wamingo

it wouldn't hurt if the server filter for Expansions just filtered the ones with unofficial addons... Right now it's useless. Of course, it would be even better, if it could filter just the servers with incompatible addons. aaand I kind of wish they hadn't called it "expansions", it seems misleading to me.

Enjoy. I might be wimpy but I find this sort of thing kind of nauseating. And frankly happy if BIS keeps it the way it is.

"Not only should impacting shots cause suppression but also shots snapping by." Totally agree. If far enough way the AI can't hear the shot, RPG's, tank shells, you name it, can whiz right over their heads without reaction.

Despite having suggested the layout of one such rose menu myself, a while back, I don't think anyone would like it much in the long run. There are simply too many, too frequently used options to not be a real bother, compared to the numerical system -- considering a rose system typically steals your mouse - ie make you unable to turn and shoot. The numerical system is very forgiving also. So perhaps, instead of suggesting complete replacements, improving on the existing system might be preferable. For instance, there must be a way to improve on getting units into vehicles, especially with more than 1 vehicle and vehicles far away.. Also, all but num keys 5 and 0 are dedicated entirely to squad leader. That seems wasteful somehow. Maybe incorporating 5 and 0 under Space would seem fitting? And the way the Space-menu is different from squad leaders vs members is probably confusing? Maybe use greying more instead of popping commands. And the action menu... ok got bored and drew a concept; - make a proper equipment selection menu, and remove weapon/equipment selection from the action menu, including ammo selection, satchels etc. - make proper UI for satchels / detonator Also, is there anyone who thinks the dedicated 'Last Hint' keyboard shortcut, usually occupying the 'H' key, is terribly useful anymore? It seems a relic from a time without easy-to-follow tutorials.

The best firefights are usually those which last the longest, I've always found - I endorse this thread. :) However I have to say one of the biggest problems in arma is the over-use of scopes. There's virtually no downside to carrying a scope. They're basicly super easymode and they ruin the standard AI and effectively shorten any firefight by leaps. Best gun != most fun. Too much open spaces too. Lack of natural terrain cover. And I believe the terrain grid size is adequate for higher bumpiness. Maybe not enough for smooth road ditches and such, but good enough for less flatness. Too often is a soldier just a black spot running across a big, flat, empty hillside or farm field. To get an interesting firefight out of that, requires handing in your rifle, for bow and arrow... Hearing/vision impairing effects, also a good idea, in my opinion.

I thought steam had implemented differential updates, or is it still in testing phase or so? quote from valve: "The new system supports delivering only the differences between the old and new files, meaning game updates will be much smaller overall."

Carl, I also liked those games, and their manuals, and I can't quite shake my fondness for games in carton boxes either, but it's time to leave the 80's behind. We've since discovered that the value of products is pretty much directly proportional to their convenience. Windows made computers convenient. Google made the internet convenient. Facebook made socializing convenient. Steam made game distribution convenient. and... Arma editor made mission design convenient. Great products are easy to use and as much as possible self-explanatory. Arma will always need the wiki, tutorials, forum and so on, but a manual of any significance won't encourage anybody to make missions, nor improve quality of those who do. Not in any significant way. Making the editor more convenient however, will. Manuals will much sooner scare people away. Say goodbye to the information age, and welcome to the age of .. ideas, maybe.

Few reads the manual. Fewer wants to. A great product is a self-explanatory one. Not one that comes with a ringbind. If you want people to make quality content, you must give them tools that lets them -- with ease. Elementary things that are currently not simple to do (like task objectives, changing loadouts, and such) should be made childsplay. Apple-fication might scare some users, but BIS doesn't seem the type to remove features or dumb down things at the cost of functionality. So I think the quality of missions would only be raised, and everyone wins.

The answers to "will xyz be in the game" are a bit predictable. In future interviews I would suggest you ask somewhat more open questions. Like.. Can you ellaborate on the new animation system? How will it be different. Will there be improvements or changes to [sound,,controls,mission editing,modding,tech,environment...] department, and if so what? Did you decide whether steam was the future or not? Why should I buy arma 3? Just my opinion of course.

At least he's thinking outside the box unlike most of you relics. ;) ArmA weapon handling already has one minigame - breath control, or temporary focus, or whatever you want to call it. It's a simple feature and could perhaps be beneficially made more intricate. Americas Army the game had a pretty good breath control system for instance. Anyway, that's one alternative to making shooting more interesting.

win-key = Fluid Posture win-key + mousewheel = Fluid Speed ? But I digress, I don't think either of them are likely.. or necessarily all that great. It's easy to overestimate ideas like these. They may only work well absent regular controls, and perhaps not in concert.

_markerpad will return null inside this code: _triggeram1 setTriggerStatements ["this", "Hint 'Finished'; deleteMarker _markerpad;",""]; ergo, out of scope.

My guess is you're trying to use _markerpad outside its scope. Underscore makes vars local to their scope. Remove the underscore if you want multiple triggers/scripts to access them.

Is there some particular reason why OrderGetIn doesn't work when player is leader, or could this be considered a bug/oversight to put on the CIT ?

I meant cursor yes. Precisely as big dawg explains.