GBee2

But do we really want to go thirty years into the past either? I loved OFP, but haven't we already done that? I'd rather go contemporary with a believable scenario and maybe one which was less US-centric.

That's the very least we can expect from the 64bit port, but there's also the potential for some performance increases depending on the engine's usage of certain C++ features. The removal of the memory cap would in theory allow for better performance itself because that memory can be used to cache more, but if Arma 32bit is going to remain available, I can't see them wanting to maintain two very different codepaths so again, don't expect anything too dramatic although we can hope. Let's wait for the 64bit clients before we get too excited though. Whatever gains we actually get, this is a good thing.

Maybe, but the XM25 isn't new though? It was in there before early release, but later removed. The bit about 'interesting new perspective' has to mean something. Taking it literally, apart from civilians, whose perspective on the battlefield haven't we yet seen in Arma? Infantry, armour, aerial, naval, logistics, eod ... engineering maybe? Though there isn't much call for bridge building in Arma and base building would be either be too complex to implement well (outside of an editor) or far too simplistic. Maybe signals/command related, but that's too 'mil sim' to be of wide enough interest. Press/Media - You can embed in a military unit and report from the frontline? OK, not likely to be this one. :P Any further thoughts along these lines? Isn't a modern artillery computer point and click in the age of accurate radar terrain mapping and GPS? If it wasn't I'd be seriously questioning the competence of defence contractors (more than usual).

I would definitely say that the Orange DLC is not a naval pack, since it's described as a "small project" and adding lots of Naval assets would definitely be a large project - certainly more work than Jets or Tanks since you would have to resolve a few engine issues around water and even movement in vehicles.

Well Tac Ops is hinting at that. Replayable would suggest missions/campaign to me?

Hmm, yeah, I just re-read and you're right. Still, it's early days, they have time to adjust plans for the DLC content based on whatever feedback we give them now :) So Bohemia - please include at least some engine improvements with this DLC, like the aforementioned grenade throwing, dropping, cooking ... Hand signals - please!! I'm know there's more I'd like to see from this DLC, I'm just having a brain freeze.

Well the paragraph before all the DLCs mentions that they will be paid content (premium packages). Which is why the Maldon DLC is the only one which has 'FREE' in the title - any other free content would just be included in game updates, they wouldn't need to put it in a DLC. I assume the only reason Maldon is a DLC is because it's an old island that's more for the benefit of those who remember it, it doesn't come with any campaign and doesn't fit into the Arma 3 story line so it's more of a standalone addition.

So, Jets DLC doesn't excite me too much, although I'm glad to see the aerial aspect getting some attention. I'd love to see BI give the aircraft the same sort of attention to detail that we've seen from the mod community - features like carrier hooks, optical targetting/tracking packages (video in cockpit screens), not vital stuff but it would raise the bar higher. Tanks DLC has to include improvements to interiors of existing tanks and IFVs, doesn't it? Curious to see what this will bring, more exciting than Jets DLC for me. Malden DLC - Nice, those of us who have been here since OFP will appreciate that one. Not sure what they mean by 'vanilla assets' - I'm hoping that doesn't just mean they'll reuse the old assets without improvements to models and textures. I preferred Nogova, not least for it's inland water, variety in forests and larger scale ... but I understand why they've chosen Malden. Orange DLC - Hopefully as interesting as they are hinting it will be, even if it's the small DLC. Tac Ops DLC - This one has me the most excited. I can't wait for more details of this one and I hope that they involve Dyslecxi and other key community mil sim members. I for one pray that this is the DLC which will improve grenade handling (ala ShackTack's script)

Jet DLC will NOT be free, just the engine updates (same as usual) Only Malden DLC will be free. Let's not let that mistake turn into a 'fact' like the nonsense where some people were certain that APEX would be free if you had bought the DLC Bundle when Bohemia had NEVER said that.

The backslash key (\) gives UNXPECTED_KEY_ID - The default binding of Salute therefore doesn't work.

The idea has appeared in several forms, right back to Tesla's claim to have caused an earthquake in New York in 1898, over a century before The Core was released. Also 'The Core' was a really terrible film that few people saw (it lost millions) and those who have seen it try to forget it as quickly as possible. I think the inspiration for the East Wind device probably came from other sources. Although it's less relevant than some of the other examples, I can't help thinking of View to a Kill. It's also a very popular conspiracy theory that significant earthquakes around the world were caused by secret weapons ...

Very nice! It's a shame VoiceAttack only works on Windows though. Voice control of AI units is a really great idea, one which I'd love BI to include in Arma 4. Until then, I'll have to research the options for linux.

