Paco454

ya it's a bug. It's banking instead of spinning the tail around. I do think it's been added to the bug list. PACO454

Yes it is. It's great since they fixed it in the new patch except for rudder control which "banks" instead whipping the tail around. Nevertheless, driving with the joystick is no fun and even worse with the mouse and even worse with the keyboard. Mentioned earlier in this thread was track-ir which I own one and must say, it works great in combination with heli's. Still waiting on word if BIS will add multi joystick support to ArmA. I have emailed them and of course this thread. At the moment the subject is moot, like pulling teeth and consquently I'm very dissappointed that BIS has refused to give the community an answer on the subject. Since I'm a paying customer, I find this lak of attention to the issue "unacceptable". PACO454

As I mentioned in my second post I stand corrected on this point. Thankyou to all who have responded. PACO454

Shin's post makes me feel like I should have gone to Yale harvard or maybe gravel Alberta. A dynamic use of words to spell out the "whatever". It doesn't make any difference. The in's and outs and critical, "moreovers" and insider "what is" and "what if's" and "what are's", it's not my intention nor is it my obligation to know this. As a person who has paid for this game, I expect better, I expect the game to be worthy of the hype that was handed to me. In no way was the game ready, in my view, for public release whether it was version game 2 or 3 or whatever high powered words you attach to it. As I mention to JW, I said the WIKI was for use, the opinions of which are to be that of whomever see's fit to see as is, for me I concider it a "out of house method of reaching their goals at the expense of the gamer who buys it". You make some valid points shin so I won't take that away from you but supporting sniper who has not contributed to this subject with anything meaningful and so to support him really sends a message who you really are are. Not to call your remarks long winded, but to call attention to your personal attack of my post through a long, winding, drag thur the bush, flip and rearrange of my post to make it appear your higher education is worthy of a higher hall montior staus and bias then anybody else's, only leaves a bad taste of, heavily peppered moldy cabbage it one's mouth. My post is to the point, I was lead to believe the game was suitable for release and it's nothing more than a bug ridden piece of "Good art work", suitable for complaints, subject to questions about the movtivations of it's release. Thats the bottom line, your education and high powered words will never change that. Dear BIS, it's clear I've opened a bigass can of worms here and I'm thankful my post has not been locked and this issue is being looked at, but I would like to say one thing, have faith in the community, were than more willing to help test but keeping information from us only results in questions and about motivations and then were subjected to long winded posts by highly educated college professors and minor flees when we complain, when all we want is straight forward answers. My question about multi joystick support is being avoided as prime example. Let me make myself clear, I LOVE THIS GAME, I bought it and I support you. I wouldn't waste my time complining about if I didn't like it. I'd fight tooth and nail to make it better. I think what I'm trying to say is, BIS should've come to us, the community to help them instead pulling the wool over peoples eye's. I feel cheated. I certainly don't need a college professor and wandering flees, to tell me that. Thankyou all again for responses, PACO454

Don't you have something important to add to this thread? -------------------- Yes, I am with DMX here, since many, as he said, belives that ArmA was started when OFP was finished. But, if I can ask some questions back: 1. You are complaining about the flightmodel: Since when is Armed Assault a flightsim? 2. Ok, maybe ArmA does have bugs, and maybe alot of them: Mention a bugfree game that is superperfect in all aspects? 3. Come on, they're running a company, not a sandbox. All companies makes their product look extra good by not showing the downsides: Think of it, if you buy something, either, it doesn't have functions that the same product by another brand has, not the same weight, controls etc, but you buy it anyways, and keep quiet about it. Why not the same for Armed Assault, because I'm sure they'll fix it in further patches? 4. You think something is wrong by setting up a Wiki for reporting bugs: Sure, maybe it's better to have 6 trillion threads saying "OMG, I've found a bug!!"? 5. If you don't like it: Don't play it, do it better yourself, or basicly stop whining. No offence, but that's just my point of view. If you do not wish to answer my question, it's OK In response JW #1) OFP had flight model and so does ArmA. My point was how could they release it knowing just how bad the control was. I never said it was flightsim. I can't even get BIS to respond to the multi joystick issue with a simple yes or no. #2) The level of bugs is exceeding to the point I question why they would release it knowing what we know already. I agree no game is bug free so where do you draw the line, at what point do question the level and number of bugs and treat it as unacceptable? I can accept a game with bugs in fact all my games have bugs but not to this exceedingly high level. That is why I question BIS's motivation. That is just my opinion. #3) You make a valid point. "All companies makes their product look extra good." At what point do you say their misleading you? I have no question they'll fix the problems with it, I'm simply pointing out they knew in advance just how bad it was and should have either waited to work out the bugs or simply asked for help from the community, to which thousands of OFP players would have beat a path to their door to offer help and assistance. I would have been the first to offer help testing. #4) I think the WIKI would have been there away so you do make a valid point. Nevertheless BIS is using it as their platform to work out the bugs. On the other hand the level of bugs is exceedingly high to an unacceptable level and the WIKI is being used. I suppose it just a matter of opinion as to what the WIKI is being used for. To work out bugs, or a place place for BIS to work out bugs it should've worked out before, using it's paying customers as beta testers because of the lak of in house testing. #5) I never said I didn't like it. I just don't like the BS that came with it. I'm a mission maker for OFP and now ArmA. Id' like thank everybody for their opinion but telling not to complain or whine or find a tree to hung or find some river to (Wink Wink) in won't help things. It seems evey year there all less and less PC games, I mean good PC games, sim types that are not too buggy to use on the PC. I remember years ago, PC games being released at a stagger rate of 5 per day, now were lucky to have 4 to 5 good PC games a year. Granted there are plenty of games out there but most are spells and magic/pay to play or are console ported junk. A game like ArmA breaths freshness into a dull PC market. I've played so much BF2, I'm totally bored with it now, no matter how modded it is. My point is, with such a dull PC game market, to have ArmA be so bug ridden takes all the fun out of an already dull situation. Thankyou for the responses. PACO454

