Arma 3: Community wishes & ideas- DISCUSSION

[scrim 1]

I actually remember BI (Dan Musil?) citing Geneva conventions as a reason that "uniform stealing" had become campaign-only!

Really? Honestly, I'm suspecting it's just because the mission in which you do it is just scripted to make the player into an Opfor soldier, so that isn't really a feature.

[finguide 1]

One thing that I've been wondering... If they are developing the features of game to obey Geneve conventions (like they did in A2 too, right?), is that why do medics engage? If they obeyed the Geneva conventions, medics should never engage and they should always be in "hold fire" mode, and on the other hand, enemy should never open fire towards the medical troops. Of course, mistakes happen in real life and there's always chance to misidentify the troops in firefight when you are extremely stressed and in hurry, but it still kind of disturbs me.

[PuFu 4600]

corpsman and combat medics are not part of medical corps

[scrim 1]

Uh, actually, medics are allowed to carry pretty much whatever arms they can, hence why they are now-a-days called combat medics. Back in WW2 medics wouldn't carry weapons, but especially in the Pacific they ended up getting extra targeted by the Japanese, and that trend didn't exactly end when the North Koreans and Chinese started murdering them in captivity and targeting them just as much as the Japanese did in combat. Vietnam saw no improvement either, so I think it's some time after that that medics in Western militaries traded in their red cross brassards for assault rifles, simply because that would be safer, though this was something that had been done since back in Korea. You'd break the law if you wore a red cross brassard/other red cross insignia and carried more than a sidearm or something for personal defence, as you are only allowed to demand a protected status if you aren't armed "offensively", but if you don't claim a protected status as a medic you can pretty much hump around with a heavy machine gun without breaking any laws. The same goes for medical facilities, if they claim a protected status by using red crosses or something equal, they are not allowed to have heavy weapons around. They can have personal weapons for their own safety, but no more.

Long story short: Corpsmen, medics, etc., didn't use to carry weapons, as they rightfully claimed a protected status. Thanks to people like the SS and the Japanese, and then the Chinese "volonteers" and the North Koreans, who all felt that the laws of war didn't apply to them, it ended up being safer for medics and corpsmen around the world to carry an assault rifle (hence why medics are now called combat medics IIRC) and look like the other grunts, than it was to claim a protected status according to the laws of war.

Edited December 27, 2012 by scrim

[chortles 263]

Really? Honestly, I'm suspecting it's just because the mission in which you do it is just scripted to make the player into an Opfor soldier, so that isn't really a feature.

If that's how uniform-stealing got implemented -- that is, if BI devs couldn't actually make uniform stealing work "properly" and had to improvise it by making the player temporarily OPFOR on a per-mission basis -- then no wonder they had to "scrap the feature", so to speak.

[scrim 1]

I'm not an expert on these things, but I think they could've made the feature. However, I'm also suspecting they didn't make it partly because it's just going to be like a one time thing in the campaign, because let's face it, it would most likely introduce a feature into the game which people would hate incredibly much. Imagine just playing on a random server and seeing everyone team kill each other after two or three guys scream in the chat about having been killed by guys from the other side wearing their uniforms.

[finguide 1]

corpsman and combat medics are not part of medical corps

Uh, actually, medics are allowed to carry pretty much whatever arms they can, hence why they are now-a-days called combat medics...

Thanks for your replies. I see that I may have had wrong information. But what confuses me, is that I served in obligatory army as medic, and we were also carrying basic assault rifles. Despite of that, we had lessons of Geneva conventions during our training period and we were told there that no-one of us in the medic training – not medics of infantry teams, not company or battalion level medics, ambulance medics etc. are allowed to engage. We could carry assault rifles but use them only to protect our actions if enemy opened fire towards us, and still maintain the protection of medical corps that Geneva conventions allow to us. On the other hand, we had very visible red cross signs attached to our camouflage uniforms, which was a requirement to have the protection of medical corps. Eg. the US medic character in the game has the international sign in his backpack.

