Player should change his position while driving vehicles much slower

[abel 0]

Sorry, if I'm not the first person, who writes about it, but role changing for tanks, aircraft, etc works too fast. This is especially unreal in MP (one player can fully control tank, for example). I propose to add some time interval (5-10 secs) for players, who try to move from one place to another within a vehicle.

Thank you.

[Jex =TE= 0]

Sounds good to me :)

[Hud Dorph 22]

No thanx - sounds bad to me - would make an m1a pretty useless with 2 or 3 AI's + 1player.

[That guy 10]

Dorph;1488949']No thanx - sounds bad to me - would make an m1a pretty useless with 2 or 3 AI's + 1player.

I have found armor to be very effective with AIs. just have to know how to use them

yes there does need to be some lag time moving between positions

[ZeosPantera 0]

To often then not I end up recovering an enemy armor and do driver -> gunner -> driver -> gunner too often trying to be useful to have it be any slower.

[CarlGustaffa 4]

Getting out to change into driver position makes sense to me, especially in a multiplayer environment. First of all, you get to value teamplay more by having a human with you. Secondly, you would need to stay behind so that you can backup, change position, go forward as gunner or commander. Instead of rushing in like most do with tanks today, on public gameplay at least.

What I would want, which sounds completely unrealistic, is the ability for a Cobra Driver and Gunner to exchange seats. This because if pilot is killed, the gunner can take controls and get it back to base instead of crashing it. Naturally, dual driver positions would be best approach, but I could live with changing as a workaround.

[HyperU2 11]

I think when I take an vehicle with AI as crew I'm not so much changing positions as taking over their character for a few seconds. I wouldn't want lag between that.

[irR4tiOn4L 10]

This would be the kind of 'totally useless but annoys the hell out of you every time' feature that turns people red with anger. Apart from the one conjectured positive of silly players in multiplayer no longer rushing alone manning a tank single handed (who with this change would rush TWO handed, so to speak, instead, producing little change in gameplay - and honestly, how difficult is it to dispatch such lone wolves?), i cannot find a single other reason to have to twiddle your thumbs for 5 seconds at a time - but unless this brought new animations, i can readily see this enraging people on a regular basis.

I think there are far more important issues to resolve

[Rommel 2]

Couldn't see the harm in the delay, as long as it doesn't prioritise over other things.

[Joona 10]

I think this woud be realistic and means no harm in cars or light armor vehicles.

As others say it is hard to play in a tank alone with AI I agree with them,

but you can always 'change player':) if they are playable.

Poll woud be nice with this.

[Jex =TE= 0]

I thought this sim was aiming at realism and not at the impatient?

[irR4tiOn4L 10]

I thought this sim was aiming at realism and not at the impatient?

It aims for meaningfull realism. Otherwise you would not be part of these elite units and operations, you would be sitting back folding boxes. The whole idea is that its realistic in what counts, but it wont waste your time with useless 'features'.

Adding a 5 second delay to switching inside a vehicle would be exactly such a feature. For starters such a delay can vary, and to begin with a common soldier would be unable to drive a tank, let alone a helicopter. So by your logic, anyone but crew should be locked out of heavier vehicles to begin with (is that what you want?). But moreover, most of the time you are switching seats to alleviate some other issue that you just wouldnt have in reality, such as poor crew (AI), or lack of teammates to cooperate with (multiplayer). Or some bug or other crazy issue.

So before you pipe up about realism mandating stupid features, consider what that actually means and where you draw the line. Painting anyone who opposes this as 'the impatient' is quite hypocritical

[abel 0]

Could you please tell me, why high-end trooper military simulator should be mixed up with arcade "battle tanks"? ARMA2 is not tank simulator, but existing simplifications should be modified. Yes, MP game should be dynamic, but there are a lot of other ways to reach this target. Stupid life bar and jumping crewman completely fit for a Dendy game, but not for a 21st century military SIM.

