Arma 3: Community wishes & ideas- DISCUSSION

[gibonez 18]

Killzone_Kid already demonstrated how to disable the artillery computer, and the artillery "fire modes" seem to be standing in for charges 0/1/2.

 

Yea even with that guide the arty computer remains on as a default and thus artillery continues to not be used in almost no capacity in Arma 3 multiplayer.

 

I'm suggesting a more proactive approach for forcefully integrating artillery in online multiplayer by outright redesigning the arty computer a complete overhaul and systems built around artillery to help push the artillery and indirect fire as a viable

gameplay alternative just as viable as

-infantry

-tanking

-sniping

-etc

 

 

This could be done easiest by overhauling the Arty system where it requires far more input than simply clicking on the map.

 

Other ways to flesh this aspect out would be

 

- Built into the engine towable weapons/radars

-Counter battery radar

With increased online usage of artillery a counter system should also be inplace. Such a system is a deployable radar that detects incoming artillery and allows for counter fire.

 

-Artillery variety

Sadly there are quite a few missing categories missing when it comes to artillery in Arma 3 vanilla.

Light mortars 60mm and below, heavy towed mortars 120mm, both light and heavy tow able howitzers and Csat MLRS are all missing.

Considering artillery is the single most important asset in most world militaries and recent conflicts show this importance the artillery variety should be increased.

 

Like I said this is all wishful thinking but It would be fantastic to have artillery be fleshed out and some complexity added to this aspect of warfare. It is severely lacking at the moment and such a push would help it be integrated online.

[Ghost 40]

Please add an engine command that can use the information given by magazinesAmmoFull such as AddMagazineAmmoFull or something. Could even make it optional parameters for the AddMagazine command. We get so many wonderful pieces of information from that command and cannot use it easily for a respawn loadout. Currently the easiest system to use is the one with the game bis_fnc_saveInventory and bis_fnc_loadInventory. Problem though is they do not add magazine ammo count. Maybe the current additemtouniform,additemtovest and additemtobackpack could be updated to add magazine and ammo count as optional parameter. I do understand that sometimes people want to get a new loadout with max ammo but for those wanting some realism we would like to come back with the same ammo count as when we died.

[gstoetti94 4]

Personally I would love to see the opportunity to unlock the launcher-slot for other heavy weapons such as MMG or anti-material sniper-rifles.

There should be a placeable module or whatever in the editor, that would enable this feature for certain classes that have to deal with this weapons. (I don’t want to see the MMG-Sniper-Pilot…). So the heavy gunner should be able to put his MMG into the launcher slot and so on.
 

And why is this feature so important? Nothing is worse than CQB with your heavy weapon. But sometimes it is necessary to go into CQB before finding a good spot where you can use all the advantages of your weapon. Right now, you are pretty useless carrying your M320 or Navid, until you have found a good spot. By putting this gun into the launcher slot, you would be able to use a carbine such like the MXC to at least defend yourself in certain situations.

Personally I don’t think, that those classes would be overpowered, because the advantage you gain by carrying another weapon causes the disadvantage of less fatigue or less ammunition for the heavy weapon. This might cause more teamplay with your assistant gunner/spotter, even on public servers?
 

As I said, this feature should be optional. The mission-creator should always be able to decide, if he wants this change or not.

[DieselJC 196]

I truly wish there was a way to fully browse the Mission lobby without having to start the game...too much time spent starting and re-starting the game looking for servers running certain mods or missions. Would be nice to be able to pick a server then start the game with what Mods are needed.

 

 

 

Diesel

[Vasily.B 529]

I truly wish there was a way to fully browse the Mission lobby without having to start the game...too much time spent starting and re-starting the game looking for servers running certain mods or missions. Would be nice to be able to pick a server then start the game with what Mods are needed.

 

 

 

Diesel

There is already server browser in launcher

[PCanas 5]

Not sure if this is the right place ofr this but...

 

1- there's a "bug" when using bipods in weapons, speacilly when you are in a prone position.When "activating" the bipod, your charecter moves slightly towards/backwards. This can be pretty anoying when you're a sniper, and you get in that perfect position that allows you to see everything, even with the movement constraints of the bipod, but then that slight movement ruins that position. I suggest someone solves that problem. The ideal would be for the bipod not causing any movement, just add the stabilizing factor to the weapon.

