P226

Looks like the same to me: http://www.doupe.cz/uploadedfiles/471043959.jpg The laser does not feel "real". But well maybe that is the screenshot's quality!

Can anyone please give me advices on my configuration? OS: Windows XP pro SP2 (genuine) CPU: Intel Core2Duo E8400@3GHz GPU: GeForce 9800GTX+ 512Mb HDD: SATA 7200rpm Memory: 4Gb (3.25Gb taken into account by XP) I am most likely going to have to update the graphic card but I wonder if the CPU can be enough for AO. Basically the configuration I am looking for would be the less expensive to run it very well for main use on MP with mods at a 1280x1024 resolution. If possible post a medium, high and high end suggested configuration! Thanks in advance!

First of all I'd like to apologize to mods if this was already adressed. I looked into the forums but didn't found a similar topic (doesn't mean there isn't I just didn't find). This out of the way... I don't know about everyone else but what I always found frustrating is having maps that are islands, thus surrounded by water but apart from few small boats nothing much you can do with it. I'd love to see for example combat divers dropped near the coast by a CH-53 for example. Then they could swim to the shore, or place explosives on boats etc... The scenarios are countless. Also mines, diver suits you could take on and off, being able to actually swim (thus being able to go underwater with a breathing limit depending on the character class and weight carried). It'd depend on other things but that's main idea.

Work with great potential! Keep it up!

That'd be great to have better explosive devices. Like IEDs, AP mines, explosives you can attach on vehicles as well. Adding the ability for an engineer class soldier to defuse it. That's not much I suppose and I think BI is able to do it. Also more AG (air to ground) weapons available for pilots: cluster bombs, WP FFAR etc... Addition of WP handgrenades to destroy equipements, disable vehicles etc...

Or you could buy an external HDD. Few months ago I bought a 500GB one for less than 100€ (everything: case + cables + HDD). Reliable and doesn't make much noise. If anyone doesn't want to risk something you shouldn't connect to the internet at all. Even the best firewalls, anti-hackers etc... Can't stop everything. So the best is to save the data on an external memory (HDD, USB key, DVD-RW...). Easy, reliable and cheap solutions. And if cheap is too expensive I am pretty sure you can buy some of these used but still in great shape. Just my opinion. Now about the topic I am glad BI did something about that.

Happy New Year everybody on the forum, the members, the staff and to BIS as well! May this new year be full of good things for you all!

Now I understand better. Unforunately I doubt BI will work into that. This concept could be great mainly for MP I think (thus making it less than likely BI will work on it). I doubt it's even possible to make AIs making smart ambushes. Imagine on the map AIs planning to block streets to push your forces toward a desired ambush point/area, and on a map scale (and we're talking BI's maps here! lol)... I'm not even talking about AIs managing several missions at once, adapting to a situation, coordinating air and ground forces (example: inf "painting" targets for airstrikes) etc... I don't know anything about programming but making all this happen's got to be something hard. Also I'm thinking about ressources required to make all this "world" live... I mean STALKER devs worked mainly on this concept. But this isn't the "core motivation" of BI I think. That's a good concept for MP if considering the Evolution thing but on SP that wouldn't fit. And putting so much time on a MP "concept mission"... I don't want to be pessimistic but I doubt this is going to happend.

That's what you did, perfectly. I don't think anybody could think that was anything else than a simple discussion! I am sure BI are open for suggestions but asking them to move away from the milsim... Well people bought ArmA for what it was and the people from BI seem to love what they do. I am maybe wrong but it's how I feel. I doubt BI made that much money (compared to many other games we play or played) of it. But I don't understand... If you like STALKER that much. Why do you want a "copy" of it by BI? For the ArmA maps? More "realistic"? What's wrong with STALKER? I think ArmA's scenario wouldn't stick at all with a STALKER concept. Soldiers never free roam in conflict zones. When they go outside that's for a reason. You can't "copy and paste" a concept on any scenario. I haven't played STALKER but I heard and read much about it. And as far as I understood I can't see this concept applied in ArmA without loosing the milsim aspect.

Agreed. Maybe BI could set more "damage zones" (sorry I don't know much about that technical topic). It's pretty unrealistic the way vehicles blow up. Most of the time the vehicle is immobilized (or just damaged) but rarely blows up like on the game. Also some "eye candy" stuffs related to damages: visible fuel leaks, some parts barely hanging or damaged (for example doors of vehicles) etc... That'd be nice.

I understand your system better I think. But I prefer a "direct contact" rather than "proximity trade".

Please excuse my ignorance: what's the "KFC community"?