I may not be the brightest guy around but I have to admit, I think I been taken for a ride by BIS. Let me break this down into several categories, first the amount of time to given to the hype before it’s release, second the videos that were released and finally the interviews. Time: The hype before this game was released went back years in advance. BIS spent years, it appears, making the game. Plenty of time to do it’s work. One would think after years of development the game would be polished, tested and optimized. Pre- release videos and interviews: Apart for the few chopper videos the game looked polished. Even the intro videos showed vehicles turning on roads, no indication of any real problems, in fact it looked very good. Interviews made it also appear to be polished. Now here’s the truth as I see it. The chez and German version are released and now the cats out of the bag. It’s clear to me that something is very wrong. It looks as if BIS intentionally mislead people about the state of the game. I draw attention first to the intro videos see when launching the game. There is no way those vehicles made the turns around the bends as they do in the video with AI behind the wheel. I’m sure the intro video was recorded using real people driving during a multi player session. The AI in game when following way points stop at every way point then continue on their way, so the AI were not driving in those videos. Next the flight models. How could BIS see fit to release the game when chopper controls were so bad, not to mention the fixed wing aircraft which were almost impossible to fly. (Seemly fixed in v1.02 yet still some issues with controls) This brings into focus now a very long list of bugs the game had when it was released. The BIS bug reporting WIKI and the BIS forum is chalk full of complaints and people reporting all kinds of bugs. Collision problems, AI walking through walls, other AI issues, sound problems, video problems, controller problems just to name a few are among a very, very long list of hundreds of bugs. I’m having trouble understanding that BIS wasn’t aware of all these problems given the years of development, moreover, the fact really none of these issues were seen in any of the videos, although some issues were seen and it was assumed those would be corrected which evidently were not fixed at it’s release. Collision issues are so bad some AI tanks, when bumping into each other, can send tanks flying 200 feet in the air. BIS can’t tell me they didn’t know about these problems. From this information I conclude that BIS intentionally released ArmA in beta form as part of a money grab. Intentionally lead people to believe the game was in good working order through videos and interviews, when in fact it was still in early beta and was absolutely bug ridden and did very little in house testing, then setup a bug reporting WIKI and used the people who bought the chez and German version as unwilling beta testers to work out the bugs. A far as I’m concerned, I do believe the community, if it had been informed there were staffing issues or other problems with the game in which it wasn’t feasible for in house testing that they informed the community they would release the game for sale as a beta and then asked the community to help work out the bugs, I could understand and even support, however this method of misleading everybody is unacceptable, and I think a class action suit should be filed against BIS for intentionally misleading the owners of the German and Chez versions. These owners should be given a full refund and then compensated for being involuntary, unwilling beta testers. There is no excuse after 6 years of development for something like this to happen. They have simply mislead everybody to highest possible degree and then took their money under cloak of deception and then setup a forum and WIKI to use as "their" platform to work out it’s problems at the expense of paying customers. I will certainly think twice before buying another BIS product. Don't get me wrong I like the game, I just don't like the BS. PACO454 Unwilling, Forced Beta Tester.