 

2- Also about  bipods... it has ajustable legs, right? So why doesn't it self-ajust to keep the weapon horizontal (or as close as possible) when used in inclined terrain, instead of placing the weapon parallel to the terrain?

[chortles 263]

I truly wish there was a way to fully browse the Mission lobby without having to start the game...too much time spent starting and re-starting the game looking for servers running certain mods or missions. Would be nice to be able to pick a server then start the game with what Mods are needed.

Are you not running the game from the official Launcher, or does its embedded server browser not match what you're looking for?

[corellian_storm 20]

So I was thinking about APEX's vtol concepts, and the thought hit me of a cross gunship/transport hybrid

Like suppose it was a quad-rotor Osprey.

Since its probably too late to suggest this sort of stuff for apex, just thought I'd throw it out here just for the discussion.

 

 

Solely as a transport, the hold would be huge. It would not make any sense to have this and not have massive passenger cap or perhaps even carry a Marshal APC. However, I think I saw somewhere the obvious problems such an attempt would have, like the glitchy-beyond-hell problems of putting a vehicle into a vehicle.

 

Solely as a gunship, well NATO just dominated the entire island hands down with overpowered air dominance.

 

But what if half of the projected cargo space was AC-130 style, and half was C-130 style?

My idea is gunship style 20mm Vulcan and 40mm, with a reduced ammo as compared to an AC, so while its still a very powerful force to be reckoned with, its not ridiculously OP. Can't shoot 105 BOFORS, and can't shoot the cannons it does have for as long of a duration as a dedicated platform.

Could probably use 1-2 underbelly CROWS M134 in addition, as a trade-off for no door-gunners.

 

Since half the hold would be weapons systems and ammo storage, then the actual troop part would be much smaller as compared to the size of the craft, and would be just the right size to still make sense without the ability to hold an APC and eight dozen troops.

 

 

So I'm seeing a futuristic craft, its armed, its a troop transport, its big, its awesome, and it doesn't have the feeling of OP or of wasted space. It could also sling load anything, including tank or mobile artillery. And for cargo, there could be a crate/cargo pallet built into the cargo hold just for visual effects, with the largest capacity in the game.

 

Seems like a reasonable trade-off IMO, between an unarmed, but VTOL, Osprey and an armed, but non-VTOL, AC-130.

Thoughts?

[corellian_storm 20]

Not sure if this is the right place ofr this but...

 

2- Also about  bipods... it has ajustable legs, right? So why doesn't it self-ajust to keep the weapon horizontal (or as close as possible) when used in inclined terrain, instead of placing the weapon parallel to the terrain?

I second this. The parallel-to-the-terrain is annoying as hell when I'm trying to snipe from the side of a hill.

[corellian_storm 20]

Personally I would love to see the opportunity to unlock the launcher-slot for other heavy weapons such as MMG or anti-material sniper-rifles.

There should be a placeable module or whatever in the editor, that would enable this feature for certain classes that have to deal with this weapons. (I don’t want to see the MMG-Sniper-Pilot…). So the heavy gunner should be able to put his MMG into the launcher slot and so on.

 

And why is this feature so important? Nothing is worse than CQB with your heavy weapon. But sometimes it is necessary to go into CQB before finding a good spot where you can use all the advantages of your weapon. Right now, you are pretty useless carrying your M320 or Navid, until you have found a good spot. By putting this gun into the launcher slot, you would be able to use a carbine such like the MXC to at least defend yourself in certain situations.

Personally I don’t think, that those classes would be overpowered, because the advantage you gain by carrying another weapon causes the disadvantage of less fatigue or less ammunition for the heavy weapon. This might cause more teamplay with your assistant gunner/spotter, even on public servers?

 

As I said, this feature should be optional. The mission-creator should always be able to decide, if he wants this change or not.

Agreed. I often find myself far too vulnerable when I equip as a sniper. I've wished a million times I could have a non-rocket secondary, Like CoD. Thats actually the one and only place where CoD managed to pass up Arma in realism.

[corellian_storm 20]

Yea even with that guide the arty computer remains on as a default and thus artillery continues to not be used in almost no capacity in Arma 3 multiplayer.