[scrim 1]

Right, what military did you serve in? I've seen that sort of mix, but IIRC the plan has always been for the medical insignias of any sort to be thrown out the window if a shooting war begins. Wearing Red Cross brassards is to show that you're a noncombatant, and assault rifles are counted as offensive weapons, so it wouldn't really matter if you used it for self defence or not, legally speaking you'd be a combatant and not entitled to protection, or even wearing a Red Cross brassard in the first place, as that'd be a violation of the Geneva Conventions, or in a best case scenario very naive as it'd be hard for the enemy to determine exactly which soldiers are shooting at them, thus making it quite impractical to avoid shooting at the medics.. Maybe someone behind a desk somewhere figured that medics with insignia perhaps could rely on good will?

Edited December 28, 2012 by scrim

[finguide 1]

I served in Finnish Defence Forces. To be honest, we were told too that in practice we would probably have to hide the international signs and fight like regular soldiers if needed, because it's very likely to happen that enemy doesn't care about the Geneva conventions, and the red cross sign in our uniforms can be spotted really far away (the cross itself is a good target too, "aim here!")

[CameronMcDonald 146]

They and their patients are still protected by the Geneva Convention provided they take no part in offensive military actions.

[scrim 1]

So platoon medics? They hardly have a choice when their unit is participating, as they both need to be there and can't refuse.

[iceman77 18]

I would like to be able to customize unit and vehicle loadouts quickly & cleanly in the editor via dialogue / drop down menu.Ofcourse current methods would still apply too. Also, I would like a more dynamic work space. For instance, if I start typing in an objects init box, when it fills up with text, the init box / unit dialogue should expand.

[finguide 1]

So platoon medics? They hardly have a choice when their unit is participating, as they both need to be there and can't refuse.

Yeah... On our system though, they're positioned in the middle of teams and about 50 meters (depending eg. on the cover that ground has) behind the fighting soldiers and not actually engaging, but ready to "dispatch" from their position to the wounded, if there is need. Medics should stay on the background though, primarily the fighting soldiers should evac the patient to cover to avoid exposing their medic to enemy fire.

[CameronMcDonald 146]

[PuFu 4600]

Using various keys as macros in conjunction with the mousewheel would provide for a sleek and intuitive interface:

By default the mousewheel scrolls through weapons. Switching animations should be able to be interrupted so that this process is seamless.

And that about covers everything, with just a few keys. Would make playing the game with just a controller a real possibility.

While i do agree that arma's keys could be condensed, what you are proposing, for the sake of playing a pc game with a controller would only restrict movement and fluency way to much:

1. What is wrong to f1-f10 selection keys? Why would you use a combination of keys when you have 102 on your keyboard?

2. Removing q and e from leaning, and replacing with another combination of a key and mouse to lean? How about if i want to lean and rotate my view around a corner. I am either leaning, or i am rotating the view.

3. Shift is used in most cases for sprinting. In arma's case is double w tap, which is far from great though

4. Why would holding down g send me to things like night vision, or grenades, instead of the normal 1-0 keys? More so, i would change the the order controls towards the numpad (the game needs to tell de difference between numpad 1-0 and the normal ones).

Pc gamers have a huge advantage over console lads: they have a proper input set of devices, including a keyboard that has a lot more buttons than a any sort of controller out there.

The following is a list of ideas which I've made over time, I'm sorry for 3 things: 1: It being out of order (I ran out of room on my notepad so I wrote between the lines) 2: If I say something that someone else already has, and 3: If I mention something that has already been confirmed (I did read the thread, but there is so many things :p)

- what if a C-130 dives and reaches mach 1? wings break off?

It will fell apart way before it reaches sound barrier.

(9) Map and game-mode ideas

Arma is not far cry 3. If you really have the skills these sort of missions can be created by you or anyone else interested

- Customisable weaponry while in the field, example here

There is no such thing as on the field messing with optics and alike. The extent would be a silencer.

- you can push the buttons on the holographic sight (I don't know what they do)

?????? FPDR

[chortles 263]

While i do agree that arma's keys could be condensed, what you are proposing, for the sake of playing a pc game with a controller would only restrict movement and fluency way to much:

I disagree -- especially considering how many other shooters there are which don't need this excuse.