I'll repeat myself for the billionth time.. ... Undestood, and stand corrected. PACO454

I'll repeat myself for the billionth time.. ... Undestood, and stand corrected. PACO454

Paco454, try to be patience! Don't you think BIS deserves a break over the holiday just like everyone else? Judging from the responce Armored_Sheep gave us a couple of weeks ago I think they are already on it, maybe not in next patch but probably not to far into the future... Remember that more "important" things like dedicated server/CTD/performance/major bugs/etc. probably have priority over this... /KC Amored sheeps response was, shall i say, telling me what I already know, "that the game only supports one stick". I'm not asking for them to act on it right away, only to ask if they will include multi joystick support. Thats all I'm asking. I agree, that more "important" things like dedicated server/CTD/performance/major bugs/etc. should have priority over this, however I don't thinks unfair to ask if they will include multi joystick support in the future. And yes everybody should have break over Xmas and New Years and so I don't expect a response until into the new year. It's an important issue to me and others and thats why I'm fighting hard for it. Back when OFP first came out they removed manual fire in a patch they released, and I fought long and hard to have it back. In the end we got back manual fire but I had to fight hard for it. This is great game, with a great furture and I will fight hard for this feature because it's an option no game should be without given the technology we have today. Thank you for your response KC PACO454

I agree that it's foolish that BIS didn't include multiple stick support. Hell, mechwarrior 2 Dos did this... However, using frankenstick, since you say it works, create a device with multiple axis. Then, assign every axis you want to every control. What I mean is say you assign the stick X axis to X and the wheel axis to z, assign both x and z to the same function. Arma does support that (I think, 99% sure anyways). Yes I tried that. I can assign the axis to whatever I want, but it doesn't function correctly with each stick half working, some buttons work and others do not. As I mentioned it's a total hit and miss deal. I think the problem is it's polling the joysticks as if there serial ports when their USB. I don't think it supports USB very well at all. In any case, I tested with FrankNstik to reach this goal. G25 to steer which requires X axis and Y axis for gas\brake. I require those same axis for flying. When I setup I get only half an axis working and only a few buttons respond and thats just in windows game controller panel and it lags very bad eventhough I set it up to poll at 10ms. In the above mentioned response from BIS, they claim it will use the controller with the most button\axis. Eventhough I set the virtual stick up with more axis and more buttons than the Saitek X52,(X52 which has the most button/axis than my G25) the game still went for the G25 eventhough the virtual (most button/axis) stick was in joystick ID#1, X52 (second most buttons/axis) in ID#2 and the G25(third most button/axis) in ID#3. I used JoyID to set and located the joystick ID's. Changing the joystick ID's had no effect. PPjoy will not allow me to set x axis to 2 sticks at the same time, therefore it's no good to me. We need a tool simular to FrankNstik that has support for USB, then we might be able to use it. However given the way ArmA picks the joystick it wants to use when you have more than one stick installed, will be hit and miss. I ask again for the community to step up and ask the question. "BIS, WILL YOU OR CAN YOU CODE INTO ARMA, MULTI JOYSTICK SUPPORT!! The community has runout of options, and by the way, a game with no options is "GAME WITH NO OPTIONS!!!" P.S. Plaintiff1, your last response, spam aimed at me, doesn't reflect the subject matter of the thread, ie multi joystick support and I ask, if you wish to comment please stick to subject matter of the thread. PACO454

Ok I'd like to thank all those who are contributing to this issue, however I not pleased with BIS for not responding to this important required issue/feature. I have tried the PPjoyJoy and PPjoysetup and the other program FrankNstik and I have not got it to work. With PPjoyJoy you can assign various different axis to various installed sticks but you can't assign X or Y axis to 2 differnet sticks at the same time which is what I need, the G25, for X and Y for steering and the X52 for X and Y for flight control. With FrankNstick you can. However eventhough you can setup the sticks to share the axis's it doesn't function, it's total hit and miss with one button working here and half an axis working there. Not good. AGAIN I ASK BIS TO PLEASE RESPOND ON THE QUESTION: WILL YOU OR CAN YOU CODE INTO ARMA, MULTI JOYSTICK SUPPORT!! The community has runout of options, and by the way, a game with no options is "GAME WITH NO OPTIONS!!!" Please respond and let BIS know if you wish this feature. PACO454

