zedderzulu

This looks FANTASTIC! Only thing I would say is that I would be wary of using that logo on the Police units as it's the real-life logo of the Greek Police. If you could come up with an Altian-esque logo for the Emergency Services then the whole thing will be perfect! Anyway, can't wait to see this released, it will add so much that is missing from the game right now. Great work! :)

I've got a question about PiP: the displays in the driver's seat of the Hunter have a silky-smooth frame rate, but in most other cases the frame rate is really quite bad. I thought, perhaps it had something to do with some other displays featuring the the vehicle in the shot - ie like the Offroad where you can see your own head in the mirror - but that's not always the case. I've reduced the quality of PiP to Low and it makes little difference - in fact I could set it to high and the Hunter is still smooth. Anyone else have this problem? Is it related to the flickering one?

Dev branch for me too - pretty much for all the reasons stated so far.

Agreed! In theory it shouldn't be too much of an ask to add the parking brake feature from the road vehicles to the aircraft. Building up engine power before releasing the brake is a fairly standard way of any aircraft taking off IIRC. Also perhaps slightly hijacking the thread but I've noticed that the AI makes no attempts to take off or land at the grassport in the hills or down in the south-east. That strikes me as a bug rather than the AI thinking things through realistically because a) it's fairly easy to take off and land from the south-east strip and b) in previous titles I've had much fun watching AI futilely try and take off from strips that are too short. Also, though it's likely far too late to mention it now, but I wish they could come up with a slightly more complex/versatile taxing system for AI. At the main base they just land and taxi down the second runway - as it were - and just stop at the end. Getting light aircraft to park themselves in hangars with big aircraft parking outside the terminal might just be a bit of a stretch, but the decade-old system they use can be used creatively. I remember back with Tonal the BAS guys had a wonderful system when aircraft would actually turn into the pavement outside the terminal and park facing back out towards the runway. I experimented with it myself when I did some wrp tinkering for my own use. Can be done, but probably not a high priority concern for the devs... Though getting the AI to use at least the southeastern airstrip would be welcome. Lots of potential for a mission featuring a high-profile target from Pyrgos or whatever-the-capital's-name-is using the airport for a quick insertion or extraction. :) So we just need the AI to be able to use it... oh and some transport aircraft too...

I seem to remember the Sopwith Camel was free, at least. It was fantastic at the time, because it finally meant that the OPFOR had a fixed-wing aircraft!

Glad I came across this thread because I was trying it out just now and wondering how I did it - certainly seems a bug that the mk30 team both carry tripods... Does anyone know whether it's possible to have a wholly AI squad deploy a CMW through waypoints or are scripts required?

They even got rid of the names "UAZ" and "URAL" in the wreck category too. Is there really a fear that any depiction of a real-life product that includes its name may incur the wrath of copywright lawyers? As it stands (as far as I can think) only the Mi-48 alludes to a real-world company.

I still wonder whether there are plans for unique OPFOR guerrillas sometime in the future. i.e. FIA are a distinctly NATO-backed/loyal faction, but theoretically there may be a pro-CSAT militia and maybe on GREENFOR there will be guerrillas who are sort of not on anyone's side, per se (or quite literally - bandits, for example - I seem to remember bandits being mentioned before, but that could have been referring to FIA) Wishful thinking perhaps, but it wouldn't really take much.

My view on the Lite versions - well, more a guess - is that they will have to exist if for no other reason than the fact that Bohemia will roll out content and new features for testing purposes on the dev branch. Or they may not at all... But yeah, I think the previous policy on Lite versions will continue. :)

Hmmm, there is certainly some truth in that. Looking at the payment options when the Supporter's Edition was unveiled, Bohemia plan for paid DLC, that everyone who spent the $32 (or whatever that was in Stirling) will have to pay extra for. I just don't believe that they will withhold all additional content and features for the expansion (though both Arrowhead and Resistance added a shiteload so they'll maywell withhold a fair bit...though they would have to be wholly separate games really, if you think about it). They've stated that the campaign will be released for free. There may be a general assumption amongst us 'fanboys' who have a shred of optimism left about the game that certain elements - such as the extra CAS planes - surely must be included in the campaign and if that is so, then surely it stands to reason that that content will also be released for free. There will surely be paid DLC, and Bohemia may well make us pay for some content that many of us believe should be in the game already, but I seriously doubt they'll charge for all that content (though I'm sure differences in opinion and perspective will re-emerge there). But think, at the end of the day, not even EA had the nerve to charge for the Extended Cut DLC for Mass Effect 3...

