Varanon

It's natural, I'm pretty sure it happens in all other communities as well. The problem is more or less "controlling" the expectations, and, sorry, Bohemia SUCKS at controlling expectations. At least I wasn't getting too exited :D ---------- Post added at 07:49 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:46 PM ---------- Uhm, I honestly, really wonder where you get that "military" theme from now ? The main expectation was 1: Chernarus+ for Arma 3 (which is not at all military, since it would benefit Life servers too, with all the vamped up houses and such), and 2: Playing DayZ as a Zombie

How did you do it ? Still doesn't work for me

I wonder when people will understand the mechanics involved. Yeah, it's free, yeah, be grateful, etc etc. The point is not minidayz, the point is the artificial hype that BI again created that went up in smoke. Need I remind you of all the previous "big announcements" that turned out to be underwhelming for everyone ? It's not about the game that's been release (I actually find that quite interesting if I can get it to run on a mobile phone browser). The point is that actions like these cause excitement, and unfortunately, the community still hasn't learned that it will never be what they expected it to be. And BI never learns that this community WILL ALWAYS expect something more than they've planned. That the hype they generate with things like that can never keep up with reality. It's actually funny to see this happen each and every time.

New misssion: Air Mail - Attack the enemy airfield, but first destroy the AA so our choppers can come in.

I'm not even going to comment on your unqualified remarks about mil sims (which is kind of hillarious in a mil-sim forum), or the occasional stupidity (like that last sentence of yours, give me a break.. should I say "life servers only exist for people that don't have one" ?) but the OP was not complaining about life servers or life players, but the fact that the filtering possibilities in the Arma 3 server browser are not far-reaching enough, and quite frankly, I agree. Other games allow you to include and exclude certain game types. In Arma 3, I can select one, and one only, that is shown, but I can't select multiple game types to be shown. ---------- Post added at 10:51 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:42 AM ---------- Ideally, you would have the possibility to create exclusion and inclusion filters. For example, you would get a list of "game modes" (COOP, RPG, PVP, etc) and could check those that you want to see, and x out the ones you don't want to see. Also, why is there no favorites tab (you can mark favorites, but you can't see them on a separate tab) or a tab showing all the servers your Steam friends are playing on ? Why not have separate tabs for different game modes. And, my biggest gripe with the server browser: Why does it rescan the whole list every time you change the filter ? It takes ages to read that list, so why can I not prevent it from rescanning all servers just because I changed the game mode ? Add a rescan button and automatically rescan once I enter the multiplayer mode for the first time, and then keep your hands off of that list until I specifically ask for a rescan. I think especially the latter is what makes the browser so unwieldy. Because the filtering options are so limited, you will change the filter often if you aren't 100 % sure what you are looking at. ---------- Post added at 10:57 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:51 AM ---------- I expected that for a lot of things :D

Remember the "new perspective"... I'll go with the 2d version of DayZ, like, top-down or something like that

I was assuming you'd know where to look at least. The point is, IF that issue exists (i.e. conditions not always computed correctly) this would be VERY SEVERE issue that could lead to a lot of problems

Wow, I am ? Why, thank you very much. I just thought you had a source for that claim which I find hard to believe.. oh well

I would really like to see what those "some people" say. Can you point to something more specific' please ?

At least for the debug console, I know that the problem is that I search for the main game display, and while it works when I start normally via CBA, it won't find the display anymore after loading a game and will wait indefinitely for the display...

I would actually laugh at that if both of them would not have been in Arma 2

Any chance to change this particular item in the future ? I can live with the other limitations, but there's those nice two attachable external fuel tanks for the AV-8B in Arma 2 that were never used since even in Arma 3, it is not possible to change the fuel load thus making external fuel tanks only a visual gimmick...

Simply awesome

Mainly officially released Arma 2 content. Mods might come later. The definitive goal is to bring the Arma 2 models to Arma 3 standards, meaning, attachments, physx, hands on wheels/guns etc. And it will be a mod that does not require Arma 2 to be installed. Also, as Alwarren said, we are putting all source files into a public repository so everyone can look at them, modify them, and contribute to the project. Basically, it's what in the programming world is called "Open Source". To this end, here's a call for contributors: Miller might want you to vote, but: Sgt. Adams wants you to join the Community Upgrade Project!

