funnyguy1

Yeah...didn't know that Would be cool if rg solved it somehow in his mod.

Great mod m8! bugs report: Can't see the speed indicator @ 800x600 Using AK74, switch to the iron sights, than select grenades, and throw one - camera goes crazy regards

x2 Best Idea I've heard in a while. I have to agree, sharing info isn't bad, even if you're gonna relase 2 separate things in the end. Or only one mod, but with compatible "choosable" components...That would be just It makes sense, especially since both of you guys aim to achieve realistic effects.

Imo the most realistic, and therefore the best one is the old good modwar by Predator...Everything else sounds too artifical to me, or at least part of it does. Well, lot of people use chammy's soundpack, probably because of the clever video he relased, with the real distant firefight pasted in. And that's good, but I still preffer M4's from modwar, since I'm using it 90% of the time I play arma, I use modwar. I don't know what's so special about fdf for example. I respect them for what they're doing, just like others, but Pred's modwar is simply better (imo), and that's why I'm using it.

I was thinking about how to implement the ballistic copmuters for the MBTs...Well It's not an "I have the sollution" thing, but maybe I'll inspire someone... to do: In order to adjust the gun vertically and horizontally gunner's point of view should be changed. Just like in real tank it shouldn't be the end of a gun. It's not necessary to have both points ov view since it's too complicated thing for arma. Then an option for measuring the distance to the target and it's speed. And the gun adjusting...thing. Arty does adjust the guns in order to hit the target, right? I haven't played with arma's arty, but I've spent hours with CoC Arty and know that it works, so isn't it just a matter of creating similar system? It's just a matter of config work i suppose, so maybe, someday...

Do you plan to do it all by yourselves, or maybe include some smaller addons relased by others, like NonWonderDog's ballistics, or gmJamez sight adjustment, or just make it compatible? Smoke from burning vehicles, destroyed houses or gas stations is also important from the tactical point of view, and again there are (almost) ready sollutions relased. regards

Thank you! BIS should pay people who improove their product, really.

Without better usage of terrain, taking cover everytime it's necessary, and for the necessary ammount of time, leaning&checking what's behind the corner, cqc tactics/movements,laying/taking suppressive fire - easy. Taking under consideration some things others mentioned, and using the extra stuff like: second's suppression scripts UPS grouplink (newest) NonWonderDog's ballistics veteran/AI skills set on 1/accuracy on about 0.8, and config settings (camuflage, sensitivity, CfgAISkill) increased... it's almost hard (in a good way). Can you imagine how kick azz it would be with all that missing stuff?

The second one doesn't end, despite the fact that there's no enemy in the town. I'll replay it and update my post.

Well tbh, it's kinda unplayable now for me, because of the NVG (I thought it was just a bug)...I think I understand what you mean by forcing player to act carefully. But it would be better choise to leave the nvg (add more patrols maybe?) and get rid of the GPS. I haven't finished it as it's too dark to see a thing. Maybe just change the hour a bit.

Is the absence of NV intentional?

I hope you'll tweak the AI to the max. Especially the engagement ranges and proper values in cfgweapons, as things in the main config are quite easy o edit. good luck

I second that. I paid for the game. Mainly because of the SP and the editor, as I don't play MP (often). I make missions, now can I moan about how bad the SP aspect is (which is, as I said, one of the main reasons why I bought the game)? What if I was just a lazy a**, and didn't want to make my own missions...does it change anything? The sp deserves to be moan about, more than any other aspect of the game.

I agree with ColonelSandersLite... But despite the 1.08 version, missions don't end sometimes, sometimes the squad that was supposed to jump in your truck decides to walk to the objective on foot etc., so you have to replay the missions in order to go on. So EVEN with 1.08 it's sometimes hard to play it, which with the mentioned disadvantages makes it even worst.

I'll try as hard as I can to focus on Facts: ArmA is balanced (more or less) to be more mainstreamers friendly, less annoying (difficult) and playable in SP (which is the weakest part of the game btw). Fanboy's mumble: STFU, there's editor, there are mods etc... Facts: It would be quite annoying for a mainstreamer if it wasn't that way: * MBTs are balanced because there are missions where you use them *realistic reloading times for weapons (e.g RPGs) could be deadly *AI (although advertised as highly non-scripted) needs a large ammount of triggers, waypoints, and scripts to behave trully realistic, dynamic and unpredictable. That's because of the current campaign and missions' style. If the AI took cover everytime it should, and stayed there the realistic ammount of time, moreover if they fleed or surrendered realistically, some of the missions could not be finished, or planned because of the impredictability of the AI. Campaign couldn’t go on because AI could surrender. Is this necessary? Especially when the majority prefers more realistic and dynamic gameplay? It doesn’t matter since it’s a future of games anyway, more and more missions are being made that way, because it’s simply more interesting and challenging. Arma already tries to be kinda dynamic because of the side missions. Besides, you can still make great missions with the "plot" that way. As you see it's not a matter of some dramatic changes, besides, look at we have already: Grouplink, UPS, Dynamic Campaigns, WGL (and countless mini mods improoving realism). Fanboy's mumble: Why even suggesting something like that since the game isn't "finished" yet, they should focus on more important things etc. Well... There's already an expansion pack in progres...so What it'll contain? Couple of new units, and a new campaign, done probably the same way as the previous one...yay Suggestion: So here goes the suggestion about future patches and expansions: 2 configs? One that allows you to play SP BIS-style, and create missions based on the scripted AI, and the second one with the more dynamic AI, and realism 'on board'. Or every other sollution that would work that way. Why not, since there are already Cadet/Vet settings? That would be something I could spent extra money on, not just another shi**y campaign. It not a sollution, it's just an idea...post your thoughts.

