pathetic_berserker

There is no Tung in A3 as far as we know so how is it relevant? Yet you talk of ignorance being insulting..... And DM was right, it should be about comparable assets.

^^As b00ce said. Though I'm supposing from photographic evidence that I've seen, it was the last of the Russian Hind-A's that were first 'on the ground' when they moved into Afganistan, I have some pics in my material of A's and D's flying side by side operationally. And I'm guessing they were later given to the Afgan gov't as part of the 40 or so they recieved.

Just to clarrify , you are talking about the actual above ground terrain textures in this part,? If so, I think its because ArmA mip-maps the terrain texture differently to the object texture. In my own experiments I've found that I had to change the scale of the object texture till the diffences were less obvious, then break it up and hide it a bit with well placed vegetation

This was my first proof of concept I did for A1 (unfortunately lost to a drive failure) that was one complete building with ground like skin. My more recent attempts have been combinations of buildings with ground like skin (buildings) and top hats (bridges) as you refered. One of the biggest frustrations was trying to make one look like it was covered in grass, ground textures don't behave like building textures so can be difficult to make your faux ground blend in.

Total pissa.

I started an an underground complex for the Australia Isle map sometime ago. It was basicaly a series of connected buildings and bridges designed to fit a specific topographical hole. Infantry AI would occasionaly enter it but even with the existance of bridges and AI paths they would never drive/walk over it. I thought that it had something to do with the AI only percieving paths in 2 dimensions, but A3 may be different in this regard. I do recall it being said that they have had to teach AI the 3rd dimension to get diving behavior correct. Not holding my breath to hear its fixed but I'm curious to know if we will at least see some improvement.

Yep same thing occured to me, think its in the grit. Good work Insta goat. Although it could be said there are some perspective issues with the chair (and wall behind) I actualy quite like it, the character still holds up and it gives it a 'Front line art' feel. Oh and hats off to someguydrawingstuff for stating the thread, I hope it takes off.

Well yes and no. It's been run into the ground alright but there was a lose agreement about how weapon select and AI command could co-exist till you came along ;). It also agreed that some form of modable UI would benifit all, but the topic is kind of dead without some sort of idea of what BIS has planned. If all keys were to remain as is, I'd still see no problem with AI command and weapon select sharing the same keys. You'll know the number keys are bound when your AI members are highlighted, and if your in the middle of commanding then your still have your 'f' key to change weapons. And I suppose we could still have a command rose under the space bar for those that don't mind losing thier mouse to tapping icons. But I think at the end of day a modable UI is the only way to go, ArmA simply encompases too much to cater to everyones style of play. My earlier suggestion of the 3d wheel that could be configured to behave as either scroll or rose was actually inspired by a 3rd party system shell available for my smart phone, wich allows you to move between browsing modes. May still be too much to ask for however, being able to choose your 'menu' mode out of box and then have it open it up for modders aswell would be..... too good to be true. Needless to say, some of us are going to be dissapointed. Just have to wait and see.

Found a spare moment this week and decided to start someting new. A7 Corsair II, (e or d, not sure yet) would like to know what is thought of the air intake. I've been fussing over it for a bit and need a second pair of eyes.

"Say again". How exactly will Smookies effort be flushed by the ability to micro manage AI with the number keys, if thats what you wish to do?I don't see the conection on my keyboard, and I'm going to go out on a limb here and say BIS are probably a step ahead of you on this one Um twisting my words here, I did't imply ArmA was THE game because it's fidelity is reaching holodeck levels of realism. I meant that what we get with the AI controlls is what makes ArmA, you cant say then claim to able scrap the AI command keys without an equaly detailed alternative and still say the game is ARMA. And as I've said knowing just a few 1-0 shortcuts for AI can mean some complex orders can be issued very quickly for those that are prepared to learn them. If you don't want to learn them, or are not prepared to play the game knowing commanding is your handicap, then this isn't the game for you. And there are plenty of games out there that will probably cater to your need of instant gratification. Those games maybe gone within a year or two, but there will be replacements or the players may choose to return to ARMA, wich will probably still be here. And as for your dislike of the scroll, well theres always a compromise and l prefer it to mousing over a rose.