Several of those features were inherently broken - especially the civilian site modules. The developers have stated time and again that rather than keep bug-ridden features and divert time and resources to fix them, they needed said time and resources to fix more important things before release. Whether they ever get round to fixing them? Who knows? Should they have pushed the release date back? Probably. But then, as I say again, there is no such thing as a final game state with ArmA (until the next sequel comes about). They could turn around tomorrow and say "actually, the official release aint happening until May 2015". They won't, but it just means that the game would continue to be improved upon, which it would be anyway, even if it was released tomorrow. You see, I think in this case you're missing my point, selfish as it is: I got to play an ArmA game 6 months early and pay less for it. Good for me! Yes I really hope they add a lot more, yes I noticed the boats were identical back in March, but I wasn't angry about it then and I'm not angry about it now.

Well I guess that really does depend on perspective. Are you sure you're taking the worst case scenario to its most extreme yet? Except ArmA2 was fielded as a completed game, with a full price tag, and wasn't ready to play, whereas ArmA3 was fielded back in March as an Alpha, with a reduced price tag. Back with Arma2, and Arma1, and OFP:R and OFP:CWC, Bohemia refined and added to the games for a long, long, long time after the game was released, which was and is a shed load more than many other game developers do. Now I'm going to jump to some crazy assumption and say...erm...they'll do the same again? What's so "final" about September 12th? The day has absolutely no meaning for me, I tell that much for nothing. Yeah I may be sorry for people who buy the game at full price but then at that point, everyone will be in the same boat, i.e. having a game that in many gameplay respects is a large improvement on ArmA2 but will have to wait for Bohemia or modders to provide extra content but then we've got good reason to be hopeful about that, based on past experiences and, well, the boat is still a lot of fun and some of us have enjoyed it for longer and paid less for the pleasure! Suits me!

I believe "Game not finished yet" may be mentioned, but unlike other ArmA titles and hundreds of other games where "not finished yet" is used because the game hasn't even been released in a playable condition, ArmA 3 is very playable - just with the the absence of a campaign and a slight hole in the military and civilian arsenals which BIS has already stated they will plug, for free. It may loose a few points for it but I don't think it will ruin the marks that much. While I was disappointed with the dev release, thinking there would be a little more, I'm really not too upset about it. BIS will address these issues, given past experience, but at least at the moment most of us can play the game in a stable matter, which is a lot more than it was with Arma 2 and especially Arma 1 which were basically broken upon release. This game's good and it's only going to get better.

Unfortunately I wouldn't read too much into the Police tactical vest, as the text on the back (ΕΛΛΗÎΙΚΗ ΑΣΤΥÎΟΜΙΑ) refers to specifically Greek Police, strongly suggesting it's a hangover from what once was, rather than what might be. Though it stands to reason that they include police units in the future. Looking through the config there are mentions of clothing for workers and fishermen and farmers so it's clear BIS have them in mind even if they're not in there just yet. I notice there's no sign of the Raven PMC that was mentioned before and had some skins associated. There was so much potential, with the proposed idea of OPFOR having several auxiliary forces, such as the PMC and a collaborationist gendarmerie. I still believe that we might see these come to light one day and I'd suspect they'll come with the campaigns :) Yes this talk of "Quality over Quantity" is irking some right now, but I think we all know that BIS are folk who will continue to refine ArmA 3 for some years yet. Get the Quality in place for release day, then get the Quantity in place :) Or, absolutely failing that, they laid enough groundwork for modders to pick up their ideas and plug the gaps...

