ACF

The swim feature seems to have become a bug - if they can swim, they will. There are few occasions when you need units to swim. Would a better solution just be to make all land classes avoid [deep] water by default, much like OFP IIRC? How about a 'CanSwim' parameter, configurable but defaulting to 0 (even for amphibious vehicles?) and 1 for aircrew and players? If a mission needs swimming, it can be controlled; if it doesn't, the designer is not forced to try to micromanage AI.

All effects were and are mono, aren't they? The engine processes the sound into stereo based on where your virtual ears are.

Is this of any relevance?

The earlier CoDs were more realistic in that you generally played a 'conventional' soldier. In contrast, MoH missions tended to be 'secret agent' storylines.

I never found a girl called 'Sherman' - easily penetrated and inclined to brew up afterwards. Instead, the missus has the initials AA so I get a lot of flak (probably deserved, I should add).

Did you actually look for a girl named after a light machine gun, or were you just lucky? Either way, well done!

So you noticed the ED-209 reference in the copyright statement at the end of the credits to Robocop??

I was going to go with "When somebody is firing at us" As a group commander, I can control the overwatch/fire and movement of the group before contact: I can split them into teams or nominate groups on the fly and move them alternately over sensible bounds. When under effective enemy fire AI should react without input from me and take cover. Units that locate the enemy could/should attempt quick suppression but not hang about in the open. You could say they should start autonomous bounding overwatch to get into cover, but they really should be bounding, not watching. The point is that I shouldn’t have to tell them to stay alive. They should react sensibly, my job is to regain control by getting some or all of them to disengage and move where I want them. A single ‘follow me (quickly and forget everything else)’ command to do this would be a nice extra, in the same vein as a 'take cover (and then return fire if you can)' command. As stated above, the sensible reaction is a factor of distance from the threat - is this or can this be considered?

I really must learn to type faster... It certainly seems a good idea to disassociate stance from behaviour. Will be interesting to see...

If formations are too rigidly enforced the group is going to look too artificial. To counteract the bunching on formation/direction changes, perhaps it would help to: i) delay the response a bit to give a unit more time to 'think' where it needs to be. ii) during this pause, units kneel or lie down, not stand and shuffle. This is especially relevant to those on the inside flank of the turn. From the simulation point of view, confusion and loss of formation is a realistic consequence of formation/direction changes: random wandering gets punished, planning and forethought get rewarded. Regarding the_shadow's comment on units breaking formation: I do wonder if the 'engage at will' logic is a bit too aggressive compared to 'engage'. Am I reading this right: The 'suicidal leader' fix is to make the rest of the group more suicidal? Not quite what I had in mind (Bug 2171 > 2551) but it is an improvement.

Remember that a DR city is three shacks and a shed...

Is it actually a layer, or is it the ground level reference on the prone model being dynamically adjusted? The latter approach might explain why there's no big performance hit. If that is the case, can't the adjustment be applied to standing and crouched AI and vehicles for consistency?

It's curious that the ArmA2 map has its origin at top left when real-world maps have the origin bottom left. I can't honestly remember which way the letters/numbers ran in OFP & ArmA1. I wonder if VBS conforms to the real world? Anyway, here's a simple mnemonic for ArmA2 grid references: ABCD - Across Before Coming Down

Brigadier James Hill summing up after briefing the officers of 3 Parachute Brigadede, 6 Airborne Division on 4 June 1944: "Gentlemen, in spite of your excellent orders and training, do not be daunted if chaos reigns; it undoubtedly will." Short and to the point.

I would recommend trying to get a copy of The Bear Went Over The Mountain by Lester W Grau, it's basically a compilation of Soviet after-action reports from their time. Edit: Soviet military doctrine Just seen the NTC (National Training Centre) photos thread. Dragons at War by Daniel Bolger is an company commander's account of a US infantry-heavy task force's fortnight at the NTC circa 1982. It outlines the theory of Soviet tactics and, better still, the effects of those tactics from the target's point of view. I'd recommend it even more highly than the one above. I'm sure I've seen it at bargain prices on Amazon's Marketplace. A follow-up: The Battle for Hunger Hill follows his battalion's two rotations at the Joint Readiness Training Centre. The focus of the JRTC was/is counter-insurgency in a well-forested environment. It doesn't have the neat attack-defend-withdraw-whatever structure of Dragons at War but it ties in with ArmA2.

