Variable

Ok, here us eagerly waiting for the release :)

Given the noticeable effort BIS is putting into improving AI driving, I don't see how this is helpful.

Dear fellow Armaholics, Is this still considered Alpha?

Maybe that's the BIS strategy; push Arma's timeline further enough to make tab-lock reasonable :p

Where can we find your Stratis campaign? Based on what you describe, I'd like to try it :)

I suggest to rename the hint that says "preventing combat mode" to "preventing auto combat mode" since the player can still assign combat mode manually.

Couple of points regarding AI orientation: 1. The order "watch" used to be not bound to a physical geographic point, but to a relative direction, e.g "2, watch 3 o'clock" instead of 2 "watch that position". It was extremely helpful since you could assign AI units to cover sectors while on the move. Now, the unit will keep looking at that point even though that angle is not longer relevant. The problem is emphasized by the fact that you can't cancel that order other than assigning a new "watch point" which will also become irrelevant the next time you move. It would be best to have both options, when assigning the order to a point, the AI would look at that physical point, but when assigning the order above the horizon, the relative bearing command will be issued. However, if I had to choose I would definitely choose the relative system. 2. In OFP the AI reported contacts in relative bearing like in Arma 3 but they used relative clock bearings instead of right/left/front. There was a little clock at the bottom right that showed the current orientation of the squad so that reports, unlike in Arma 3, always made sense. Having to rely on such a HUD item is not the best design but at least it was useful. Currently, the AI contact reports are almost always useless. What would be the best design for Arma is AI contact reports by TRUE BEARINGS. General ones for close contacts (e.g "enemy soldier north west") and accurate ones for farther away contacts (e.g "enemy soldier bearing 315). 3. I don't think there's a problem with the calculation the AI performs when reporting contact left/right. It seems to be based upon the squad's orientation which slowly updates according the leader's body orientation. The problem is, there's no feedback for the player that shows the current orientation in a lot of cases, and that leads to what seems to be incorrect contact reports. As said, a true bearing system will solve that.

BIS, even Star Citizen, a space game, has weapon collision now (gun lifted when impact is made with an object). I think all games around have that by now. In Arma you see a cool 'weapon up' animation when you reach the boundaries of FFV positions, so the technology is already in place. Why not finally add it to free movement mode? It will contribute gameplay because it will motivate players to use pistols or SMGs as opposed to MGs or other long rifles in tight quarters. Pretty please? :rolleyes:

Varanon did you happen to rename the action to "Prevent auto-combat mode"?

So how will we be able to configure TFAR without a userconfig? Some aspects are crucial, like having all personal radios for all and having the same LR and DD frequency for own side? Frankly, without that we won't be able to use TFAR on our dedicated coop server, and I suppose a lot of groups won't either.

Nkey, please, if you find the time, answer the questions in recent posts. There's a lot of confusion currently.

Korneel, for scheduled events, will there be a weekly recurring option? For example, set a recurring event every Sunday and Thursday at a set time of day? I suppose most groups have fixed weekly sessions.

Why was the change for the AI to get into the FFV positions before critical crew seats? I don't see the point in that since in most cases you want them to man the other crew seats (such as gunner and driver) when you take the commander seat (or the other way around).

I hope this is an issue that has been fixed and not a change?

We have problems of that sort lately, too. The dead don't hear each other and the guys alive hear the dead sometimes.

Make that saves and AI teammates.

Although a bit of a "closing the stable after the horses escaped", since people who already played the campaign are not likely to repeat it, it's good to see this. Thanks for listening BIS.

I tried it again and got the optional task of destroying the trucks. I actually managed to destroy the first one without getting detected. I stayed to its back and fired my chin cannon from range. While engaging the second, I got detected. I finished the 2nd off, and bugged out. Great fun.

Semper Fidelis Nice one Wiki, had some nice firefights. Couple suggestions: 1. The team leader seems to have a death wish. He attacks down hill in the line of sight of something like 20 hostiles. I suggest to have him flank to the right or the left, it doesn't seem realistic for a team leader to attack like that. 2. The leader charges in to engage without stopping. I suggest having a pause before cresting into the second enemy compound and moving slowly the last meters and engage. 3. Another savepoint after the initial engagement would do good for players who doesn't use multiple manual saves. 4. Something to fire your M136 at will add a lot to the mission, especially for players who bothered carrying it through the whole mission :) 5. I think the mission is better off without the misogenic and homophobic banter. I know you you want to recreate macho conversations between soldiers but there are other ways around without offending women or gay players.

I agree. I see the choice of the name "showcase" a complete turnoff.

Regarding the background story - this issue is secondary in my opinion, and I would have forgave Apex Protocol for its weak story had its mission were reasonably well made.

This mission still works and is a great one. BIS should take notes! The firefights were intense and the flow was engaging - paradrop in, fight the enemy, repel counter attack, link up with armored support. Thanks Lexx!

If this mission is your definition of "not so well" I want to see the ones you define as good :D Lexx, what triggers the optional task? I completed the mission without getting it.

Lexx, is it true that the optional task appear only if you get detected? That's how it was for me.

Yes, of course that is a possibility too. Another worrying possibility is that the management failed to lead the team to better results. I highly doubt the people in charge are satisfied with what came out of Apex Protocol. There's some hints to reevaluating management processes in the latest SITREP. I wouldn't be surprised if these are a result of this outcome along with others.