Your right , it's challenging. And though I'd be happy to see improvements such as a reduced need to micro manage AI and maybe better handling of the spacebar and contextural elements (if possible) I think the rewards for learning a few of those 1-0 short cuts is worth it. Its THE game after all and as far as I'm concerned these are the elements that make it this game, they make it ArmA. And tell me I'm playing a BIS creation and not just a WASD banger with next gen graphics. But I agree, knowing what sort of changes BIS may be considering would help better formulate all this posturing. Coz it realy would be cool to have multiple bindings to number keys

Have to say I kind of disagree with with you. '100% based around the AI command' is just a foolish exageratation, and I've never known interaction with weapons to be as easy as just pressing one button in real life so I've never felt it to be all that bad, and my key board seems to have enough keys to cater for all the non Ai stuff so I'm getting by just fine. There are many who view this as a combined arms simulation/real time strategy shooter and AI command gets exactly the attention it deserves. Sure freeing up the 1-0 keys for weapon selection, unitil an AI unit is selected is a good idea. But almost everything else posted seems to be about you getting the last word in towards pushing a BF3 style game on an ArmA scale. I have BF3 and scaling it up wont remove my regret, and I've played many of the 'classic' shooters over the years, but realy don't think of them twice now. Thankfully BIS have already stated that A3 will lose none of the current A2 features so I'm not actually too worried that much of this talk will have any negetive effect, and I'm sure BIS recognises that the AI in this game is in fact one of things that makes it unique. Sure many will gripe about it from time to time ,but at the end of the day few would argue that it's been done better. Maybe its time to step back and see if your 'selfish desire to see this game reach great heights' isn't translating into 'homogenous shooter on low grade steriods'.

Sry but as soon as I saw the thread title I hoped no-one mentioned BF3. I found it to be so disconected, listening to all that marine boasting 'whohar' while they were in fact being blow away and I was doing all the killing. But BF3 is another story and your right more fluidity would be great. I think I heard Jay mention in the latest walkthrough that they were keeping the essence of the current voice system but looking at the most used words and phrases to improve them and hopefully make it sound more natural.

Oh lol, thanks for bringing me up to date.

I'll agree weapon select might be improved if it was bind able to the number keys. But I'm reasonably happy with the current AI menu I know many of the key number combos in the heat of battle and I like the detail in them particularly when I feel like micro managing in quieter moments. Switching the number keys to the command menu after AI activation is the best option. I think much of rest should remain basically as is (even the f.n ‘F†key) and pretty much everything else in the discussion is sounding a bit convoluted. Except maybe for this I think maybe more focus needs to be on why we access the menus sometimes but that may be diverting the topic abit. As for that grey area between what has been touched on in this thread and focused on in the thread ‘Arma 3 Action Menu’ I’ll simply reiterate. But as I get to the end of post I think "so what if you fumbled and selected a throw grenade instead of your underslung GL and killed half your team mates coz it didn't have the range (guilty),.....have a cup of concrete, wars a bitch" :p

I think he means proper configurable turrets for fixed wing aircraft that don't have to rely on scripting. Have to say this is one of the (very little) niggling annoyances I have with BIS and its RV engine. BIS have said that the ArmA series is more a great big sand box for people to get creative with, than an absolute complete package, excelent! As long as the supplied campaign and asstes are actualy complete I'm perfectly fine with this and it's been a good outlook for all concerned. So people jump into the sand box thinking they might be able to make some cool new assets, but aircraft configs are lacking the one thing every other vehicle is capable of, turrets. Then came a statment to the effect that fixed wing aircraft wont get proper turrets becase of aircraft/target speed reletive to netcode or some such thing. Yet the community has shown it realy wants and needs this as evident by the scripted work arounds used on the AC-130's and WWII aircraft. Now BIS probably do have some good reasons for their thinking but its a pity really, because proper turrets would be a better solution to the scripts and I think the modding community here is mature enough to know that the RV engine will have limitations, ie putting a 360 deg turret on a mach 2 aircraft may have issues, but the community here isn't realy into fantasy vehicles.. So yes the ArmA series is a sandbox, but only to the level BIS requires for its own assets.

