nmdanny

Happened to me too, the first time I was running mods and restarted two times and it didn't help, at the third time I restarted the game to no mods, restarted the mission and done it successfully.

What is next gen?

In my opinion, a possible solution is a mix between the ArmA 2 method and the current method so that players will have more of an incentive to buy DLCs. First of all, DLC content downloaded will include both high quality and low quality LODs. There would be several showcase/demo scenarios made by BIS that would include fully functional and high quality DLC content in addition to advertising/notices. Players who don't own a DLC: -Can't place it in the editor(DLC content is hidden), if they're editing a mission that contains the classnames of DLC content(scripts,sqf/sqm etc..) it would be symbolized as a DLC mission and they won't be able to preview/play the mission until all DLC classname references are deleted. -Can't preview missions, host servers, play campaigns/scenarios that include DLC content. -When playing on another server that has DLC that they don't own, only the low LOD of the unowned content is displayed. There will be overlay notifications/adverts but there won't be notifications that open a new menu or interrupt gameplay(full screen overlay is ok though). In addition when playing on a server that contains unowned DLC content, there would be a watermark in the screen saying so(so that if they are publishing pics/videos, watchers won't be misinformed about the quality of assets in the game.)

Does your realistic and roleplayish mission consist of Go Karts? Probably not, in that case, you won't see a single notification. If you want to charge into battle in a kart armed with a starter pistol and race gear, then you are expected to pay for the Karts DLC, otherwise this shouldn't concern you. Same as for premium helicopters, you want to fly them? Buy the DLC, otherwise, let somebody who bought it fly and you can be a passenger. The notifications while being a passenger shouldn't bother you too much, and you should be grateful that you're even given a high quality partially usable helicopter. After all, you can't expect to have free unrestricted content that you didn't pay for.

Well oddly, according to BIS this kind of behaviour is intended: http://feedback.arma3.com/view.php?id=19002

It's really hard to decide which system is better. The old system allowed for full functionality(minus scenarios/campaign) but at a low quality, so there was no multiplayer split, but it broke immersion and uglified the game when present. The new system doesn't uglify the game, but depending on the restrictions, it causes some split, which depends on which kind of restrictions BIS will put and how the mission makers will deal with it. E.g, mission makers can give pilots an option between a mohawk and a DLC transport helicopter;between a vanilla attack chopper and a DLC one;for loadouts, a toggle between DLC weapons and vanilla ones;a toggle between vanilla soldiers and DLC soldiers(if they belong to the same side) This will also depend on which restrictions BIS will place, for example: can players use unowned DLC clothes, DLC weapons, can they be in the gunner positions of a vehicle, can they be in the copilot seat, if so, can they take manual control, can mission/addon makers use scripts to circumvent DLC restrictions, how disruptive will the notifications be, etc.. I think the best option for players would be to toggle between HD restricted content to low quality unrestricted content, but players would hop between the options depending on what they want to do, and then there'd be less incentive for players to buy DLCs. Ultimately if I'd have to choose, I'd rather have the ArmA 2 option. But I think BIS chose the new method because it's easier to handle, and it's also better from a PR perspective: perspective buyers who see youtube footage from might be unimpressed upon seeing low quality lite content.

I hate the white HUD crosshairs that appear in vehicles, I don't mind them very much in 3rd person, but they totally kill immersion in 1st person. Especially in attack helicopters and the A 143 Buzzard jet. Is there any option or mod that gets rid of them? I tried turning off everything in the difficulty options but to no avail.

I'd like to see a more expanded attachment system, for example, swapping a weapon's stock, gas system, barrel, underbarrel attachments(grenade launcher,bipod,foregrip,T-pod), utilize both sides of a gun for attachments(a combo of laser and tactical light) A bigger variety in optics besides the ARCO,RCO,reddot and holosight we have, a black holosight too, perhaps some cool and advanced scopes that suit the 2035 setting(something similar to the FELIN scope maybe?) Some tools for snipers to engage their targets more accurately, especially if better ballistics are introduced, e.g a Barret BORS optic, kestrel wind detector, a ballistic computer for sniper rifles such as the cheytac, maybe even an auto aim sniper rifle such as the TrackingPoint Precision Guided Firearm more weapon types we desperately need namely shotguns, the scrapped XM-25, some more missile/rocket launchers and assault rifles

I've noticed two bugs regarding Zeus when playing by myself in a template mission: 1. I can't edit my player on Zeus - therefore I can't can't change his rank or group him to squads 2. When I die and respawn as the mission maker, pressing Y doesn't do anything and relogging as the mission editor gives me access to Zeus again.

But the thing is, today in order to beat battleships or MBTs you don't need vehicles of equivalent sizes. An MBT can be easily destroyed by an ATGM humvee/soldier, a battleship can be destroyed by a truck carrying a cruise/ballistic missile. Then there's the countermeasure race, IR smoke vs missiles, then APS vs missiles/rockets, or CIWS vs anti ship/cruise missiles. But what this means is that heavy armor(MBTs, battleships) aren't needed since there are small countermeasure systems which can replace thick armoring. Theoretically in 2035 in the Armaverse, APS and missile jamming systems should have been advanced enough to replace most of the armor, instead of having slammers we should have APCs or even armored cars fitted with missile launchers and HMGs/GMGs, which is also why more MRAP and APC variants would make sense.

