NoRailgunner

This mine detection process is too fast and too precise. Just have a look at current real mine/IED detection and removal procedures. Maybe have some different detectable mines and some "jamming" things to add manually around. Such things could disturb detection but aren't that noticeable in the first place. Btw the change between different scopes/sights etc seem to be too fast and instant - what about proper attaching/detaching animations + reasonable time to adjust/check these things?

BIS GC staff have to follow strict rules in Cologne = get drunk with Koelsch & sing the famous "Viva Colonia..." in front of the Cathedral - otherwise they are not allowed to pass the German border! Rules are rules....

Hmmm.... HUD system with a nice clip-feature, unlimited battery support and unbreakable? MLRS launch - without lots of smoke and dirt? Rangemaster/Instructor units - so yeaah... well ok. PDWs - hope the awesome OFP (AI) pistol configbug won't find a way into A3 !! How fast is the modelswitch for A3 vehicles if they get damaged or destroyed? What happen if vehicles drive into water? ...yes teasers/trailers/previews have to look nice! Btw weren't there some rumours about "Baywatch Limnos" vs "Baywatch Stratis" women's beach volleyball finals??? :cool:

Cross fingers that BIS don't make the mistake of implementing animations/movements that are too fast and unbelievable. Please no weapon clipping through walls, disappearing building corners, sudden death via misplaced objects (invisible death-trap/gap) and similar things. Quick-"Drop" for weapon/stuff in players/AI hand would be nice - OFP/CWA has this feature....

Thank you RHS for beeing still around.... remember playing with RHS stuff in OFP = good times!! :)

BIS would need to find, record and pay native speakers so ingame characters do sound good + believable - without faked/overdone accents. :)

Lets wait and watch the next A3 ingame presentations and maybe later this year we can all have a closer look at A3 - Alpha release. Seems that Xaitment products (eg AI unity control) aren't very useable and affordable for A3....

What about possible trick shooting / aiming via vehicle mirror? ;)

AI can still detect from the outside who (faction/side) is sitting - for AI not visible - inside vehicles - just use a MBT, IFV, APC and drive around. Imo better "AI attacks own side/faction vehicles" solution would be: if AI has LOS on hostile/opponent crew/passengers (visual ID) or if the vehicle starts firing and/or driving over own units (action ID) or implement a noticeable radio call/feedback for crew/passengers identification and verification (communication ID)

@Iroquois Pliskin - imo for an authentic / "realistic" modern Air-to-Air and Air-to-Ground combat in A2OA with planes one would need much bigger islands/maps aswell as proper working radar/EW features. Guess BIS made the general decision of having less SACLOS guided missiles/weapons in A2OA because some people would complain even more about imbalance or unfair stuff. Just search for Metis-M (AT-13) and compare it to the Javelin system in real and in A2OA. If people want to experience + play with somewhat more authentic stuff in a game they have to deal with certain different and "unbalanced" systems for each side/faction. The mission makers and players have only to become familiar with A3 and get to know about the advantages/disadvantages of weapons/vehicles/aircrafts/ships.... = main + challenging task for BIS tutorial/training mission maker(s)! :cool:

No sorry, my idea was more about a internal config-switch at start so no one can be mad about his own basic A3 selection or blame the game for having superior and inferior assets if he don't want it. Simple + userfriendly feature just clicky-dicky! :)

Thats why i suggested to make an option during the start of A3 - so everyone (incl. casual, simfan, simple or advanced player....) can choose with which type or sort of game assets - for example "balanced"/"default"/"sim" - he want to play. No need to make ingame assets that are only from the look/style different but in their core just "balanced"/"equal"/"equivalent units and vehicles on both sides".... Btw still missing good examples of possible authentic balanced + unbalanced A3 assets = no cookies for you! (Anyway good to see at least that people agree that its not the game who puts (all) the game assets in the mission/map....) :D

