting vs. config vs. difficulty control over disabling CCIP - I believe the proper and consistent way how to alter these elements is only via configuration - you create a vehicle and you set how it should behave. As a player you learn vehicle's behavior. If you download a mod you know what you're doing, you know you can expect different behavior.
  Which is not the case when scripting. I'm not dismissing more freedom in real time over what happens inside the game. However if we were to create a script function to disable the CCIP why not request a script to disable the range measuring in other optics? Or grid or target info? Or maybe have a scipt to change physx configuration of a vehicle? Even if we ignored the technical difficulties of implementing that and maintaining it - what would be the actual benefit? Total freedom in real time customization? Wouldn't it come at a cost of a completely unpredictable game? Same goes for difficulty. It can be communicated via difficulty menu. But still something as specific as one part of vehicle's targeting systems would be way too inconsistent as a difficulty option. More than a solution to a problem it feels like a patch stacked on top of an unsolved imbalance.

I hope most of the complains come from how the CCIP looks atm, how can get mistaken for a meta helper, how it's available in 3rd person and in full screen's range.

[djotacon 190]

I love when one man say for 100 peoples. Here on forum this is NEGATIVE for me and few users. Even developers writed somewhere its WIP, so stop please.

@ineptaphid - it was one of my beloved feature in ACE 2 :)

Don lie please and put in my mouth things that I dont say.

 

I say only that there's no direct relation between the population of KOTH and the targeting improvements - that is the senseichen point -, not my point obviously.

[x3kj 1247]

• ad scripting vs. config vs. difficulty control over disabling CCIP - I believe the proper and consistent way how to alter these elements is only via configuration - you create a vehicle and you set how it should behave. As a player you learn vehicle's behavior. If you download a mod you know what you're doing, you know you can expect different behavior.

  Which is not the case when scripting. I'm not dismissing more freedom in real time over what happens inside the game. However if we were to create a script function to disable the CCIP why not request a script to disable the range measuring in other optics? Or grid or target info? Or maybe have a scipt to change physx configuration of a vehicle? Even if we ignored the technical difficulties of implementing that and maintaining it - what would be the actual benefit? Total freedom in real time customization? Wouldn't it come at a cost of a completely unpredictable game? Same goes for difficulty. It can be communicated via difficulty menu. But still something as specific as one part of vehicle's targeting systems would be way too inconsistent as a difficulty option. More than a solution to a problem it feels like a patch stacked on top of an unsolved imbalance.

The "issue" of CCIP (and also Locking) beeing very powerfull also comes from the fact that you can see the piper outside the real aircrafts HUD. That means you do not have to dive on a target to get the CCIP piper. But i would not want to miss on new features just because they are not 100% perfect ( this is A3 after all... it wouldnt have the success it had if it worked that way).

[samatra 85]

Although personally I don't see targeting pod or CCIP as OP as people claim it is, I can agree that it shifted threshold of skill requirement to be very effective with jets in KotH. And since people complained we removed thermal imaging off targeting pod. But I'd totally support introduction of scripting command to switch CCIP (I'd go for client flag instead of flag for each entity).

[Sniperwolf572 758]

 

• ad scripting vs. config vs. difficulty control over disabling CCIP - I believe the proper and consistent way how to alter these elements is only via configuration - you create a vehicle and you set how it should behave. As a player you learn vehicle's behavior. If you download a mod you know what you're doing, you know you can expect different behavior.

  Which is not the case when scripting. I'm not dismissing more freedom in real time over what happens inside the game. However if we were to create a script function to disable the CCIP why not request a script to disable the range measuring in other optics? Or grid or target info? Or maybe have a scipt to change physx configuration of a vehicle? Even if we ignored the technical difficulties of implementing that and maintaining it - what would be the actual benefit? Total freedom in real time customization? Wouldn't it come at a cost of a completely unpredictable game? Same goes for difficulty. It can be communicated via difficulty menu. But still something as specific as one part of vehicle's targeting systems would be way too inconsistent as a difficulty option. More than a solution to a problem it feels like a patch stacked on top of an unsolved imbalance.

 

While I have no stake in either end of the argument, and couldn't care less about KoTH or it's balance, that argument is against everything Arma stands for, and besides, you already have multiple things that behave against what you argue for.

Turning off NVG support in optics, turning off TI in optics, changing mass and center of mass which affects control, disabling and tweaking stamina parameters, limiting a vehicles speed, and so on.

