New Interview with BIS

[icebreakr 3139]

We had a couple of questions on our mind and Maruk satisfied our curiousity in a new short interview:

http://www.arma.si/modules/articles/?art_id=51

Enjoy

[lwlooz 0]

Once again I hope "Improved AI" means that they are less suicidal.

"They have 3 MG's pointed at us Sir!" "What do I care,CHAAARGE!!"

[Not that they actually charge,they will run towards you and make 5 360° turns on the way and lie down and stand up 50 times in a very slooooow fashion]

Probably not,but hey,evaluating ones life goes hand in hand with being able to supress people. And that would make people go "Omgz0r!! I already was at the court to sue you BIS but turned around when I read this on my laptop!?!?!!"

[sickboy 13]

sweeeeeeeeeeet

[andersson 285]

I hope they will add internal views in tanks.

Quote[/b] ]Will damage model be improved, because now we see BMPs getting trashed by machinegunners due to hitpoint system?

If I´m not wrong BMPs have very weak armour, so maybe its not that unrealistic?

[metalchris 0]

believe me , BMPs are designed to withstand machinegunfire (ok maybe not 20-30mm machineguns).

There are very few points on a BMP vulnarable to small arms fire.(f.e. optics)

[bravo 6 0]

short but nice..

can't wait to see what they improved..

[Jack-UK 0]

Thanks for the interview

Interesting read.

Go BIS

[Maddmatt 1]

I wonder what the AI will be like, I can't wait for this game.

[hellfish6 7]

Is it just me, or was there absolutely no new information in that interview?

[DVD 0]

@Hellfish6

its like "42" ... the answer of all questions about all and nothing

[icebreakr 3139]

I'm glad to see all the improvements are on the way (mentioned under the first answer)... we couldn't wish more, well ... realism mod is clearly in the hands of community :]

[Balschoiw 0]

Quote[/b] ]Is it just me, or was there absolutely no new information in that interview?

Thought the same.

[DVD 0]

I'm glad to see all the improvements are on the way (mentioned under the first answer)... we couldn't wish more, well ... realism mod is clearly in the hands of community :]

If crCTI can work and a linux server comes soon, ... we will see ...

[hellfish6 7]

I'm glad to see all the improvements are on the way (mentioned under the first answer)... we couldn't wish more, well ... realism mod is clearly in the hands of community :]

You can't make a realistic armor/damage system if the configs don't let you define armor values for more than just the turret/tracks/engine. Without being able to define things like "hull side" or "turret front" and chemical vs. kinetic armor, the entire damage system will be a lame, generic hit point system like we already have.

[kavoven 4]

Quote[/b] ]Is it just me, or was there absolutely no new information in that interview?

Thought the same.

It sounds like:

We will improve everything, but don't have the time atm. ^^

Anyway, looking forward to the promised improvements, though the were already promised with the original release...

[desertfox 2]

Quote[/b] ]You can't make a realistic armor/damage system if the configs don't let you define armor values for more than just the turret/tracks/engine. Without being able to define things like "hull side" or "turret front" and chemical vs. kinetic armor, the entire damage system will be a lame, generic hit point system like we already have.

I couldn't agree more on that particular comment.

Concerning the article - I can't wait until the patch is out. Sounds great. BIS is on the right course.

[Pierrot 0]

believe me , BMPs are designed to withstand machinegunfire (ok maybe not 20-30mm machineguns).

There are very few points on a BMP vulnarable to small arms fire.(f.e. optics)

I've heard it is often the case that 7.6mm penetrates side armor of BMP.

[sickboy 13]

Anyway, looking forward to the promised improvements, though the were already promised with the original release...

They never made promises, they said what they had planned for ArmA... If this is AT the ArmA release or AFTER the release in ( free!! ) patches, has never been specified. As it seems, you will get ur features after all anyway (patches)

[Dwarden 1124]

I'm glad to see all the improvements are on the way (mentioned  under the first answer)... we couldn't wish more, well ... realism mod is clearly in the hands of community :]

You can't make a realistic armor/damage system if the configs don't let you define armor values for more than just the turret/tracks/engine. Without being able to define things like "hull side" or "turret front" and chemical vs. kinetic armor, the entire damage system will be a lame, generic hit point system like we already have.

well if i remember correct in some other interview it was said this is gunna be improved too (way to define front/back/side etc values) ...

[Scrub 0]

I think to solve the problems mentioned, there might need to be both a penetration value, and an armor value that scales the damage done. This would allow everything from no damage done, to massive HP damage with possibly no penetration (Squash/HEAT rounds), to complete penetration with little armor damage (penetrator)... just need to account for the massive spall now. It's a tough problem with 1000' of rounds flyin' around.

[Adv 0]

I was a little disapointed there was no specific mention of the sprocket version CTD crashes in multiplayer. They did mention stability fixes in general terms I hope thats one they fixed.

[Big Dawg KS 6]

Quote[/b] ]ArmA.si: Will damage model be improved, because now we see BMPs getting trashed by machinegunners due to hitpoint system? How hard would be for your team to implement a more realistic system in cases when player gets injured (bleeding, fading out)?

Maruk: Such changes are not currently planned and could not be only difficult to make but may also have serious impact on game play. There´s a large potential for community modifications in many areas and let´s see how far some of the community makers can go with the technology provided in ArmA.

Don't be so worried about it guys, he never specified which of the two very different questions he answered, and it looks a lot more like he was focusing on the 2nd (underlined) one with his response.

[icebreakr 3139]

Dwarden: thats right, armor will be patched...

[sluggCDN 0]

Forget about armour. How about making sure sniper rifiles don't shoot tracers!!!. Can they do that little thing. Please, BIS! Also, in game as it stands now you can fire semi-auto on the move either runnign or walking. But firing full-auto would stop you dead in you tracks. Maybe one shouldn't be able to shoot when sprinting but could fire when walking slowly.

In-game example: I'm firing short bursts from behind a corner. I'm getting engaged. I'm trying to hide behind a corner while supressing the enemy, but can't move and fire at same time - I have to let my trigger go, then I can move. As a result I get hit while frozen in full-auto mode fire. In many cases I got to make a split-second decision which the full-auto move lock makes very difficult; it has a potential to make life difficult for quite a few players in the game. Major show stopper! Little but deadly.

[Big Dawg KS 6]

Forget about armour. How about making sure sniper rifiles don't shoot tracers!!!.

How very selfish of you. If you want the tracers removed wait for an addon, at least you can already change that, whereas the armor system requires engine modification. And I think it's safe to say more people care about engine improvements than tweaking of the default content.

Also, there's nothing wrong with the setup in ArmA with moving and shooting as of v1.03. You can't hit crap if you're moving anyway, so being able to fire on the move isn't going to make any difference other than you getting killed more.