 

I'm suggesting a more proactive approach for forcefully integrating artillery in online multiplayer by outright redesigning the arty computer a complete overhaul and systems built around artillery to help push the artillery and indirect fire as a viable

gameplay alternative just as viable as

-infantry

-tanking

-sniping

-etc

 

-Artillery variety

Sadly there are quite a few missing categories missing when it comes to artillery in Arma 3 vanilla.

Light mortars 60mm and below, heavy towed mortars 120mm, both light and heavy tow able howitzers and Csat MLRS are all missing.

Considering artillery is the single most important asset in most world militaries and recent conflicts show this importance the artillery variety should be increased.

 

Like I said this is all wishful thinking but It would be fantastic to have artillery be fleshed out and some complexity added to this aspect of warfare. It is severely lacking at the moment and such a push would help it be integrated online.

I could see the point of this on something like the custom map of AUS, but for little bitty islands like Stratis/Altis, who needs to shoot from the south tip to the north tip? So this is only IMHO, but it just seems like there really isn't a need for artillery beyond what is already availible.

[gibonez 18]

I could see the point of this on something like the custom map of AUS, but for little bitty islands like Stratis/Altis, who needs to shoot from the south tip to the north tip? So this is only IMHO, but it just seems like there really isn't a need for artillery beyond what is already availible.

 

While yes the range of the maps do downplay the importance of artillery somewhat.

 

It remains an important tool that should play a pretty big role in Arma.

 

Regardless of map size indirect, beyond visual range fire missions should be a big part of the game that has equal importance and key word is complexity as Infantry, air and vehicle action.

 

This is especially true in the new environment Tanoa. Tanoa is a map with thick heavy brush not unlike Vietnam. Where contact is sporadic and fire support missions would be called out in an attempt to flush out the enemies from the heavy brush.

 

I will say though due to the map size constraints if there would to be just one category of indirect fire that would fit perfectly with what arma is today it is Light man portable mortars.

 

Sadly those are completely missing at the moment.

[corellian_storm 20]

There are 2-man mortars that turn into backpacks. The Mk. 6

Not enough for ya? ;)

[veles-zv 176]

I understand that Arma 3 has been a very single threaded game because the Ai (one of the most used task) is on core 0 and many of the other task as well, while the other less  demanding task is on the remaining threads which means its barely being used. and also there is no such thing as true multicored video game because of latency issues involved in making such a program work in real time. Would it be possible for Bi to split the AI factions (red,blue, indi) on 3 separate cores / threads or even further by squads?  im asking this because the future of processors involves having more cores while slight increasing transistor counts ever generation and since not many servers use a headless client for the ai and in single player creating a headless client is impossible if i am correct unless you somehow use virtual machines and some how make it work? , however as I said before Games such as arma relies on the single core performance more then it does on the number of cores you have and this would be a good way of future proofing the arma series or at least arma 3 :S 

 

 

Also why are meshes limited to a maximum of 60 meters in-size without the use of stitching meshes together with the usage of proxies? if possible have a limit such as 350 meters. 

 

also what I would like to have in Arma would be realistic AI both infantry and vehicles, Ai which can be suppressed, move to cover when engaged maybe even have options for flanking ect, scanning of hostile targets and not instantly lock on to targets even while they are being engaged, vehicle anti infantry such as the tank commanders anti aircraft machine not scoring 20 hits on a man sized target 800 meters away while on the move at top speed :(. the ability to sneak around enemies at night if they do not have NVG equipment. the ability to have convoys and with the vehicles / better path marking (let alone drive on the road better then a drunk elderly trained monkey with alzheimer)  being deathly afraid of bridges / other structures. the option to lock Ai into stances without the need of scripts with three checkable boxes in the units attributes  [stand] [crouch] [prone]. 

 

Vbs Features that would be cool to see 

Advanced water Simulation (rivers. lakes/ pounds) 

Realistic river, lake/ pound water movement 

Underground objects which can be used by the AI 

Ground cutting

Water Compartmentalization below Water line

 

 

 

New Advanced Missiles guidance

Laser

Tv

heat seeking

Rader guidance  (maybe still working as a tab lock) 

gps

and maybe a few others

 

 

Vtol Cas / fighter aircraft in Arma 3 apex. I've heard someone say that vtol aircraft such as av-8 is not possible due to engine limitations yet the cup mod v-22 works as a proper vtol craft :S so i dont know if that is true, but if it truly is BI could add a jet based F-35 or YAK-141 just so that the mod makers can use this a guideline for future aircraft mods. 