 

While sure, nobody is stopping anybody from creating a new config mod and removing the CCIP, there is a very real case why many authors wish to be able to create new classes for their missions, or change things like this on the fly to tweak certain small things about already existing classes/assets which cannot be done by scripting but it's absolutely insane to induce an addon dependency. And scripting itself can already change how a lot of game systems behave from default to make them absolutely unpredictable. 

 

The very real use case is that sometimes you want to do things which are only possible by tweaking the config and creating an addon dependency, but you absolutely do not want to make your mission addon dependant, because that's the difference between being accessible to anyone vs. installing mods and reducing your audience to only those who can be bothered to do so.

Having the ability to create new/child classes through something like description.ext for this very purpose would be a godsend. Needing to have a plane without CCIP, a differently textured vest or a weapon, and so on.

 

Why is it OK to to be able to make a gun that shoots tanks on the fly without touching the configs, but not change that guns texture?

Why is it OK to to be able to remove NV/TI capabilities from a vehicle, change it's center of mass on the fly, but not remove CCIP indicator?

Where is the predictability in that? Should we not be able to replace bullets with tanks for the sake of predictability?

 

There is always more need for more customization like this in Arma, it's what makes it great. You can have Argo for predictable.

[dragon01 902]

The "issue" of CCIP (and also Locking) beeing very powerfull also comes from the fact that you can see the piper outside the real aircrafts HUD. That means you do not have to dive on a target to get the CCIP piper. But i would not want to miss on new features just because they are not 100% perfect ( this is A3 after all... it wouldnt have the success it had if it worked that way).

Actually, at least as far as the Viper goes (dunno about the other planes), you indeed do not have to dive onto the target to use CCIP. It's a bit more complex than the crosshair floating outside the HUD, but it works. In a real aircraft, non-visual CCIP acts a lot like CCRP. You mark a target visually (with a marker on the bottom of the HUD), pickle the bombs and overfly it, the computer should release them when you're in position. Dunno if there's much demand for CCRP in ArmA, though. ArmA planes generally don't fly as high as the real ones, making CCRP (and level bombing in general) a bit redundant.

 

BTW, now that I think of it, we could likely use DTOS. It's pretty simple, you lock onto a position on the ground (in a Viper you have a box on the HUD that you can slew around), then pickle and smoothly pull up. If you do it right, the computer will release the bombs and "toss" them to your aimpoint. Harder than CCIP, but can save you from overflying a particularly hairy target. Dive toss was used as far as WWII for nukes, but if you wanna do it with any degree of accuracy, DTOS is your friend. The same overall interface (a movable caret on HUD) could also be used for controlling the laser pointer. ACE method is fine, but it requires you to center the target on HUD, which is not always precise. Better to move the marker.

[dr. hladik 231]

CCIP is now available only in MFD or optics

[fn_Quiksilver 1636]

A welcome tweak, thanks soldiers :)

[dr. hladik 231]

Also vehicle aim cursors are no longer visible on veteran difficulty

[Vasily.B 529]

Yes but in RHS, when switching to manual loading main gun (in russian tanks) after pressing R key (next target, reload in vanilla, reload in RHS) there is an empty target marked on horizon

[dragon01 902]

Just wait till Christmas, RHS hasn't been updated yet. Maybe it'll be fixed in the update.

[xxgetbuck123 945]

15 hours ago, dr. hladik said:

CCIP is now available only in MFD or optics

 

Are you able to expand on this a bit more? 

 

I took it as CCIP is now integrated into the actual aircraft rather than just floating around everywhere? Though I may be wrong? As I'm working on the F35 I'm curious what this entails for future implementation etc..? 

[jerminhu 25]

Yeah. Can someone post a screenshot or a video?

[Bamse 223]

Only had the option to take a few screenshots. Visuals of CCIP are the same as before, its just that it's not visible outside the defined HMD-box.

Crappy screenshots taken from crappy work computer from within the A-164:

http://imgur.com/a/wYIC6

[jerminhu 25]

7 minutes ago, Bamse said:

Only had the option to take a few screenshots. Visuals of CCIP are the same as before, its just that it's not visible outside the defined HMD-box.

Crappy screenshots taken from crappy work computer from within the A-164:

http://imgur.com/a/wYIC6

Is the lead indicator affected?