Jump to content

HaseDesTodes

Member
  • Content Count

    108
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Medals

Everything posted by HaseDesTodes

  1. HaseDesTodes

    General Discussion (dev branch)

    if it really has only one gear, then maybe it is meant to have a hydraulic transmission (or a generator + electric power train). that way there should be no more drastic changes in engine RPM (acutally it depends on how it's made). but i guess that would be to much high-tech for 2035 :)
  2. HaseDesTodes

    Tanks DLC Feedback

    @teach first thing: DLC will come out in less than 3 month (afair), and they should have been working on it for at least half a year (probably 1 year now). unfortunately i can't seem to find an up-to-date roadmap for Arma3 right now, so i can't provide any "solid" evidence on dates. this topic was opened more than a year now, and now you come to request a totally new feature. you can be 99.995% sure, that it wouldn't make it in the game if you request it so late. so it seems pointless to me suggesting it or hoping it will come. second thing: it has pretty much been been said that it WILL NOT be added to the game. https://forums.bistudio.com/forums/topic/196366-tanks-dlc-feedback/?page=22&tab=comments#comment-3236279 https://forums.bistudio.com/forums/topic/196366-tanks-dlc-feedback/?page=23&tab=comments#comment-3236780
  3. HaseDesTodes

    Audio Tweaking (dev branch)

    @lex__1 i had noticed in the past, that (AI) squad commands don'T fade out properly. so i was able to hear AI at 2.5km distance (sound fully turned up) i did report it, but as usual BIS didn't really care to answer https://feedback.bistudio.com/T124627 i linked a video i made in the report, and i can hear the AI voice commands very quietly, if i turn my volume to the max. especailly between 0-15 sec, idk. why i made that video so long. i don't really know if that's the way you can hear it, but i think it might be related.
  4. HaseDesTodes

    Arma 3 Third-Party DLC Pitch Discussion

    I thought about this for a while, and found it wouldn't hurt if express my concerns about this. In the past BIS have made sure, that non DLC/Addon owners were able play with owners and this seems not to be the case with the way this is announced (at least how i understood it). I usually play on the EUTW servers, which is a mission that doesn't use any 3rd party assets, for one simple reason: accessibility. Even if it's super simple to join a modded server and download missing mods using the launcher's server browser it seems to be a step many players are not willing to take. Because of that i fear, that it would be difficult to run a server (in terms of having it populated) that uses one or more premium mods, if having them installed is mandatory to join and play on the server. I think that we can expect the new premium mods to contain at least one mod that is mainly an asset expansion (vehicles, uniforms, equipment, etc.). All those things could be added like it was done with the DLCs, so non-owners could play together with owners on the same server, but couldn't use them. I think premium Mod/DLC creators should be given the option to have their assets behave the same way as BIS DLC assets. So that they can decide if their creations are suitable for use along with vanilla assets or not, but also if they would like it this way. I'm sure there can be reasons to restrict the use, so i think it should be possible, but not mandatory. Having mods forced in order to join a server, can lead to a low player count, what often makes a server less attractive to other players, so the server gets on a downward spiral. And players might begin questioning, if they should buy a Mod/DLC when there is not enough content that is utilizing it. I'm sure there will still be some/many well organized communities that get to fill their servers, but i think, that if one is trying to sell a product increasing the potential amount of customers can be a good way to go. One thing i am concerned about with what i suggested, is, that this might get to some "pay to win" scenario. If there are very powerful assets that require premium access in a PVP situation, players might feel that they are forced to buy a DLC/Mod in order to keep up. Only ways i currently see to prevent this kind of situation are: -mission creators make sure the access is balanced (put a high price tag on those assets, restrict amount per team, etc) -the way it is announced: you need the mod in order to play on a server that uses it -create low quality versions of the assets, that are free to use for everyone, and keep the high quality versions as mods (almost like BIS used to do it with BAF, PMC and Armed Forces of the Czech Republic) I don't really expect much/anything at all of what i wrote to happen, but i wanted at least to express my concerns about this topic.
  5. i have "Use default action" bound to the "enter"-key, so whatever you have bound it to, skipping might work with holding it.
  6. HaseDesTodes

    Jets DLC Official Feedback

    let it fly straight at first, then start homing in on the closest valid target near the marked target. if the needed flight path corrections are to great, it's the pilot's fault that the bomb misses. but if the bomb can't find any target it should fly just like it was dropped with out any target. i guess that would be the best solution here; no imba after-drop flight path, but still precise if a laser/ir strobe is in place
  7. HaseDesTodes