Because it is one? It is "I want better AI, I give examples, and I suggest things for future patches/expansions topic". I wouldn't suggest worst AI, would I?

Ok, the last explanation, as it's all quite clear even though my english isn't good. @ArmaVidz: the pool choises are obvious, yes - you agree with what i wrote, no - you don't, don't care - you don't need any changes at all @plaintiff1: I have second config. If I hadn't I would ask somebody if he can do one for me, or didn't play the game at all. The point is, that BIS keeps making those funny missions, while dreaming about something more dynamic. I've just said that they could do it better (which is just my thought, and of course neither some of you nor BIS will agree with that), and prooved it because I played, made missions with the mentioned scripts. Furthermore, I'm not asking BIS to make what I want, I'm just trying to say that would be nice if they included some things straight in the config, in the game, so that we didn't need to put so many scripts into our missions. By dynamic/unpredictable I don't mean uber dynamic, totally dynamic or uber dybamic&realistic, I mean nothing more than "dynamic enough to surprise me, and be better than AI in the official missions (which isn't hard)". Moreover I mention some of the fan-made sollutions.

Just a quick reply, I'll write more tomorrow. I'm not talking about a totally dynamic AI e.g. that doesn't need waypoints. First of all I was complaining about missions/campaign done by BIS. With the little effort and the usage of mentioned scripts you can make better missions with more realistic AI. When dynamic can equal realistic? When you make a mission, you first create a virtual world with AI patrolls, bases and stuff. In this stage of mission development there's no need for dynamic AI, because you want it to be more or less your way, of course UPS does great job with creating patrolls etc, but that's not the point. That's the part where everybody does what ordered. Also the other side (player?), they have plans, they have maps with objectives marked and so on. Everybody knows what to do. And I'm affraid you focused more on this side of a mission. That's the theory, but for an ordinary rifleman every enemy soldier hiding behind a cover is dynamic and unpredictable, therefore when the "action" starts, it is somehow dynamic, despite the fact that everybody knows their objectives. Playing ArmA I feel too comfortable, AI can't surprise me. They try to search you, try to flank you, flee, but they do it only if you let them survive. AI isn't good enough to fight you. By dynamic and unpredictable I mean nothing more than AI that has the ability to surrender, call the nearest patroll/unit for help or stays covered as long as it takes to surprise you, or it feels safe again. In other words: surprise you. Imagine what would happen if they could do that in BIS' missions?

Afaik dynamic campaign with AI generals and stuff isn't possible on large scale in ArmA/on average pc, so let's leave the subject till game2 comes closer. The point is, AI is scripted no matter how you call it. And that's why I started this topic. You really need to throw some scripts into your mission to make it challenging and enjoyable, not to mention the ability to replay it with an unpredictable ending. By dynamic AI I mean nothing more, than what some ppl have already done. E.g. UPS/Grouplink/Dynamic campaign templates. If it was already in core ArmA, you wouldn't need to mess with additional scripts, just to make it realistic. You would in fact, focus on things like plot and general realism of your mission. edit: BUT, some campaigns wouldn't be playable then. Personally I'd rather "turn off" some things in the config to force the AI to behave a bit stupid (so that I could script it my way), than use tons of scripts to force it to do the job realistically. That's why I suggested the second config. Isn't it the BIS' policy? To make things dynamic in the future? The second config would allow them to introduce other things that destroy the gameplay balance and frustrate mainstreamers. Besides, it's neither the "I want XYZ in ArmA, I know that's not possible, but I still want it" kind of request, nor blaming BIS that their game sux. All of this can be done, and the community prooved it. I'm neither a "fanboy" since it has a negative meaning to me lately, nor a whiner (at least I try not to be one). I just don't know why BIS made those side-missions (remember? When you destroy the convoy you won't have problems in the next missions etc.) instead of making more dynamic and unpredictable AI. It would just work.

Would be really cool if BIS relased such guide. Many people wouldn't complain about certain features because it would be much easier to change things. It would help both, ordinary ppl like me, and addon makers (especially new to ofp/arma).

I tell you a secret, I know that. And that's why this topic has started my friend. If the majority consists of 'whisfulthinkers' and narcissists, then maybe it's you who doesn't fit, and they're not so self -entitled at all, or something really changed in this community, and I no longer should use the term "majority". No wai! Look at the part of my post where I mention fan-made things that make it something better than "what it is".

I thought my (old) mouse was causing it...anyway, I have the same problem edit: It's the same mouse that worked perfectly in ofp

I'm soooo skeptical about it I really, really hope the campaigns will be better... but when I see "massive battles" - kind of adverts, I imagine the guy beside it, sitting there with his little embarassing complex, adding more and more MBTs on every square kilometre of the map, "more! more! moOOre!". It's just like they don't realise, that one is just enough to kill you, and enough to force you to be affraid...It's just a matter of mission design, that's all...

I don't want to reduce nobody's gfx settings. lol. I've just said I have crappy rig, just like some other players, that's all, so I do what I can to keep decent fps count (and that includes reducing my gfx settings), but that wasn't the point of my post. Neither I want you to pity me, nor should you. I just stated that I would prefer to have some other aspects of the game upgraded, as significantly as the gfx, EVEN if it would cost the gfx upgrade itself. Btw, that's what I meant in the last sentence of my previous post.

I consider buying a new rig just for ArmA, after your (or similar) mod is relased. Just in case you didn't know...