In the mission Paradise lost, if you choose to help James, you eventually go to a ruins where Miller is. About north-east of there you should see a submarine, probably the one from which Miller's team operates. You can spawn it as an object in the editor using some trick, see here: http://www.reddit.com/r/arma/comments/20ec2a/big_sub_from_the_old_screenshots_is_back_howto_in/ I checked out the submarine, it's not functional, just a static prop with some buggy collisions. But hopefully some modder might make it functional.

This episode was pretty short and disappointing, the storyline was stupid: -An earthquake device! BIS scrapped the railgun but added an earthquake device instead? Makes no sense -If you end up helping miller, he just screws you without explaining anything but the fact it's an earthquake device. Why is there no closure? -How did british intelligence know about the device while the US didn't, plus they essentially fucked the US/Nato by creating a second CSAT invasion. Why did they not tell the US about it and spare the losses of many NATO servicemen due to the second invasion. -For such an important device the protection for it was shoddy. Most of the CSAT soldiers in the base were killed(by who? James was in a checkpoint far away, no way he could have ramboed and killed them all) -How did NATO not even notice a biodome or an existing and obvious CSAT base within its captured territory. Well, it was nice of BIS to add the big submarine to the game, it's clear that it bigger purposes before the whole campaign/story direction shifted.

Uh, how about early access to Zeus, new content such as 2 new jets and a truck, a campaign episode, and other experimental additions such as the AV camera etc..

I hope that the A-164 Wipeout is actually a majorly redesigned model, if it's an A-10 with PiP and some minor improvements then I'll be very disappointed.

A new slammer variant is nice but its what should have been in the game on release, like many scrapped vehicles and weapons(astute submarine static, XM-25, mortar and command variant of the AMV, shotguns, etc etc) I also don't understand the logic of fitting a weaker cannon, I'm sure like the TUSK abrams, the merkava can retain its 120mm cannon. It better have a higher rate of fire and a larger amount of rounds(especially HE rounds)

Second quarter this year.

I think Blastcore is better than vanilla effects, although I feel that it's too yellow, it needs more shades of orange and red, and explosions in blastcore still have the vanilla ArmA 3 explosion pop for 1/4 a sec which is ugly.

Fixed wing UAVs are nearly useless for their intended real life purpose - to loiter above an area and fire missiles at them. Since only the pilot has control of ATGMs and he must strafe at a target to take it out. I made a ticket about it a long time ago (http://feedback.arma3.com/view.php?id=12865), assigned 6 months ago and hasn't changed..

Well here is where you're wrong, it's perfectly acceptable for a DEVELOPMENT build to not work for a period of time, even among professional studios such bugs might pop up.

Why? It seems pretty good to me. It's not a silly trainer jet like the buzzard, it looks like a formidable CAS jet with decent manoeuvrability, kinda like a small F-16, and not too specialized/heavy like an A-10.

Has anybody noticed the Base Camp, Sleeping Tent and Vehicle Camp backpacks? The first two are player respawns, the third one I assume is vehicle respawn.

Anybody who owns ArmA 3 can enter the dev branch, see the guide here: http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?149411-How-to-change-Arma-3-branches-between-STABLE-amp-DEVELOPMENT-versions-STEAM-client

As of now, it isn't possible to add init lines to objects in Zeus, so you can only do so by adding VAS through the 2D editor. Maybe you could move around that object and duplicate it but i'm not sure if the init line will come with it.

Here are the suggestions I could think of, I bolded those which I think are particularly important. -Better integration with the 2D editor, aka make it more like a 3D editor. For example, allow seamless switching between 2D and 3D editor. -The ability to save templates/missions, so if you do a mission on Zeus you could be able to save it for later use. Perhaps saving groups of soldiers/objects and such. -Let us create custom waypoints besides "Move" , such as cycle, loiter, land, etc. -Allow Zeus to issue squad level commands to AI soldiers, perhaps allow him to switch to the tactical view. -Allow paradropping empty objects -Add instant explosion modules instead of Howitzer/Mortar/Rocket, for when you want to simulate something exploding not due to shells. -Instead of a square box representing an entity/object, show its real silhouette(for easier rotating and placement) -Add an intuitive way to change the available loadouts on respawn, including the loadout name, clothes, equipment, perhaps special abilities and such(Medic, Engineer). -Add more modules from the 2D editor to the Zeus, for example the supports module. -Add a parameter that can allow zeus to take control of any AI unit in the game. (Or a specific team, depending on the circumstances). -More control over AI or players, such as placing them directly inside a vehicle, changing their inventory, paradropping them, etc. -A module that changes the independent faction loyalty, or maybe even loyalties of all factions/squads. -Allow a forced interface Zeus the ability to give himself a player entity, which upon death would respawn like a normal soldier, or just return him to the Zeus interface. -Add a module which allows Zeus to grant and remove zeus-abilities to other players. (But those players would be an inferior zeus which isn't capable of granting/removing more players zeus abilities)

What does mean "give it player control", am I supposed to sync the Zeus Game Logic Virtual entity to a person? If so, does he have to be unplayable, playable or player? Edit: Nevermind, I figured it out, I had to make the game logic entity itself playable.