[irR4tiOn4L 10]

Could you please tell me, why high-end trooper military simulator should be mixed up with arcade "battle tanks"? ARMA2 is not tank simulator, but existing simplifications should be modified. Yes, MP game should be dynamic, but there are a lot of other ways to reach this target. Stupid life bar and jumping crewman completely fit for a Dendy game, but not for a 21st century military SIM.

The amount of extra work required for more realistic vehicles, their physics and their weapons systems, as well as various get in/out animations for each of them (all of them has different ways of getting in) is simply too large a task for one infantry sim

Having said that, i think you are only asking for moderate improvements, such as penetration based armour, no life bar vehicles and better animations. Those are reasonable changes; but introducing a seat-switch delay is not part of that

[abel 0]

I do not ask to build another KA-50 simulator based on ArmA2, only some changes, that will make our beloved game a bit more realistic. Required delay do not need any animation at all - only black screen or external view for a few seconds. Otherwise good tank driver may be a devil on ArmA battlefield, that's cool for MP, but where is realism?

[Jockson 10]

Voted no. It's one of those things that just because it's in theory "realistic", doesn't mean it should be in the game. Personally, it would annoy me quite a bit.

[tcp 10]

I sort of disagree with a delay because a commander can take control of most of the systems and an experienced one could switch between stations fairly quickly.

However, a handicap is not so bad. However, you are only further increasing a handicap that is already there. A full human crew is much better.

It's your game and you can do whatever you want with it, here's something to get you started. Although, its not tested and it might begin to have problems with more than one player because the gunner command only returns the first gunner. You may have to end up limiting the seat delay to when their is only one person in the tank.

Tank Init Line:

this addEventHandler ["GETIN",{_chgseat = _this execVM "chgseat.sqf"}];

chgseat.sqf

_veh = _this select 0;
_seat = _this select 1;
_unit = _this select 2;
_delay = 5;
switch(_seat) do {
case "driver": {_seat = 1;};
case "commander": {_seat = 2;};
case "gunner": {_seat = 3;};
case default {_seat = 4};
};
if(local player && player == _unit) then {
while {player in crew _veh} do {
	sleep 2;
	if(driver _veh == player) then {
		if(_seat != 1) then {
			_seat = 1;
			titleText ["Changing positions...", "PLAIN DOWN"];
			disableUserInput true;
			sleep _delay;
			titleFadeOut 1;
			disableUserInput false;
		};
	} else {
		if(commander _veh == player) then {
			if(_seat != 2) then {
				_seat = 2;
				titleText ["Changing positions...", "PLAIN DOWN"];
				disableUserInput true;
				sleep _delay;
				titleFadeOut 1;
				disableUserInput false;
			};
		} else {
			if(gunner _veh == player) then {
				if(_seat != 3) then {
					_seat = 3;
					titleText ["Changing positions...", "PLAIN DOWN"];
					disableUserInput true;
					sleep _delay;
					titleFadeOut 1;
					disableUserInput false;
				};
			} else {
				if(_seat != 4) then {
					_seat = 4;
					titleText ["Changing positions...", "PLAIN DOWN"];
					disableUserInput true;
					sleep _delay;
					titleFadeOut 1;
					disableUserInput false;
				};
			};
		};
	};
};
};

[Jex =TE= 0]

It aims for meaningfull realism. Otherwise you would not be part of these elite units and operations, you would be sitting back folding boxes. The whole idea is that its realistic in what counts, but it wont waste your time with useless 'features'.

Adding a 5 second delay to switching inside a vehicle would be exactly such a feature. For starters such a delay can vary, and to begin with a common soldier would be unable to drive a tank, let alone a helicopter. So by your logic, anyone but crew should be locked out of heavier vehicles to begin with (is that what you want?). But moreover, most of the time you are switching seats to alleviate some other issue that you just wouldnt have in reality, such as poor crew (AI), or lack of teammates to cooperate with (multiplayer). Or some bug or other crazy issue.