 

Napalm and flamethrower with volumetric flames much like Rising storm (fire bombs are still being used today against combatants)  

 

Oh one more thing Magazines being proxies much like optics, lasers ect.

[corellian_storm 20]

Vbs Features that would be cool to see 

Advanced water Simulation (rivers. lakes/ pounds) 

Realistic river, lake/ pound water movement 

Underground objects which can be used by the AI 

Ground cutting

Water Compartmentalization below Water line

 

 

 

New Advanced Missiles guidance

Laser

Tv

heat seeking

Rader guidance  (maybe still working as a tab lock) 

gps

and maybe a few others

 

 

Vtol Cas / fighter aircraft in Arma 3 apex. I've heard someone say that vtol aircraft such as av-8 is not possible due to engine limitations yet the cup mod v-22 works as a proper vtol craft :S so i dont know if that is true, but if it truly is BI could add a jet based F-35 or YAK-141 just so that the mod makers can use this a guideline for future aircraft mods. 

 

Napalm and flamethrower with volumetric flames much like Rising storm (fire bombs are still being used today against combatants)  

 

Oh one more thing Magazines being proxies much like optics, lasers ect.

 

Probably making the water too good looking would make it really hard on lower end machines that can run it now, but might not run it then. Underground features would definitely be awesome, though.

 

Dunno about vtol fighter in Apex. Will be some sort of V22-like transport, to my knowledge. But if you look around on Armaholic, there's a couple different vtols, including F-35, with functional vtol and regular flight.

 

Napalm probably not useful on Tanoa. Vietnam wasn't exactly a bunch of tiny islands. One bomb would reduce an island to a heap of ash-covered sand. :D

[veles-zv 176]

Probably making the water too good looking would make it really hard on lower end machines that can run it now, but might not run it then. Underground features would definitely be awesome, though.

 

Dunno about vtol fighter in Apex. Will be some sort of V22-like transport, to my knowledge. But if you look around on Armaholic, there's a couple different vtols, including F-35, with functional vtol and regular flight.

 

Napalm probably not useful on Tanoa. Vietnam wasn't exactly a bunch of tiny islands. One bomb would reduce an island to a heap of ash-covered sand. :D

 

 

 

 

 

 

well no it would not, if VBS can do it arma sure can do the same its a 100% fact and lets face it, rivers and lakes are a huge thing in combat, a river can halt a armored unit in its track for sometime, also infantry can be slowed down by it as well.

also the vtol on armaholic for arma 3 is vtol but svtol they can only land vertical but not taking off

and why is firebombs not useful on tanoa or any island? tanoa is not Australia or California its not going to catch on fire because its a rain forest. and fire does not need to spread by burning things at all,  

[corellian_storm 20]

Its more just the size of the islands, not that they are islands. Bombs are built for mass destruction on a broad radius of damage. Especially napalm. So the smaller the landmass, the more the bomb becomes overkill.

[VTOLAFMPLS:3 36]

 

 

explanation:

aim a target

press the button to mark a target (or pull the trigger with RapidFire on (removes one step to save time))

pull the trigger

then the system will fire automatically as soon as your aim lined up with the dot (center of mass)

[veles-zv 176]

Its more just the size of the islands, not that they are islands. Bombs are built for mass destruction on a broad radius of damage. Especially napalm. So the smaller the landmass, the more the bomb becomes overkill.

what does the size of effect have to do with anything? napalm of 450 liters only covers about 50 to 100 meters at best.  the map is going to be around 10 x 10 km still pretty big, its only 6 km smaller then altis. i will must likely make my own fire bomb mod for arma with my own effects instead of using the FPS robing effects that come standard with the game. 

[NickNukem 0]

Has anyone mentioned proper displayed terrain as a wanted feature...

[Vasily.B 529]

Has anyone mentioned proper displayed terrain as a wanted feature...

If nobody, THEN I AM! Please fix this glitches with objects floating in the air over the distances..... it looks terrible and is very odd. It may be normal in Operation flashpoint, first ArmA, but not 3rd part with its Visual Update.