Not sure whether this has been highlighted yet: Beached trawler (368kb)

Actually this was one of the few names that Bohemia explicitly didn't have the right to use, hence the trucks appearing with the name "Utility truck" originally (ACE renamed them KAMAZ IIRC). The actual textures do not show "КÐÐœÐЗ" but "ЗÐÐœÐК", as they continue to do so now. That said, I'm fairly certain I remember an authentic GAZ logo on the steering wheel of the Vodnik. But yes, what is most apparent now is not so much the skirting of using certain trademarked names but the explicit renaming of easily recognisable military hardware so none of it seems connected to the real-world anymore. Though they still feel they can use the name of Mil Helicopters in the Mi-48 but not Kamov in what should be - and always used to be - the Ka-60. This is despite the fact that I'm fairly sure both Mil and Kamov come under the same happy parent company. It's not a gripe, it's just a shame. Furthermore, I remember that the S.T.A.L.K.E.R. series had a similar policy of avoiding using real-world names for blatantly real-world guns. Needless to say players were spoilt for choice when it came to mods that gave them back their real names...

While that is true, 4GB RAM is the "Recommended" figure as per the Systems Requirements page after all. And while you can go about Altis with 4GB okay, heaven help you if you're running any other programs in the background. I've noticed it since the launch of the Beta actually - prior to this I could load up the Alpha with little problems, but since the Beta, the strain on the RAM has been really severe, and I started getting crashes like never before. But not anymore. Anyway, yeah, is 16GB excessive? For games, yes, probably, but I don't just do games on my PC, so it suits me. Otherwise I would actually advise the Systems Requirements be updated to have 4GB the minimum and 8GB the recommended.

Well, upgraded from 4GB RAM to 16GB RAM today, and, well, the performance difference is vast! Still not getting anything like 60fps but then I don't really mind that. I can now drive/fly around the island without massive stuttering - most of the time.

Loving Altis to bits at the moment. There are a few tiny errors I can see - misplaced road signs, a few structures that either are indestructible or don't leave any sign of rouble when destroyed (Domes for example). Performance is...mostly okay. Once the computer has process loading the surrounding countryside and/or town, then the rates are quite nice, but I haven't tried it with loads of other AI and it can take a very long time to load stuff and seems to suck up a hell of a lot of RAM, which can cause it to crash quite frequently. Currently have 4GB which I'm looking to update in the coming days, so it will be interesting to compare performance - see what is purely RAM alone. Have found the underwater ruins, but curious to see whether there are any large shipwrecks anywhere? Anyone found anything? I've found a partially submerged trawler - upright and in one piece - and there is a fishing boat amid the wreckage of one of the power buoy sites, as well as a few wrecked fishing boats in at least one of the harbours.

Well, should only be a matter of hours either way. I for one shall be giddy with excitement the second I see a green appear in my Steam taskbar icon. Question I could ask everyone here I guess is, what's the first place you're going to visit? Me, I'm going to see whether I can find Telos - which I'm sure I saw mentioned in the trivia bit at the bottom of one of the loading screens. Obscure Doctor Who reference? Obscure Star Wars reference? Obscure Greek reference? Or none-of-the-above-what-the-hell-are-you-talking-about!?! :P

Personally I think the level of destructibility is a bit too inconsistent at the moment. For instance, the Control Tower seems to be built out of plasterboard - fire a few grenades at it and the entire top section disappears (also the destruction effects don't really accommodate such a large section of the building disappearing). Conversely, buildings such as the Military Offices and, from what I can tell from the latest dev build, what is called Diesel Power Plant building - or something - they appear a lot in the airbase and the radar station - are seemingly indestructible. I hope BIS can tinker with some of this - maybe not as far as what I'd really like to see which is dynamic building destruction - but even if it's tinkering with the rate in which the original model sinks into the ground. Looks okay when its a tall structure leaving a very short ruin model, but when a lot of the A3 buildings have ruin models that are nearly as tall as the original models (eg tent hangar, radar building, camp structures etc) it looks pretty bad.

On a more gameplay side of things, and I hope this hasn't been mentioned before, but I was wondering whether there were any plans to simulate some of the features of the Future Combat Systems program into the game's mobile howitzers - especially the Non-Line-of-Sight cannon which, through the use of an autoloader could perform a "Multiple Rounds Simultaneous Impact" mission. The MRSI would basically see the onboard computer calculate variable trajectories so it fires numerous rounds at the target and has them basically all fall to earth at the same time. Actually it may well ruin gameplay, but when I first found out about it, it really struck me as something that would be desirable on a future battlefield, plus I don't think it would be *too* difficult to simulate through the artillery computer. That said, the FCS program has since been cancelled, but, well, so has the Comanche.