So before you pipe up about realism mandating stupid features, consider what that actually means and where you draw the line. Painting anyone who opposes this as 'the impatient' is quite hypocritical

Sounds like a Strawman to me.

If you wish to start a topic on the realities of crew served positions, be my guest :)

[maturin 12]

Tank crew shouldn't be able to bail out simultaneously either.

[irR4tiOn4L 10]

Sounds like a Strawman to me.

If you wish to start a topic on the realities of crew served positions, be my guest :)

Its an example of where the 'put it in if its realistic' metric leads, and therefore why it is the wrong metric. Its also accurate - you really would have NO HOPE of flying a helicopter or driving a tank as a common soldier.

Since you will reach a point where you no longer desire realism, the force of that argument is weakened - and it becomes clear that realism for realism's sake leads nowhere.

Thats exactly what i think seat switching delays would add. If anything is a strawman, its that 'single-player-crewed tanks' in multiplayer need addressing. They dont. A fully crewed human or even AI tank will do much better

[Jex =TE= 0]

You continue to argue a point I'm not addressing. Have fun :)

[no use for a name 0]

I don't really like the idea...I mean there's there's a line where realism starts to not be fun and turns into annoying. I could maybe see it in PvP MP games; but as for the core singleplayer game I wouldn't ever get in a vehicle if it took 10 seconds to move from one position to the other.

Edited November 19, 2009 by No Use For A Name

[irR4tiOn4L 10]

You continue to argue a point I'm not addressing. Have fun :)

Im arguing we should not have a seat switch delay. If thats not what youre adressing, i dont think its a discussion for this thread

[LJF 0]

Its an example of where the 'put it in if its realistic' metric leads, and therefore why it is the wrong metric. Its also accurate - you really would have NO HOPE of flying a helicopter or driving a tank as a common soldier.

Since you will reach a point where you no longer desire realism, the force of that argument is weakened - and it becomes clear that realism for realism's sake leads nowhere.

Thats exactly what i think seat switching delays would add. If anything is a strawman, its that 'single-player-crewed tanks' in multiplayer need addressing. They dont. A fully crewed human or even AI tank will do much better

The thing is, everyone always uses the "character", yes, the character of a common infantry soldier couldn't fly a tank, but a human player is not a character, they merely control one. I think most of us are pretty good at using everything: tanks, choppers, planes, cars, rabbits etc, if the player can control a plane, then he can control a plane.

I'm all for such a delay, but maybe not 5-10 seconds, that's an aweful long time, 3 seconds would be plenty. Would it be possible to animate the camera to the new position? Not a full animation for the character, just a cam animation.

[irR4tiOn4L 10]

The thing is, everyone always uses the "character", yes, the character of a common infantry soldier couldn't fly a tank, but a human player is not a character, they merely control one. I think most of us are pretty good at using everything: tanks, choppers, planes, cars, rabbits etc, if the player can control a plane, then he can control a plane.

The point is that a natural restriction (not being able to join several armed forces at once, devoting many years to each, in order to be effectively able to pilot choppers, aircraft, tanks and infantry duties) is not present (because the flight/driving models are simpler), but the developer chooses not to program in a substitute restriction on players (choosing a 'character' who can only do certain things) because this would undermine the reason realism is included - for more authentic and thus fun by including realism that counts

Even more interestingly, the restriction (not being able to pilot all vehicles) is one that is needed as a substitute for a lack of realism in the flight models and vehicle controls. Just as a seat switching delay is 'needed' to account for a lack of realism in vehicle seat switching. There is a direct parallel between the two, and both serve no purpose beyond anal realism on their own, and should not be in

I have yet to see someone demonstrate WHY a seat switch delay is even needed. Single-driver multiplayer tanks are easily dispatched by two-man crews - what other possible justification can there be?

Edited November 22, 2009 by irR4tiOn4L