1. What is wrong to f1-f10 selection keys? Why would you use a combination of keys when you have 102 on your keyboard?

Last I checked, the only reason to use the F1-F10 keys is for unit command/selection... to me the minimum to which Arma controls should be condensed is to the ability to play a solitary character -- movement, aiming, shooting, fire mode/weapon switching, inventory menu access -- with only a controller, even if Arma 3 doesn't support "separate interfaces that are toggled based on detected controller" (i.e. moving to unit command/selection and elements such as the map or binoculars to Start and Back/Select button menus)... that's a separate and not necessarily as important aspect.

2. Removing q and e from leaning, and replacing with another combination of a key and mouse to lean? How about if i want to lean and rotate my view around a corner. I am either leaning, or i am rotating the view.

Medal of Honor: Warfighter's "peek and lean" was an interesting implementation (hold LB on a 360 controller, flick or hold the left analog stick in the desired direction), though like the Arma 3 adjustable stance system it was seemingly designed to provide "pop out and back" without being sticky cover; its main downside compared to Arma 3 is that in MOH Warfighter you can't stay leaning and move, but the analog stick function provides some degree of sensitivity as to the amount of "peeking out".

3. Shift is used in most cases for sprinting. In arma's case is double w tap, which is far from great though

To me it actually makes sense... if you think of the Arma jog as being equivalent to the COD-type shooter "sprint" :lol: While you'd have to free-look down to notice the running animation from first-person view in Arma 3 unlike those shooters, I'm not so bothered by Sprint being Wx2, considering that to my knowledge it's the only "shooter" with two different non-shooting movement speeds anyway.

4. Why would holding down g send me to things like night vision, or grenades, instead of the normal 1-0 keys? More so, i would change the the order controls towards the numpad (the game needs to tell de difference between numpad 1-0 and the normal ones).

Err, how about because "the normal 1-0 keys" don't already support this? Iroquois Pliskin kept going on and on and on about this last year :rolleyes: I do agree with you though about the idea of moving the order controls to the numpad (if I wanted to look in other directions I'd just use the free-look key!) and moving "wielded item/gear" to the number row.

Thinking back to other shooters, I'd say that the main difficulty in switching to the number row implementation is the sheer variety of possible item categories that can be held simultaneously in Arma, much less equipped, whereas other shooters have a limited number of categories so as to fit them all onto the number row without modifier keys required, or using class lists to regulate these possibilities, i.e. for the "3" key in BF3, an Assault can fit a Medkit or a M26 MASS underbarrel shotgun or a M320 underbarrel grenade launcher, an Engineer can fit a Stinger/Igla or an unguided rocket-propelled grenade launcher or a Javelin... in Arma 3 the lack of weapon category restrictions could be handled as simply as "1 = slot 1 weapon, 2 = slot 2 weapon, 3 = slot 3 weapon" (the "category" being the slot in the inventory menu) but it's the other non-weapon items one might have that could/would be an issue, though at least on PC other shooters haven't been averse to throwing those elements (i.e. fire mode or binoculars) onto other keys.

There is no such thing as on the field messing with optics and alike. The extent would be a silencer.

Detaunted's idea is actually sound and I will disagree with you here -- because Arma 3 has that "messing with optics" interface, it's called the inventory menu! :D (I absolutely disagree with the idea that that can or should be excused away as "it's a demo"... no, I believe that that interface capability should remain in Arma 3.)

[JCDBionicman 1]

While i do agree that arma's keys could be condensed, what you are proposing, for the sake of playing a pc game with a controller would only restrict movement and fluency way to much:

1. What is wrong to f1-f10 selection keys? Why would you use a combination of keys when you have 102 on your keyboard?

2. Removing q and e from leaning, and replacing with another combination of a key and mouse to lean? How about if i want to lean and rotate my view around a corner. I am either leaning, or i am rotating the view.

3. Shift is used in most cases for sprinting. In arma's case is double w tap, which is far from great though

4. Why would holding down g send me to things like night vision, or grenades, instead of the normal 1-0 keys? More so, i would change the the order controls towards the numpad (the game needs to tell de difference between numpad 1-0 and the normal ones).

Pc gamers have a huge advantage over console lads: they have a proper input set of devices, including a keyboard that has a lot more buttons than a any sort of controller out there.

It will fell apart way before it reaches sound barrier.

Arma is not far cry 3. If you really have the skills these sort of missions can be created by you or anyone else interested

There is no such thing as on the field messing with optics and alike. The extent would be a silencer.