These days, battles would also happen across hundreds of miles using cruise and super-sonic anti-ship missles, with ships having no sight of each other or much warning before they explode and sink. Smaller scale stuff, with litoral craft, patrol boats and landing craft would be a nice touch. Also, what about hovercraft? Several nations are using them as landing craft now, with the advantage that they can lodge themselves a little further inland where the troops can disembark with more cover. Large hover/landing craft using the new vehicle-in-vehicle system to deliver up wheeled/tracked vehicles too. Small dinghies and fishing boats for the civilian side would also make for a more interesting backdrop. i.e. instead of them just appearing as wrecks or out-of-water props, allow them to be usable. The sea surface is also a little too sterile. More navigation buoys, fishing net and crab/lobster pot markers and sea birds on the water surface would just add to the feeling of realism.

Huh? They were releasing information about Apex for months before release, including trailers and even a completely open beta was available weeks before the release.

Are you running it under Wine, or using the native linux port?

You mean not since Apex campaign was released 3 months ago and updated a few days ago?

Given how much the community complained that the real world technology seen in Arma 3 was "far-fetched and outlandish" ... I'm not sure you'll win them over with Arma 4 involving alien weapons which are complete fiction. I'm in no way opposed to seeing a mod explore the idea, I think it could be great if done well, but if BI did it, I reckon it would be entirely rejected by the existing loyal community and would kill the franchise dead ...

No, humanity lost the war, the armies were defeated. The fact that the aliens died _after_ the war was long lost, doesn't change that material fact.

I really don't know whether the 'red' vehicle is modelling some miraculous ability of radar to see vibrations from a running engine(!) or whether it's supposed to reflect a heat signature (IR). Obviously moving vehicles should show up with priority tasking on a combat radar, in that instance the 'red' state is justified, otherwise, with radar all stationary vehicles should be white. If the targeting vehicle also has IR detectors in addition to or as an alternative to radar, then the vehicles heat signature (already modelled) should be used to determine 'red' state. Therefore simply turning off the engine of a tank wouldn't result in it instantly turning 'white', it would remain 'red' until it had cooled down to match the air temperature. Would those changes not help with the balance, or failing that at least it would be more realistic. I also liked the suggestion that all vehicles, enemy or friendly should appear on radar forcing the pilot to correctly identify targets not fitted with a transponder or reverse-IFF systems before they engage.

Well the point made by others over the one-sidedness of such a conflict would be particularly relevant in a realism series. Humanity lost the war in War of the Worlds, they were powerless to stop the invasion because of the technical superiority of the invaders ...

Oh really? I can go around the entire city and walk through every single door? There are no locks, no boarded up houses, no side doors blocked by obstacles either inside or out? Tanoa is the most creative and most varied map they've ever produced with an astonishing level of detail to it's outdoor spaces, it seems most people would rather be inside - probably sitting in front a computer screen playing games, just to bring things full circle. If you want urban combat, then there are plenty of maps available for that, IMHO Tanoa is not about that at all. It's offering the Jungle/tropical environment that people have been calling for from OFP forward, it's an outdoor environment for those Congo/Vietnam recreations etc.

Old thread, but harking back to it's original discussion about what makes for a good campaign. Someone said that Voice Acting/Dialogue isn't so important because it's hard to do - while I really do appreciate just how hard it is to find someone who can do voice acting, I don't think you can underestimate just how immersion breaking bad voice acting is. Not just the acting, but bad dialogue too. One third party campaign, I won't mention which because I've no wish to hurt anyone's feelings, the voice acting was so cringeworthy that I really struggled to remain interested. Things like including garbled 'military-esque' cliches you've seen in far too many bad action films while putting on a 'tough sergeant' voice is not OK and it's nothing at all like the real world. Most soldiers, officers and NCOs talk to each other very normally, they aren't growling, scenery chewing characters who can only talk in clipped orders - if you're going to write dialog, just write it the way you would talk to your friends, your boss or a stranger in real life. Do not feel tempted to throw in any military terms unless you actually understand what they mean, and never overuse them. Truthfully, for good voice acting you don't need to act, use your own voice and say it naturally, calmly, do not over-stress syllables or add intonations etc. Lastly, you could learn something from watching some of Dyslecxi's ShackTack videos - when he gives a briefing or orders to other players, he's not acting, he's just being himself relaying instructions as I presume he would in real life were he suddenly dropped into the army. That's what you want to aim for, not what you see in the movies.

So I've tried pointing to mods installed via steam workshop with the -mod= argument but it's not working. Has anyone figured out how to do this? e.g. I've tried -mod=/mnt/nas2/Games/steamapps/workshop/content/107410/669962280 for the official ADR-97 mod but it's not available in-game. Tried with various mods, same result. Once I understand how it is supposed to work I'll try to find the time to write a cross-platform launcher for the wider community.

Issue with CUPS is resolved, I missed the fact that it's dependent on the CUPS Core addon. If CUPS Core isn't loaded but CUPS Terrains is, then Arma won't start.

-mod=@CUPS Where @CUPS is a symlink to the steam workshop downloaded version. I have no problem loading multiple mods, right now I have the RHS mods and a few others loading together fine.