    Jets DLC Official Feedback

    can't you simply disable the ability to lock on anything but laser/IR strobe targets for the bombs? i think that's the main cause for the problems. and afair this was the way it used to be before sensors got changed.
  8. HaseDesTodes

    General Discussion (dev branch)

    yes it's probably the same model. BUT the discussion about the RPG/bipod on an A3 launcher is based on a rendered image from a different game. that's all i wanted to express. i'd really like prone position with launchers and RPG-7 with PGO7 sight and bipod, but i don't think we should assume this is coming because of the DayZ RPG image.
  9. HaseDesTodes

    General Discussion (dev branch)

    did you guys realize the RPG-7 model is from the DayZ SA? i guess it might not be a noticeable problem to transfer it to A3, but i don't think there were plans for it.
  10. HaseDesTodes

    Laws of War DLC Feedback

    when i played the campaign during exp. testing phase (the first version released on exp) it worked as it "should" be
  11. it shouldn't matter if you did, as he explicitly stated it. so if you fulfilled everything else, and didn't receive it, then started over and didn't use it, it should be a bug.
  12. i have gotten the "Remnants of War" achievement for finishing the campaign, so the answer is "Yes"
  13. HaseDesTodes

    Laws of War DLC Feedback

    i have finished the campaign in around 3.5h (could have done it faster) small spoiler it had some very nice ideas, and i really like the story. there were a few things that i found could need improvement:
  14. HaseDesTodes

    Orange DLC (wild) SPECULATIONS !!!

    from what it looks like to me it will be in the first week of september (so 6th). it's not 100% exact, but i guess the schedule itself isn't either.
  15. HaseDesTodes

    Jets DLC Official Feedback

    this is even just 8 posts before your initial post. if you need hundreds of hits to the flank of an apc to destroy it, i wouldn't call it AP, at least not in arma.
  16. HaseDesTodes

    Jets DLC Official Feedback

    it's a bug. the bomb homes in on the vehicle selected by the airplane's sensors. no laser is used.
  17. HaseDesTodes

    Malden DLC 2035 - Official Feedback Post

    island is realy nice to look at, i'm curious how it will turn out gameplay wise. nevertheless i have made a small list of flaws i have found: an ugly step in the pier parts (part is rotated to much) some sand texture that looks ugly there a small gap between the concrete and the metal piers (realy minor issue) the curbs overlaping to have small ugly steps, and the grass is clipping through them
  18. HaseDesTodes

    Jets DLC Official Feedback

    i just ran few tests in the editor (not flying, 40m distance to rule out spread): don't nail me on the exact numbers, especially for the infantry, as i always needed to adjust them to the jet cannon, but you can clearly see some things. 20mm twin cannon sucks against infantry, even though it looks like it uses HE ammo. all 20mm cannons are not realy good against infantry, especially, due to the rate of fire and the limited ammo. Neophron and Wipeout have the best cannons for air to ground combat, just as you would expect of CAS planes. DLC jets have splash damage, even if it doesn't look like it.
  19. HaseDesTodes

    General Discussion (dev branch)

    steam-> library-> rightclick Arma3->Properties ->Betas-> dropdown: development-> close-> start the download if it doesn't start on it's own.
  20. HaseDesTodes

    General Discussion (dev branch)

    did you change the numbers? this is an expaination on how to remove CBA (as an example) from a mission i wrote a while ago.
  21. im pretty sure they removed it a few versions ago you were able to open it by toggleing your panels
  22. HaseDesTodes

    Jets DLC Official Feedback

    my test: place two centurions next to each other one to the north, one to the south. have one facing east, and one facing west. enable data link send and receive for both. enable the radar for both turrets. have a helicopter (taru) fly towards the turrets from the side with radar. as the helicopter gets closer, observe the turret facing away. without datalink information it shouldn't be able to notice the helicopter unless it's within optical sensor range, so it should only react, if datalink info is beeing used. my result: the turret turns around and starts aiming when the helicopter is about 2km away. (optical sensor radius) next test: same layout, but at night. result: turret facing away is not reacting at all. my conclusion: AI doesn't take information from data link targets. it only reacts, if their own sensors pick up a target.
  23. HaseDesTodes

    General Discussion (dev branch)

    ah nice to know. i was just confused by it jumping from 1.69 to 1.71 last week
×