?????? FPDR

Not that I have a problem with criticism, but it's far too often that people argue quibbles and nonsense on peoples ideas put on any wishlist on any forum on the internet. There's always someone with nothing better to do than try to find things wrong with people's ideas where there are honestly none. It's very, very annoying. If you are going to critique, please put as much care into critiquing as the other person put into structuring their ideas please.

You agree that ArmA's keys could be condensed, but you claim that 102 keys are better than a few, smart and easy to remember macros. Huh.

Here's what's wrong with the F# keys:

It requires me to take my eyes from the screen to the keyboard, and one or both of my hands to carefully press and browse through a large volume of keys. What's more intuitive is what I suggested, select your soldiers by aiming at them and adding/excluding them. Just like real life too; "you you and you go over there, and the rest of you flank left!"

I'm not sure what your arguing in terms of the free look key and the lean/stance key. They need to be on separate keys because they work better that way. So, what you want is already possible. I lean and go into a low crouch with the caps lock, and I quickly look behind both my shoulders with alt, and once that's done I lock freelook in whatever camera angle I want to use for aiming.

Shift is still used for sprinting, and now it works so much better because you have smooth analog movement with the mousewheel in conjunction. For quickly toggling between your basic run and walk speed you just briefly press the button, so if I'm walking and I want to sprint I press once to toggle to run and then hold it down and press the mousewheel forward. Perhaps it would be better if it toggled between "tactical pace" and sprint instead, I would imagine those would be the most useful paces.

Why would the gear button double as a scroll macro for utilities? I don't know, it might better to put it there as opposed to assigning to a random other key that the player has to remember instead.

And no, controllers will always be superior to mouse and keyboard, and this is coming from someone that dumped his console in favor of computer so I'm not here to start an argument about consoles. Again, using a few smart keys in place of, ONE HUNDRED AND TWO is quite obviously better. The mouse has the analog stick beat for aiming precision, but the left analog definitally has the awkward wasd keys beat, and even though the mouse is better it is tiring to use over an extended period of time and so that added precision doesn't mean quite much when your fighting wrist strain. I find an analog stick is just as good as a mouse with the exception of turn speed. You won't be able to aim very well with higher sensitivities that would allow you to turn like a ninja with a mouse, but your ability to aim will be consistent over a long period of time due to it's ease of use. I've been using my ps3 controller with the ds3 tool for playing games that aren't awkward to play with it.

Whether ArmA 3 is Far Cry 3 is irrelevant. What's relevant is if his idea is feasible and useful, and it is both. Oh wait, how dare I ask Bohemia to actually create multiplayer modes! Preposterous! How about we get the modding community to make the game for them while we're at it. ArmA 2 leans on mods far too much, let's hope ArmA 3 doesn't lean on them as much as Skyrim and the rest of Bethesda's trash.

A simulator should paraphrase reality, not directly mimic it. After all, we want to enjoy the videogames we're playing right? I think allowing the player to field-swap optics on the fly is just fine. For the "harzcorz" give them a difficulty where this isn't possible.

Edited January 8, 2013 by JCDBionicman

[chrisb 196]

Yes it’s a wishes and ideas thread. So all ideas and wishes are relative to that player, if others find them interesting and useful, then that’s even better. BIS will only do what they do and give us what they want to give us.

For my part arma 2 is really quite easy, I got a Nostromo a good while back, it took around a week to get it configured the way I wanted, never looked back, with that under my left hand and the mouse in my right, they cover more or less everything I need to cover, the keyboard is used very rarely now.

If they improve arma 3 control wise, it will make it even more simple to config the Nos..

Every idea or wish I read, and think, how could that work with my setup, I find that interesting, so keep them coming..:).

My wishes/ideas ! 3D editor in place of the standard 2D, that’s really it. But one that works well, not RTE or the BIS short cut one..:).

[iceman77 18]

Not that I have a problem with criticism, but it's far too often that people argue quibbles and nonsense on peoples ideas put on any wishlist on any forum on the internet. There's always someone with nothing better to do than try to find things wrong with people's ideas where there are honestly none. It's very, very annoying. If you are going to critique, please put as much care into critiquing as the other person put into structuring their ideas please.