I would say Arma 3 but for one detail that weighs heavily on my perception of the game: I hate the fact that you need about four bullets to kill someone in Arma 3. It might be more realistic with body armor and so on, but I just don't like it. In Arma 2, if you hit someone with a 7.62 even over long range, he dropped. In Arma 3, you need to do that three times. I remember doing 800 meter shots in Arma 2 with an M110, and while I missed a lot, it made the shots that hit more satisfying. In Arma 3, I need to pull that off two, three times, and that's just peeing me off... Of course, all that Alwarren posted too... especially the medical system... (in fact, that's my only pet peeve remaining from the Alpha days, hehe) ---------- Post added at 02:31 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:27 PM ---------- Yes, indeed

Indeed. It's somewhat sarcastic that we have the biggest island in Arma's history, but no cargo plane... well, there is one in Arma 3, but it's only a wreck

Ok, let me clarify: Why walk up to the medic and heal yourself ? I don't get the advantage of it. If you are hurt, the medic should come to you and heal you, especially if your mobility is limited due to leg wounds. The medic is stacking healing orders, sure, but that still does not make it any more sensible. What should be the case is that you call "Injured" and if you're not the team leader, your team leader will order the medic to heal you. If your and Rangers point was that the medics sometimes take too long to react or don't react at all, then yes, that's a problem I agree with, but the solution for that would be to have the medic prioritize the healing. This is NOT accomplished by walking up to him, but rather letting him come to you. Another point: Assume you're injured and need a medic and you are not the team leader and you are not in combat. If the medic is in formation (which is usually the case for AI), then you might not even be able to approach him because he will try to keep formation and move away from you. And yet another point: Try to even identify the medic, especially if your vision is blurred through injury ? Bottom line: Having to walk to the medic is a bad idea, for a multitude of reasons (limited mobility after injury, formation, visibility). The only viable solution is to have him come to you, either because you yell "injured", or because you are the team leader and ask him to come. Agreed, but as I outlined above, having to walk up to the medic yourself isn't a solution at all. Medics should react faster to injuries, yes, but by realizing they are medics first and riflemen second and when someone needs to be treated, they should give that priority. I also fully agree that AI reacts far too slow, and that's the case with everything.. just try to tell them to get into a vehicle...

Next time you visit your doctor, walk up to him and give yourself an injection, and you know why it was removed. ;) But honestly, what time and energy ? Why not remove damage completely from the game if you want it to be inconsequential.

I don't think Alwarren expects the AI to pull that off, really :D I could limit the height of the chopper by introducing a reduced speed waypoint before the landing (let's say, 200 m before), but it still climbs to 50 or 60 m from it's initial 20 m. Plus, the additional waypoint is hard to insert when the landing procedure is scripted (not impossible, but lot of fiddling around).

Yes, but the problem is, a player would start much sooner, leveling out the nose of the chopper and reducing the collective to make sure they don't gain too much height. As I said, the problem is that even when the chopper flies in at 20 m, he starts to lose speed so late and so rapidly that it climbs to 170 m. AI should definitely start leveling out much sooner to gradually reduce speed instead of at the last moment when the only option is to exchange the speed for excessive altitude.

Likewise! Yeah, from experience, this is something that would be very welcome, especially to keep in touch after the team leader was killed until the new leader has picked up the LR

Description.ext entries can to the best of my knowledge not be used in scripts. Maybe some script is reading entries from description.ext and defined global variables , but normally, those shouldn't be available Sent from my Xperia Z1

Thanks for the hints guys. The problem is really that the waepons are not centered correctly, but I'll change that. It's the cleanest solution and the most future proof

Is author an actual script command ? I can't find any information about it

Yeah, since it's all for CUP and we have some control over it, I think we'll recenter the models to the mountings instead of the center axis.. meh, just a lot of work, fixing all proxy models and then also all proxies in the models using it