To save all that tiresome reading: <object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UpdeNcH1H8A&hl=en&fs=1&rel=0"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UpdeNcH1H8A&hl=en&fs=1&rel=0" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object> And not unrelated, the original Band of Brothers: <object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ptqev-KEmhU&hl=en&fs=1&rel=0"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ptqev-KEmhU&hl=en&fs=1&rel=0" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

Brings back memories... The following issue has been CLOSED ====================================================================== http://bugs.armed-assault.net/view.php?id=2272 ====================================================================== Reported By: ACF Assigned To: ====================================================================== Project: Armed Assault Issue ID: 2272 Category: Units/Vehicles Reproducibility: always Severity: minor Priority: normal Status: closed Metabug?: no Resolution: open Fixed in Version: ====================================================================== Date Submitted: 03-19-2007 00:14 CET Last Modified: 03-19-2007 10:41 CET ====================================================================== Summary: Infantry turning anims not used in ironsight/optics mode Description: In 3rd person view, infantry turn using appropriate animations in standing, kneeling & prone positions. When this is done with the crosshair on, the point of aim can be seen to move relative to the point of view. In 1st person - whether head-up, ironsights or optics - the point of aim is practically locked to the point of view. Can the turning anims be implemented in 1st person so the unit has to 'shuffle' round (maybe as an uber-realism difficulty option)? ====================================================================== ---------------------------------------------------------------------- ACF - 03-19-07 09:35 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Re-post of 002248 which has 'disappeared'! ---------------------------------------------------------------------- boecko - 03-19-07 10:41 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- open your eyes and search ... nothing dissapeared http://bugs.armed-assault.net/my_view_page.php it's in the Features project ... Issue History Date Modified Username Field Change ====================================================================== 03-19-07 00:14 ACF New Issue 03-19-07 09:35 ACF Note Added: 0001617 03-19-07 10:41 boecko Status new => closed 03-19-07 10:41 boecko Note Added: 0001619 ====================================================================== The most important point, IMHO, is that if AI are forced to turn realistically, it breaks their aim. Nothing worse than running round a corner behind a prone AI only to have him spin round and get you. Building on Murphe's line of thought, surely the spin rate should be the same as the shuffle round rate? Collision detection is also important, AI laying hard up agains the wall shouldn't be able to trun anywhere.

It is possible to SetPos infantry units below ground to simulate slit trenches: this setpos [getpos this select 0, getpos this select 1,-1.3]; this setunitpos "up" in the init field. It's a bit of a bodge, though, as they can't be grouped - movement or engage orders cause them to pop out. My limited understanding is that an anim has some sort of ground reference point. Is it possible to have a slit trench 'vehicle' that troops can 'get in' and 'get out' of? As an empty vehicle, it would get ignored; if 'crewed' it would be engaged. It's vehicleness would mean units could be ordered in and out. Can a unit be used as a turret? Then again, aren't the anims now a new separate torso/leg system? Might it be possible to dig a unit in by effectively switching his legs off? The model wouldn't need to be much more than a dark rectangle with a parapet. I'm afraid it would need someone cleverer than me to make this happen, but it would be nice to have an addon that brings something groundbreaking, as it were, to the game.

[stereotypeMode] And they call us Poms 'whingers' :rolleyes: [/stereotypeMode]

Perhaps because some might not appreciate the response? However much we would have liked ArmA2 to be perfect out of the box, the history of the game suggests otherwise, the German release suggested otherwise and so on - what made you buy it? It's the law of diminishing returns. It's a simulator, it seeks to emulate reality. That goal is a fixed point. As each iteration of the simulator gets closer to reality, the scope for big, showy improvements reduces. We're going to have to look really hard to see changes in ArmA3...