Ok I had a look at thius utility. Granted it will combine sticks however this same problem will be there. X and Y axis, ok so I can assign X and Y axis to the G25 but now I have no X and Y axis for flying. I will test it later to see if I can make 2 profiles at the same time with the same amonut of buttons. Maybe I can fool it. I'll let you know. PACO454

I'm still waiting for a proper response from BIS. Yes or NO? Since I bought the game I expect an answer from BIS.. Please respond. The current response doesn't answer the question only leaves more lingering questions. I ask again to please respond. PACO454

yes and then some... PACO454

Seem to have found a limited response but nothing more, Will ArmA eventually have support for multiple Joysticks? Is it a future concideration, is it the works or is it never going to be supported? I'd really like to know where BIS stands on the subject. A simple "yes" we are going to include it or, "no" were not going to include it, would at the very least let us gamers know where we stand. I don't think it's unreasonable question to ask. The response, "is yet not present in ArmA" is little vague don't you think? I concider the subject important as it would make the game so much better, after all thats the idea right, listen to your gamers, fix all the bugs and make it better product. This is great game and the lak of this feature is hurting it IMO. I really hope this feature can be added. PACO454

The question on everybodys lips is, will it be supported? PACO454

Thanks for the support. I certainly didn't mean any harm. By the way is that Ziggy from Westcoast WCCSQUAD.COM PACO454

Why lock my post? Telling me I've been around long enough to know better? What on earth did I do wrong? Form a post to get attention. Maybe I could have worded the title a little different and if I have insulted Placebo in any way, I apologize immediately. I certainly wasn't calling placebo a joystick, my god, why on earth would I do that. I think I was trying to draw attention to the meaning of "placebo, a fake drug" with the lack of device controls in a indirect way, meant as a play on words. There was no insult intended in any way shape of form whatsoever. Under the circumstances I think I deserve an explanation given the subject matter. The subject matter of my post is in know way offending placebo or anybody else. I ask you reopen the post and will edit it. PACO454

I knew if I put the word "Placebo", placebo will read this post and so I have a question I'd like to ask you placebo if you have time and are willing to answer. I'm sure others reading this will want to know as well. Condition: I have 3 Joysticks connected to my PC 1) Logitech Wingman FF 2) Logitech G25 FF Racing Wheel 3) Saitek X52 The game only supports one joystick in ID# position 1 There seems to be hierarchy as to which one actually uses ID#1 A small program called "JoyIDs" allows me to change the ID#'s however eventhough I can tell it to assign a stick to ID#1 the game will still use that stick who's hierarchy, for what ever reason, is higher than the others. The only way to force a stick to been seen by the game in ID#1 is to remove all sticks accept one joystick which is then defaulted into joystick ID#1. Question: Is it possible to make the game support and allow the use of more than one stick, so that I may use the X52 for flying and the G25 for driving? I have to disable the other two sticks in the device manager. I'm forced to use mouse and keyboard for driving and it's difficult. Can this be looked into to see if this important issue can coded into the game to allow joysticks ID#1 and ID#2 or even ID#3 to be used simultaneously, as with most, if not all major games made today have implemented? This is really good game with great support, worthy of this type of device support. I'm sure others would agree. Can this feature be implemented, given a fair amount of "BEGGING", time, support and coffee? Thankyou, "Begging on my hands and knee's" PACO454

Yes it's a bug and I have reported it. PACO454

I copied this from another post as I too am finding the same issues. Reporting this a bug. Along with english to chez language conversion follies. After playing AA for about 4 weeks now and doing some mission editing here is what I found with the AI: 1) The Stryker ATGM AI will not target or fire at any OPFOR target unless the player is inside the vehicle. 2) The AH-6, MI-17 and Blackhawk AI will not fire its rockets at any OPFOR vehicle and very seldom any Soldier. 3) The OPFOR soldiers will fire at the BLUFOR helicopters, but the BLUFOR soldiers will not fire at the OPFOR helicopters. 4) The Harrier will not fire at anything (completely useless).

Thank you. PACO454

Wasn't the AI\Player supposed to be able call in Artillery in Arma? If so, how do you call a strike in during the game. What keys do use? I know Artillery will require to be added to a custom map as a static object, in which I can an AI "assignasgunner" command. The AI will use the gun. I just want tknow how to target in game if that's even possible and what keys to use. Any help would be great. THX PACO454

Seems if you increase the values it increases sensitivity. I just replaced the first number to for each one and that seemed increase the sensitivity. Still require a description for the values. Example: 0.500000 to 1.500000 I use the x-52 Saitek Paco454

Me too...Need zoom for tank commander. PACO454