I strongly agree with point #23 (and #33). It is one of the most important thing for me. If they're afraid about costs of "actors" or "advisors" I am pretty sure many people of the community here can do these jobs for a very cheap price: plane/train ticket (I'm even sure there are people in the same country able to do the job perfectly) to the studio, meals, a place to sleep, a free copy of the game, a picture with the devs that's it! Too bad BI doesn't put to good use its community. Current games animations are like: * initiate changing weapon procedure... OK * procedure in progress...OK * weapon change procedure complete... OK There's no feeling. You feel like you're a robot in a car factory not a soldier in a battlefield! Especially when you need to use your backup weapon in ArmA it takes ages! It's like the guy is taking his bagpack off, and looking for his Beretta inside the bagpack while underfire! In real life it's much quicker. You drop the rifle (I don't mean you throw the rifle on the ground, there's a sling for reasons) and draw the pistol.

Doesn't XAM 1.4 mod (and others) already have FLIR? So it should be very easy for BI to have it ready by then! Also depending on "what will be available" in ArmA 2 it might be great to have thermal weapon sights on sniper rifles (of course I am aware the "range" of these aren't the same of a chopper or plane). In urban combats for example imagine: a sniper covering a squad moving into the streets by night, snipers inside dark rooms waiting for the squad to ambush them. He sees the guy behind the window, can alert the team, shoot the guy (or let the team nearby deal will him without much noise). That could be a scenario where this could be useful. Of course someone might want to say: we can have a chopper around the town and do the same job. But what if the mission editor doesn't want any chopper in the area like "far behind enemy lines" scenario etc...

Yes, but they could take some actions off the actions list and simply having to press B for Binoculars. What's the use of having both? In case the "B" key doesn't work you can rely on the mouse wheel? You can still reassign the key. It works great on other games, why not in ArmA? Same with weapons there should be a key for each: "primary weapon", "secondary" (handgun or SMG if possible latter on )and "explosives" (handgrenades, satchels, rocket launcher). About the G key as I said, in MP there will be a lot of kids "G-ing" you anytime for fun. If there's no mean to agree or not about "sharing" BEFORE he blocks your sight with some kind of equipement screen while you're under fire, then there'll be a lot of trouble. That'd be great with mature players but on MP most of the guys aren't. But what do you mean by a "tab listing"? Because I'm against anything that is "automatic". I don't want in any possible way some kind of menu or listing popping up blocking my view and possibly immobilizing my character while I'm playing. And I think a lot of people wouldn't like it as well. Please give more details about your idea.

Ironically, this in itself is wrong. There is both a right and a wrong, and it's pretty easy to figure out which is which. Accurate war reporting from people who were there or have military experience=Right Someone who's experience comes from youtube videos=Wrong. Come on! I was trying to cool everybody off! You ruined it! lol

I don't mean to interrupt this "party" but it really depends on too much factor to simply put: this or that vehicle can or cannot survive an RPG rocket. For multiple reasons: point of impact, angle of impact, ammunition used, is the rocket in "working order" or not (age, where was it stocked, "genuine" or not...)? etc... etc... All in all: yes a Stryker can survive an RPG hit but it might not as well. Same with Abrams or other vehicles. In Iraq (and other scenes) there were Abrams completly immobilized by a small arm's fire (talk about a lucky shooter), there were others making it back to base almost in pieces. But game developpers work with limits. They cannot take into account both reality, what they can actually do and keep the fun (if devs were much close from reality many people wouldn't even play the game I can bet on it). They can't as well re-create the complete architecture of an Abrams (admitting the US gov would give them the information which is impossible). And I'm not even talking about other limits like system requirements of players! So I think nobody is right or wrong. Thus no need to be rude with eachothers guys. This is just a game. EDIT: By the way... Isn't the Stryker an AAV? So why is it impossible to cross rivers? Or is it just me? Thanks if anyone can answer that!

I agree with Sosna. BIS should base the inventory system on weight not on slots. Giving each thing a weight value and for each soldier max capacity. For example a SF guy could carry more than a "basic grunt", who could himself carry more than a pilot etc... About the interaction between players that'd be good as well but not make it an "automatic" thing like transforming the guy into a walking ammocrate you can check anytime. You'd have to get close and "ask" (maybe using the actions list at the lower right) with an "ask" action and the other guy having the choice to refuse or agree. Imagine an automatic thing in MP: lots of jackasses coming forcing you into inventory while you're engaging hostiles. That's be ugly. The detachable components of weapons seems a great idea as well. Like taking a sound suppressor on and off. ArmA's too "static" regarding that. A mission needs versatility. About the "zeroing thing" with the RIS it "keeps the zero" you've set. So you can switch sights without loosing it. Also it's too bad the IR device doesn't work . If you don't know what I'm talking about, that's the little thing attached on the rifle in ArmA. It is supposed to emit a beam (which can be tweaked in real life but I'm not asking for that much) that can be seen only with your NVGs. That'd allow "shooting from the hip". So let's add: working stuffs, not only visual. Otherwise it's better to keep 'em off. That's rude to put a cake in front of a kid but not allowing him to eat it!