I guess I'm in the crowd of saying "Supporter's Edition too pricey" but will show my continued support by buying any and all DLC that may or may not come at a later date. And I feel really bad about it. I'm in the crowd of people who have been playing since the demo back in 2001. I own every game in the series; every official expansion pack...which is sort of why I don't feel too drawn to spending money to in effect get them again, especially since, dare I say it, with Arma III here I'm unlikely to play them much! Truth is I just can't afford to spend £60 on a game right now. I just wish there was something I could do to show my true appreciation and support, which would, I'd like to think, be worth more than £60 anyway. Beyond mere monetary value! Which would be very handy for my limited bank balance. I'm okay with Steam though I don't really use it much. I would very much preferred to have a hard copy though. So, Digital Deluxe version it is then (can just about afford £35). Thrilled/surprised myself to see that the "Recommended" specs pretty much match my setup exactly, so I'll be very interested to test that notion out. Next week. Got a deadline or two or three by Friday. Ooooh but come Saturday! :D

Hey all, Welcome to my release thread - gonna work on some relatively small addons, largely to do with random themes, and largely starting off with simple re-skins - hopefully some day soon I'll be progressing into more ambitious things - modelling, islands, whatnot... but we'll see. Anyway, first up: What is it? A collection of reskins based on the stock BIS KamAZ models, intended for civilian use. As a bonus, a pack of KamAZ trucks for the CDF is included, along with a few skins for civilian UAZs. How do I use it? The pack is split into four pbos - one for the main pack of civilian models, one for the CDF version, one for the extra UAZ skins and one specifically for a Schnell-livery fuel truck, separated because it is the only one that requires Operation Arrowhead to be installed. Or at least, it is as long as I've coded the config properly... All units follow conventional grouping, the majority being found under CIVILIAN > CHERNARUS > CARS or SUPPORT - the Schnell truck is found under CIVILIAN > TAKISTANI > SUPPORT and the CDF trucks are, naturally, found under BLUFOR > CDF > etc. The trucks are known by the name KAMAZ however, not "Utility truck". Naturally this will look more suitable for ACE users, but otherwise shouldn't interfere too much - hopefully. The re-skins are applied using the hiddenSelection feature, meaning that they can be easily swapped around by mission editors - the readme file included should (hopefully) explain it better. This version is Beta - a few issues - most of which are beyond my control, i.e. not being able to change the specular map or the chassis texture - remain, but ultimately I've only tested them on my computer and so do not know how they will perform on others'. Also they are not yet signed. Thoughts, suggestions, critiques very welcome; anyway, I hope you enjoy them! :) Download link http://www.zedderick-designs.co.uk/portfolio/files/kamaz multipack v0.5.rar Armaholic ArmA2Base.de Armed Assault.info (Mirrors welcome!) /edit - unfortunately I've noticed a glaring error in the readme file - nothing too serious but still: Basically, when it comes to using the textures, the example code I wrote is incomplete: setobjecttexture [0, "extra_kamaz/data/kamaz_kab__co.paa"]; setobjecttexture [1, "extra_kamaz/data/kamaz___co.paa"]; I meant to amend this to the following: setobjecttexture [0, "extra_kamaz/data/kamaz_kab_<name>_co.paa"]; setobjecttexture [1, "extra_kamaz/data/kamaz_<component>_<name>_co.paa"]; Though as long as you put in extra_kamaz/data/ followed by one of the textures listed below then it should work!

Many, many thanks for all the compliments (and mirrors)! Much appreciated :) Unfortunately I noticed a bit of a glaring error in my readme - I'll edit the original post. :\ Love the screenshots, Nicholas! :D Krycek, I'll look into black hummers - RicoADF very kindly offered me some textures he had done so we'll see :) Student - I cover this in the readme. Unfortunately the original game models have ЗÐÐœÐК on them too - presumably BIS didn't have permission to use the КамÐЗ brand - so I kept these trucks as ЗÐÐœÐК partly to keep in the setting but also because the letters stick out in the game and it wouldn't have looked very nice if I changed them around. :\