Here's an observation about tanks: Bug 1744 I tend to agree with: ... and believe that a better simulation of AFV 'behaviour' is needed ahead of a better damage model.On the plus side, I'm glad to see that HEAT and sabot effects now match the HEAT and sabot ammo!

Please - can you? Please? It would be interesting to know if they are the traditional above-ground structures or some sort of very, very flat vehicle with 'crew' anims that are partially-buried?

It is not against the Geneva Convention to shoot paratroopers out of their chutes because they are coming to attack you. You are not supposed to shoot aircrew bailing out of shot down aircraft, even if they have just attacked you.

Firstly, apologies if this looks familiar, I have banged this drum before for ARMA: Implementing the suggestions below might do enough to improve 'patrol' behaviour without having an extra Behaviour - see bold bits and notes at the end... Infantry 'Behaviours' (CARELESS, SAFE, AWARE, COMBAT, STEALTH) have been tweaked since the earlier versions of ARMA but ARMA2 should have as good a variety as OFP at least. These observations are based on ARMA 1.14. CARELESS and SAFE: Issue: Units walk at the same speed in all SpeedModes. (In OFP, NORMAL & FULL Speedmodes were the same jog but LIMITED was a walk.) Suggestions: i) Distinct SpeedModes in CARELESS and SAFE, i.e. LIMITED = amble, NORMAL = brisk walk, FULL = jog. ii) SAFE should use 'weapons in hand' anims making it suitable for patrols and sentries. iii) CARELESS ought to use 'weapons slung' and 'social' anims. Reaction (or lack of it) can be controlled through CombatMode and UnitPos rather than hardcoded. iv) Remove default file/column formation in CARELESS and SAFE and allow formation to be editor-defined. AWARE: NORMAL is a jog and FULL is a run but it's not a great difference in actual speed, though this is an improvement from earlier ARMA versions. Issue: In SpeedMode LIMITED, units move too slowly and too deliberately - weapons are 'up' most of the time making the Behaviour too similar to COMBAT. Â Suggestions: i) AWARE LIMITED should be a walk with weapons 'down' most of the time. ii) AWARE NORMAL should be a touch slower than it is (AWARE FULL is OK). iii) In all SpeedModes, units should mostly kneel when stationary and at WPs. COMBAT: Issues: i) No real difference between SpeedModes. ii) Leader moves too far ahead and remains standing at WPs. Suggestions: i) Same tactics with distinct SpeedModes: LIMITED at walk, NORMAL at jog, FULL at run. ii) Keep leader back Keep leader back, move junior subsquad first. iii) Leader to kneel/go prone when stationary at WPs. iv) Units ought to use available cover at WPs as in STEALTH. STEALTH: Units now seem to move as one - I think earlier versions had the squad moving as two subsquads as in COMBAT, but I might be wrong. Action at WPs seems OK - units move to available cover and get down. Issues: i) NORMAL and FULL are similar fast jogs, LIMITED is a permanent crawl. ii) Leader tends to get too far ahead. Suggestions: i) Reduce the speed of STEALTH NORMAL. ii) Some crawling in STEALTH FULL and more in STEALTH NORMAL iii) Keep leader back. Regarding 'patrol' Behaviour, SAFE NORMAL as described above will be adequate for 'out of contact' patrols and sentries. The addition of kneeling/prone at halts in AWARE gives us what is needed for in-contact/tactical patrols. I believe this is more useful than the AWARE Behaviour in ARMA 1.14 where units stand at halts.

The new FOV seems OK but the 'naked eye' zoom seems to be overdone. Naked eye zoom is only slightly less powerful than zooming in ACOG (4x?) but it's the zooming-in transition that is really noticeable. Up to 1.12, the short zoom was subtle enough to feel like concentration, now it feels like a camera effect.