Pulverizer

Keep in mind that if you only reduce the speed with a script, without increasing thrustTime, you are also reducing the effective range of AA missiles in the same proportion.

@OP, have you played Dragon Rising and Red River? They're closer to Arma than any other console shooters, not counting Operation Flashpoint: Elite on Xbox 1 of course.

bin/config.cpp { cfgAmmo { class AA { thrustTime=3.0; thrust=1000; Make thrust lower and maybe increase thrustTime. Strela ammo inherits all values from Stinger ammo so you don't have to change that.

That assumes on the off chance that some invidual from every game's fanbase notices that user poll on some obscure forum and thinks it's enough of big deal to cross-post. It's just way too random to have any validity.

Jesus Tittyfucking Christ. It's just a forum poll. A tiny people group specific sample, which is also very easily distorted to whatever result by outside voters such as people coming in via this thread. What was that other thread when people rallied to vote Arma 2 as the best FPS of all time or whatever. Well anyway, Killing Floor won. Bunch of utter nonsense.

The reticle stays still. There are two surfaces: the invisible surface with the reticle and the slanted glass in front of it. When your point of view moves, they misalign so the reticle appears to be on a different spot on the glass.

It's a good practice to use iterators, like conditional loop with a counter or the forEach command, for such repetitive tasks, so you can do with only one script instead of 200 hundred copies of the same thing running. ForEach will block other execution so it's best to use it for light tasks, or initialization that only happen once. Why do you need 200 faces? Are the faces random, or all the same face or what?

I have no interest in moderating the BI forums unless they pay me really really well.

Could you use identities defined in description.ext instead? Like so: class CfgIdentities { class Officer { name = "James Abrams"; face = "Face33"; glasses = "none"; speaker = "Adam"; pitch = 1.00; }; class Commander { name = "John Peterson"; face = "Face2"; glasses = "none"; speaker = "Adam"; pitch = 1.00; }; }; this setIdentity "Commander";

I don't have any problem with it or think it's a big deal. I just answered a question as to why people would vote no. And then I clarified that answer. And now I'm posting more crap :p

It should totally be a feature request with a CIT ticket and all that, but has little merit to be the subject of a poll. Basically the same as "would you like Arma3 to have an improved engine, y/n?" :p

Probably to make a passive aggressive statement about the redundancy of the poll. It's a request which no one would have a reason to actively oppose, so why even ask.

Optional autoupdates (like Steam). I've got better things to do than check, download and install updates to everything all day.

You can see still the aim point in the HUD at extreme angles so naturally you would assume that's where your weapons are pointed at. The error happens all the same within the zone where a correctly diplayed reticule would not dissappear from view. But yes, the idea was to make it clearly visible outside of the shiny HUD glass to not be lost in video compression.

I take it you don't fly much in Arma. It's a pretty serious issue with TrackIR users. I made a video to demonstrate how bad the parallax error is in choppers: http://youtu.be/Ys26bgKg7lA?t=23s

Btw to easily generate arrays of units, use list trigger_name and thislist on the trigger activation. Eg 1: trigger activated by east once, covering all east soldiers: onActivation: {_x setSkill (0.4+random 0.4)} forEach thislist; east_units = +thislist Eg 2: trigger activated by east once, covering some area where you want to detect east soldiers name: trig_zone_a then from a script you can update the array at any time: #loop _zA = +list trig_zone_a _cm = "Man" countType _zA _ct = "Tank" countType _zA ?_cm+_ct>0: hint format ["%1 east soldiers and %2 tanks inside Zone A", _cm, _ct] ~60 goto "loop"

A valid issue Norsu, but your solution would be way too extreme IMO. I would do like TF2. Only show 100% standard servers (be it missions or mods) on the 1st page of server browser. The major problem is that this would require a variety of official MP missions that don't suck, with PvP and everything. Perhaps allow mission wizard games too on this list. Then of course have another separate tab that only shows all the mod and addon using servers, and all the cool kids with their crazy evolution, domination, citylife missions and such that might not be the first thing a newbie wants to see. This would be super effective I think, and wouldn't make the second tab folks go spergers. Well, not go full spergers.

foo="SmokeShell" camCreate getMarkerPos "my_marker" then "SmokeShellRed" and "SmokeShellGreen" respectively. Stuff created with camCreate is local only in multiplayer so that's good for superficial things. CreateVehicle does the same but is global so you can easily create mp-synced random artillery explosions for instance. Just beware that if createVehicle is executed on every client, its effect will be multiplied.

You also lose rating by destroying empty friendly vehicles and empty enemy vehicles that were commandeered by friendly. E.g. if you steal an empty UAZ as a west soldier, then destroy it, you will lose rating. Better use the "killed" event handler: http://community.bistudio.com/wiki/addEventHandler

What makes you think that this is one modular vehicle, instead of just 3 different models as in the previous games?

Should we hold on to misconceptions instead of correcting them, because someone might get confused?

No for phone: -Everything would be too tiny to see past 50m -Way too many controls for a small touch screen, making playing tedious or cripled -Performance -Everything would have to be made and redesigned from scratch to work around such limitations -Very low marketability compared to GTA No for tablet version: -You might as well play on a laptop and get much better controls

Apples and oranges. But flight and avionics are possible in CE: Fv3TwP8BUaU Also, ballistics with wind deflection are possible: c6kdPAWrWLw A very basic model like that is probably enough for serious gaming. Actual shooting and flying is learned elsewhere anyhow.

Finally got around to try this mod. Here's my single player first impressions:

Were you there when they took it out of the box and it worked? Maybe it didn't work. Based on the BIS games I've taken out of the box, I'd guess it almost certainly didn't. Maybe it doesn't work convincingly enough in CQB, MOUT etc to this day and that's why they licence CE.