Same can be said about authentic/realistic/imba assets - mission makers can use them but don't have to use them.... Guess its not so comfortable to have a choice but be fully limited to (arcade/gamey) balanced assets? Simple games for simple players.... :)

Can't wait to hear all those "balance all!11!!!!" tacticool fanatics if the RAH-66 Comanche or the (possible) BMPT are doing their badass attacks ..... but maybe BIS will have mercy with those special casual tacticool fastmovers and add only some authentic and totally evil + imbalanced assets to A3! Btw is it the game who does make the missions and place/add all balanced + imba stuff into the mission? Is it the game who choose the time, terrain/area, gear/equipment and support for each side/faction in the mission? Is it the game who selects the conditions to promote/degrade, add/decrease points or spawn places in missions? ;)

Hope that RHS motostreloks and desantniks will kick some asses in and around Chernarus soon!! :D

Sorry, I just thought that those those "dumb kindergarten comparison vs possible authentic ingame assets" don't lead to a solution that makes most players happy. Really sorry to have made a post with an idea/suggestion that could ease or cool down the "casual dude's vs sim fans" fight.

Well some things simply don't have and don't need a equal/balanced counterpart in realworld and in a game! If A3 is about authentic combat/war all factions and sides could have their own strategy/doctrine = their very own stuff + some unique/typical assets. Seems that the problem is that some people don't like or can't get their head around to tryout something new/different. Imo a good thing would be if BIS implements different selectable modes that do switch the gameplay at A3 start eg "balanced" - "default" - "simulation". Or is this idea too pragmatic and useful? Of course this would be a little bit more pain for BIS devs (and later for community projects). The gain is that people can select from the start of A3 how they want to play and don't have to like or be forced to like certain things. Hmm.... any other ideas/suggestions to solve the issue between different tastes/likes/styles ?? :)

Those people with a second monitor do have simply the advantage that their first monitor isn't for example filled with the map = they overall do have a much better situational awareness and response time! Imo it would be tenfold better to have proper (action) animations + views for such objects ingame incl. something like a "quick throw/toss" feature. ;)

If one can look at the open map/camera/mirror/MFD view on his 2nd monitor anytime, in any situation and perhaps at most comfy zoom level - sure that is realistic, authentic and "appropriate analog".... :rolleyes:

n7snk yes, it is very easy + comfortable to press only a few keys/buttons and of course using extra hardware has certain advantages. Question here is more about which things are reasonable + nice to have on a second monitor and which things are just unrealistic from in-game characters POV. :)

Issue is that your ingame character must do something ingame which one with a second monitor possibly doesn't have to do it (or worst case, just once - at mission start). Its more like outsourcing ingame features and functionality only to be fully available - anytime + anywhere.

Make profit as fast as you can before others will start/continue to fight for Z-Ca$h!!! Stay creative and don't get too deep into routine.... :)

Imo there are some other important things to think of: How big are the real displays of those handheld/portable devices? How fast soldiers can use such a device and should it be available ingame in any situation? Can such portable devices be jammed and/or detected+tracked - as ingame available too? What about wear and tear aswell as damage/malfunction possibilities - as ingame feature too? Should the player have a similar screen size ratio of the real device/MFD or should he have the advantage of the bigger screen (incl. zoom) ratio on his 2nd/3rd/... monitor?? What effect should it have on a player ingame like additional lighting/blinding/disturbing/irritation etc?

Issue is that there is still nothing ingame between closed map and full map view and something that one can throw/quit/abort quickly if needed. Btw Land Warriors still need to open + focus on small displays > 0:13 and typing/reading/zooming is still an action + distraction.

There is nothing against it as long as the animations and view of your own ingame character is done/transmitted in a reasonable + authentic way. If the player walks/sits around on high alert (or even in combat) its not so usual that he has a map always + ready + open at his hand. Same could be said about the inventory of his backpack/vehicle cargo - its only possible to remember the things that are in. In short: if there is a action/move needed to open/close or activate/deactivate something ingame this action/move should be required for everyone. :)