Well short of the deatils this is about the only comment that has made any sense to me in this thread (I may have skipped afew bits) but the more the action menu focuses on only actions that take time to prepare and complete or are not usually done under pressure, the better. Honestly, I am completely skeptical about many typical rose ideas but I suppose one of the biggest issues here in this discusion is conveying a visualisation, wich is both difficult , yet incredibly important. In short, unless it remains linked to my scroll wheel as the current operation is, its just something to further complicate matters. Controlling the menu with the mouse pointer or keyboard removes my ability to make directional changes while surfing my menu so is simply not an option. So it realy boils down to more of a graphical interface rather than operational one. To this end it would be ideal if BIS provided a framework so that menus can be customized by modders. Imagine if you would BIS provided a moddable 3D rose (not so typical) for the menu. Wich could be configured to be viewed edge on, giving the effect of the current system. Side on, for those that like thier view obscured by a big flower, or my favorite idea a half or 3/4 rose in perspective, that would enlarge the text or symbol about to be selected and positioned to one side of screen so that there could be space to expand menus if they are sensitive to catagories. 2cents

All this inuendo is making me excited.

Doesn't have to be simultaneously in such an exacting fashion if the guy behind can stay close and go over a shoulder of the lead. ---------- Post added at 21:17 ---------- Previous post was at 20:57 ---------- I agree melee stuff can be fun, but in a sim I can't help but feel it may muddy the waters a bit (funny how it still feels OK in DayZ). Basically because its so hard to actualy simulate with any sense of fidelity. I know I'd be a bit frustrated by it becuase my own melee training and experience is now measured in terms of decades, yet I understand that games as a medium have their limitations....grrr... in the unlikely event it was included its a function that I think needs to have an on/off setting. Because sometimes it would be pointless and sometimes just for fun.

Yeah go for it, I think its reasonable you make any changes you feel necessary to fit in with your pack. Wouldn't hazard a guess, but for something that was meant to be a 'hobby' the hours are obssesive, scary levels, maintained over a couple of years. But I feel in this case it was worth it. AFAIK it's still the the most detailed CG 3d model of a Hind-A around

Wise move to keep the A2 flight model for those demos IMO. Imagine non sim folks having a go, Oh look infantry, cool, ATV's , cool, choppers,....oh F.. Though I actually quite like the TOH flight model it may take some time for people to get used to.

Performance problems no doubt. Though it would be nice to get soem improvement, maybe longer lasting tracks, particularly for tanks.

^Well said Iroquois Pliskin excatly right. What I find wierd about the idea of a CQB game mode is that I thought CQB was something that just happened in any space to small to swing a cat or any situation where you were within closing distance (~3 steps) of a target. Honestly not up what they teach on the subject today, but I always felt it occured often enough during the normal course of play. I think the connection between CQB, accessibility and BF3 is that twitch shooters like BF3 make folks feel more comfortable in CQB situations and less helpless. However I think what we have seen of the new animations and weapon handling in A3 may make the issue a moot point.

Cool, love hearing about new functions for A3, especialy from the dev's.....so is this confirmation of a slider? ---------- Post added at 11:47 ---------- Previous post was at 11:44 ---------- Actually I'm begining to get some hope that A3 may be handling its particle effects a bit diferently, ....still so many details unkown.

^^ Ah, ok I found the first samples package released in Jan but I think I’ll need the newer one with the hinds template in it, ‘promised’ in March, as per this thread http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?132878-Mi-24-Hind-template-request Though I'm still curious if somethings missing here (I know for me it will probably be the time) but I still can't find a single 3d party TOH chopper?