[acealive 8]

I am pretty new to Arma 3.

I like a lot of things about it and its mods. Arma pretty much covers most my gaming needs right now. FLying Helicopter SP Missions, playing coop missions with a large team, some KOTH, a little Zombie Shooting with Ryans Mod and a little Altis Life every now and then. Arma offers so much !

 

One area however, in which I would love to see improvements in the future is the driving of cars and other vehicles.

They don't even have gears. No shifting needed.

 

Arma is good at simulating infantry and I also enjoy the advanced helicopter model, which makes it necessary to use a joystick.

 

But, coming from sim-racing, I really don't enjoy driving in Arma. It feels like Mario Kart of NFS, not worthy of a Simulation. Driving a car or a several ton truck with WASD buttons ? Come on...you can do better than that.

 

Please create an advanced driving model, which makes it necessary to use a Wheel, pedals and a shifter in order to drive a vehicle. So that one can choose between the models, just like with the helicopters.

 

I understand that not everyone wants a challenge when driving, just like some people enjoy flying a helicopter with the simple helicopter flight model and Mouse/Keyboard..

 

Yet, I would appreciate if some work went into the vehicles.

At least give us gears and shifting, and no auto-clutch please.

Driving a large vehicle can be quite a challenge in real life, or driving a regular car on dirt roads like most of the maps have.

 

I'd love to see a representation of that challenge in Arma as well.

[Housesparrow 8]

Improved character movement system:

I dislike Arma3's character animations, and can't help but find it all unrealistic, because when shooting at other player's characters at both close range and from afar, the figures body as a whole doesn't seem to have momentum, so the chars position and limbs move around spastically making it hard if not impossible to hit predictably well. So..

 

I would suggest a better paced system for character animation, that was more about feet and stance, and less about xyz pos of a character, maybe that way the characters movement would resemble natural movement having momentum.

 

 

How about voxels?

I believe upcoming Star Citizien (based on Cryengine) will make use of voxel technology, for holing out asteroids. It would be nice I think if one could use something like that in Arma to dig hull down positions for a tank, or to dig a trench. Obviously, any game design for such ideas has to incorporate some senseible ideas for avoiding abuse and exploitation by the players. Maybe limit the depth to a certain depth, or allow additional deph, only a certain places on a map. A nice additional feature to this, would be, to not only create a cavity in the ground, but also (maybe optionally) a dirtpile next to the digging site, that in turn could be "smoothed" out over the ground to remove the dirtpile so it basically levels out with the ground again.

[Vasily.B 529]

Improved character movement system:

I dislike Arma3's character animations, and can't help but find it all unrealistic, because when shooting at other player's characters at both close range and from afar, the figures body as a whole doesn't seem to have momentum, so the chars position and limbs move around spastically making it hard if not impossible to hit predictably well. So..

 

I would suggest a better paced system for character animation, that was more about feet and stance, and less about xyz pos of a character, maybe that way the characters movement would resemble natural movement having momentum.

 

 

How about voxels?

I believe upcoming Star Citizien (based on Cryengine) will make use of voxel technology, for holing out asteroids. It would be nice I think if one could use something like that in Arma to dig hull down positions for a tank, or to dig a trench. Obviously, any game design for such ideas has to incorporate some senseible ideas for avoiding abuse and exploitation by the players. Maybe limit the depth to a certain depth, or allow additional deph, only a certain places on a map. A nice additional feature to this, would be, to not only create a cavity in the ground, but also (maybe optionally) a dirtpile next to the digging site, that in turn could be "smoothed" out over the ground to remove the dirtpile so it basically levels out with the ground again.

For voxels - i say big YES! The only missing feature in milsim is hiding in craters after explosion in the open. Also self entrenching T-X tanks would be lovely to see.

Unfortunelly, this require some low level changes in the engine (same as updating TrueSky plugin) and will never be loaded. Off course, it would require changine whole terrain mask, setting lower levels (so after crater being done, there will not be white hole inside of it) etc. But if it can  be applied now, i wouldn't wait, and with Tanoa onboard its great time to apply it.

[Jordo94 12]

Hey not sure if the Dev's even read this, but the raven vest retextured would make a good unique vest for the CTRG