The only nonsense are BF / COD noobs coming and trying to request or even to some degree, demand changes to our controls that we've had for over a decade. They want to be able to press 3 and knife someone, run some more, jump, hop, shoot someone..run.. press 3 knife someone etc etc

---------- Post added at 00:09 ---------- Previous post was at 00:07 ----------

Also ... LOL @ a controller being superior to mouse and keyboard. You clearly haven't spent much time using keyboard and mouse :cool:

Edited January 8, 2013 by Iceman77

[rye1 21]

Nah it is a myth that controller is superior to mouse and keyboard for the likes of FPS. You can be very precise with a mouse and it is reactive to what you do in that way - adjust your mouse sensitivity and related options until they are right for you. That for me meant adjusting my external settings as well as internal including deadzone. For driving on the other hand of course, maybe so - at least you can drift properly with an analog controller; but that is then one-upped by a sequential shift and wheel so there you go. I use my Xbox controller for nearly all of my driving games, none of my shooting games.

[iceman77 18]

Yup, I was about to say... There are things a controller does better. Turns out, shooting bad guys isn't one of them.

[chortles 263]

The only nonsense are BF / COD noobs coming and trying to request or even to some degree, demand changes to our controls that we've had for over a decade.

I wouldn't use that as a defense of anything about Arma, especially considering the radical amount of user interface changes already presented in Arma... and yes I do believe that "exposure due to DayZ" had to do with that :rolleyes: (that is, in prioritizing or reprioritizing what had to be "ready to show off at E3/Gamescom" and what can be "pleasant surprise for our community alpha playtesters").

Nah it is a myth that controller is superior to mouse and keyboard for the likes of FPS. You can be very precise with a mouse and it is reactive to what you do in that way - adjust your mouse sensitivity and related options until they are right for you. That for me meant adjusting my external settings as well as internal including deadzone. For driving on the other hand of course, maybe so - at least you can drift properly with an analog controller; but that is then one-upped by a sequential shift and wheel so there you go. I use my Xbox controller for nearly all of my driving games, none of my shooting games.

But then the sequential shift and wheel are separate controllers in their own right. ;) Also, I'm aware of a bunch of games such as the Assassin's Creed series where range of character movement is actually inhibited by keyboard limitations -- hence there seems to be a trend towards "controllers for movement and melee (when applicable) but mouse for shooting", i.e. in the Sleeping Dogs game. Oh, and speaking of this combo of controller, keyboard and mouse... XIM3 :lol:

I thought of a button-mapping for hypothetical Arma controls months ago... and the F1-F10 keys were pretty much the only major ones that I couldn't map directly, so the basic infantry controls already seem at least seem pretty condensed!

Mind you, the idea was not so much "Arma as consoles" as "hypothetical Arma game that would only support a console-style controller", and to come up with both a button-mapping and the necessary interface revisions needed to support this concept while minimizing "actual" gameplay changes (keep walk/tactical pace/jog/sprint, but then come up with a button map that would support them all on a controller).

Edited January 8, 2013 by Chortles

[Llano 11]

Some things i would love to see

• Enter/exit animation
  
• Improved sound
  
• Possibility to see if someone is aiming with the scope or not
  
• Improved landing when using parashute (dat spelling)
  
• Wind have effect on bullets
  

[JCDBionicman 1]

Yup, I was about to say... There are things a controller does better. Turns out, shooting bad guys isn't one of them.

Mouse definitely has analog beat when it comes to CQC, but ironically enough when it comes to aiming at something far away I can quickly aim in it's general direction but then for whatever reason, and call me crazy, I fumble a bit to accurately aim at the target before it manages to fire at me, where when I use an analog stick I find aiming at distant targets not too difficult. I think it's because with a mouse you'll gradually slow your aim as your reticle gets closer and with the analog the aiming is constant.

[iceman77 18]

Mouse definitely has analog beat when it comes to CQC, but ironically enough when it comes to aiming at something far away I can quickly aim in it's general direction but then for whatever reason, and call me crazy, I fumble a bit to accurately aim at the target before it manages to fire at me, where when I use an analog stick I find aiming at distant targets not too difficult. I think it's because with a mouse you'll gradually slow your aim as your reticle gets closer and with the analog the aiming is constant.

hehe, I think it's rather how much time you spend using a mouse. It's persoanl preference ofcourse and only my opinion though :)