Iroquois Pliskin

There's a reason why a thermonuclear war between the two Superpower had never occurred - physics are not limited to one side of the globe, you will always have a counter to the enemy's arsenal within half a generation margin. Take the Su-34 and tell me why it should be going against the single seat F35/AV8B, why not the Su-27? Tank selection: Why T-72, and not T-80 as an intermediary? With Iran, I can't speculate what assets BIS choose to employ, but there's a reason the Merkava tank is in the game.

Yeah, don't forg3t tidal wave simulation and procedural generation of terrain - we can finally play Capture The Island on the Moon!

It would appear that your monitor doesn't support whatever default screen resolution is being used in-game. You'll need to modify it in the config, http://community.bistudio.com/wiki/arma2.cfg

Dude! Full gearbox simulation, your battery even dies if you leave the lights on.

Are you fvcking kidding me? :icon_mrgreen: FPDR Patient on the loose, Mods, nurses, medical personnel, halp!!

I regard your post a troll = we're even! You can't possibly expect BIS to include every single daydreamers' wish into the game. Underwater terrain & combat Ragdoll physics for infantry Wheel (& tracked) vehicle physics and weight simulation Reworked animations New dynamic stance system (CTRL key) Two new massive and massively-detailed islands Innumerable new units, weapons and equipment, All of the above is on top of ArmA II Not enough?

Don't start this, I gave plenty of examples in this thread. If you want hypothetical lists of assets, head to Wiki and compose them yourself. It is the concept that matters, not the details.

I'm 12 and wat is this.

Well, by improving the controls, you'd be making the game accessible to a wider audience by default, because clunkyness is unneeded on top of genuine simulation complexity, which already taxes the brain of the average Joe. I'm glad at least people agree on that part. ---------- Post added at 11:12 ---------- Previous post was at 11:06 ---------- TvT of 40+ players is the standard model for quick PVP in ArmA, which can and does have vehicles. CTI (Warfare) is a variation on that - the most popular in fact. http://community.bistudio.com/wiki/Basic_Guide_to_Berzerk! TvT Capture & Hold example: fast-paced, VERY competitive, victory often was subject to the last seconds of the match. fnX8gweY8VM Berzerk deteriorated, when the original modder had abandoned its support, EkqGpCZnBvE ArmA is tailored to large terrains. What we mean by CQB is not point blank combat, but engagements starting out from 500 m (scenario/objective dependent) all the way into the urban areas, but when people enter those close spaces, they are fvcked by unintuitive, unresponsive controls.

Wat. FPDR FPDR FPDR

Where's the logic in that? What if both teams have "good players"? Obviously, assets decide the game then.

Then... Dedicated weapon keys - yes! Dedicated weapon keys to facilitate more fluid gameplay in both CQB and other circumstances. The awkward weapon/equipment controls are a heavy barrier to entry in PVP, and the scroll list(s) can't be mastered, unlike an intuitive KB layout.

That's the remake on Gamescube (?), which had a very different sountrack and voice overs. Original MGS 1 <3 forever,

You know, they could replace the triangle Comanche radar icon to a square one - the enemy would be expecting a ground vehicle and then... ASSUPRISE!

Some new thoughts on the Comanche: the screenshots show internal bay armaments, which carry 12 FFAR rockets, 2 missiles (hellfires?) on each side - a total of 24 FFAR, 4 missiles. The ATGM can be swapped* to AA missiles 1 to 1 as they currently are, and one rocket pod for 2 additional missiles, so 12 FFAR, 4 ATGM, 2 AA is a viable configuration. That's still way, way below the AH-1Z capabilities, which is great! http://deltagamer.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/scr04.jpg I hope they keep the same trend for other air vehicles, like the F-35 and Iranian equivalents. *Mission specific, already in-game.

This topic is kinda outdated, here's a recent discussion: http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?136343-Multiplayer-Balancing-Will-Arma3-s-MP-be-balanced/page45 If all of the systems stay the same, including TAB+Click, then opfor/blufor assets need balancing.

Leave the man be - the first 30 seconds trailer teaser of standalone DayZ with fluid animations, proper weapon controls and the same island of Chernarus would overshadow any gimmicks the other brand might provide. :) I'm primarily interested in this, since the greater exposure made the Devs see, that we need intuitive weapon controls in ArmA III. :icon_twisted:

Hey, let the best man win. I'm quite confident they will not be able to compete in the map size department and everything will be derivative from that: not enough land to explore -> c00l bunnyhop action per square metre, pl0x -> deathmatch extraordinaire.

Character controls is an unnecessary barrier to entry to ArmA. The problem of AI command interface taking up the second most important group of keys - the number row keys, is exacerbated in DayZ. 7IFIPiiCfxU

We had tanks flying in vanilla ArmA II release on Chernarus. Although, it wasn't as pronounced as on Takistan due to rocks being the culprits, which are in abundance there.

What engine is it running? mLU6BvTeF9E At least the weapon controls are intuitive and ragdolls are present. (And yes, that's you, ArmA III, that I'm looking at) If this "War Z" is going to be on the derpboxes, say good bye to high resolution textures and welcome to motion blur, DOF, lens flare overlays.

I can certainly attest to that: even the slightest rock can unflip a tank, though it doesn't send it flying like in ArmA 1. Guess, we'll have to wait for ArmA III with PhysX to correct vehicle weight values.

v7Q_1Pd9ME4 Engine block shot at 9:50, this is from last year's Gamescom. Great progress in retrospect: the above demo looks like ArmA II on an island like Lingor - not much of an improvement back then, compared to this year's E3 & GC. They seem to be upgrading the damage model from game to game: does anyone remember what happened when you shot the wheels in Armed Assault 1? LOOOL. Adding separate ammo and crew compartments would be a major upgrade. I'd like to see scenarios, where the crew dies without the tank being completely destroyed, or a tank becoming totally disabled without it going up in flames, unless the ammo compartment is hit.

BattleEye can deals out global bans, which is very important in the long term.

BIS have been awfully quiet on a lot of stuff lately - are they already internally testing major gameplay components, before they plan to release the open Alpha? I'd like to think that the community Alpha would include fully working PhysX, completed interface & controls and decent MP netcode. http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?131519-Arma-3-Community-Alpha-Announcement! Open testing usually has all its core features in place and only minor improvements can be made at that point. Gief dedicated keys, pls.