Well no offence smellyjelly but if you want a "STALKER" game stick with STALKER. ArmA is a game, not a mod for STALKER. I might be wrong but the suggestions you made should be to the STALKER devs and ask them for a STALKER 2 with different location, weapons, storyline. Just my opinion. About the the topic now... About ArmA missions/campaigns they are ok. But it's not "immersive" enough to me. Not enough dialog. I feel like ArmA was half finished were OFP was a great campaign. More dialog and immersion. Everybody remembers Armrstrong and Gastowsky's missions! For the time they were great. I remember the mission where you had to run away from Russians in the forest alone in the early begining of the campaign.

A lot of good things have been said. Also I'd like to add when shooting: shoot -> check -> adjust -> shoot etc... Keep that in mind. (I didn't repeat the "move" thing as it was said but "keep movin'!") As it was said it is very important to be aware of your environment. That's crucial in a game like ArmA. There are hills, forests etc... Your map isn't an accessory: heights, vegetation, buildings etc... Move from cover to cover. Before moving your must know where you are going next. Not get there then wonder: where now? Always plan the move after the next one. Cover all posibilities by studying the map (if you have the time). Also before moving check your surrounding. Check direction by keeping your "head still" and check for movements. Also even camouflages can render the detection of personnel with time and training you will be able to differenciate them from the vegetation etc... Almost like black spots on a white picture. And of course remember to know where the North, East etc... are. To help you take some references like the moon (if night) a forest, a building etc... There is more to know but I guess with what most people brought up here you already have enough to get started. Training and experience will do the rest.

Ah.... That is probably it. How do I launch it in full mode ? Thanks, Libriut Get Kegetys' ArmA Launcher.

I think the FDF team has done an outstanding job. About the "not realistic" argument... As I thought Goeth confirmed it is a real sound. It wasn't "made up". To say the truth even from live footages you have very few chances to always hear the exact same sound. It depends on the mic quality, where the gun is shooting (cave, shooting range, field, street etc...), the ammo used and many other factors. Two guys could record the same weapon without having the same sounds. That happens a lot. Even when you enter houses in ArmA and shoot from inside the sound isn't "real". The sound isn't "static". It reacts to factors. So if you want a sound pack that suits your opinion of realism make your own. I'm pretty sure the folks from FDF deserve at least that you ask them how they "made" their crack sound before criticizing. It's like telling a baker "You should have added some salt!" without even ASKing if he did. Try to do that to a great chef and he'll throw at you whatever's close to his hand! (from Goeth's answer I guess Finnish chefs are more cold blooded than others! lol) The many people who use their own time and sometimes money for our pleasure free of charge deserve more respect than that. Example: - QG which is mostly a bunch of addons and a campaign was sold about 15€ when it was out if I remember correctly. - back in the OFP days the FDF, WGL mods (and MANY others) these mods way where a HUGE improvement: free of charge. In ArmA many addons, softwares (like ArmA edit), sound packs, scripts, missions: free of charge.

At least this game has a positive point: it's like stepping back in time! In the early days of modern FPS! Plus it's impossible to have "spoilers" on this game as there's virtually no story! Enemies spawn before your eyes (terrorist indeed have modern weapons, Star Trek transport ray thing I guess), sprinting is like Crysis' speed mod, voices are like recorded by a bunch of friends for fun while eating some pizza. Frag grenades blast effects are visually exactly the same in the air or on the ground... Enemies obviously are retarded. Forget about stealth. Silencers on weapons are completly useless. I actually heard an enemy in what looked south America (the story is so boring and linear that you don't even listen) speaking French. Why not? Let's have Afghans speaking Congolese as well! The only positive thing seriously is the fun of ripping the arms or legs off a guy. Or blow his arm off or shoot his throat and see him bleeding slowly until he falls down. Well I could go on and on about it but it's easier to say: this game isn't worth more than 10$ among the low budget games. Save your bucks for a game like CoD 4. That is actually worth the money. Only drawback: in the end you'll ask for more!

Check: http://www.systemrequirementslab.com/referrer/srtest (select the game you want to check your PC on from the dropdown list) About the game: It's a "good" game. Not as good as I thought it'd be. It's challenging but the story is ugly. Almost as ugly as SoF: Payback's one. As it was said it's too bad such game ends up like this. It could have been fantastic but it's not. Nothing more than a very common FPS.

Nice work! Even in combat situations the helmet isn't always worn. Case by case basis. But well... That's another topic...