Petko

Dear Dwarden and Others! 2 years ago I didn't have had any problem with the policy with retail keys not being able to activate on steam. That time the concept of Arma with the modability, beta patches etc. did not fit well into steam. And the distribution on the steam plattform was just a supplemental method, where we could assume that it would cost a lot for Bohemia to allow retail keys to be activated on steam. But since than lots of things have happened. The Arma games have been streamlined to steam (or steam was streamlined to Arma, or both), Arma 3 became a steam only game, and now even DayZ is distributed on steam. We can say for sure, that Bohemia and Valve are now strategic partners. As for me I have bought Arma 2 and Arrowhead in a retail store, the DLC-s were bought on sprocket (Bohemia Store now), and now Arma 3 too, and activated on stream. So today I was thinking I would like to reinstall Arma 2, Arrowhead (CO), DLCS too, but as having now Arma 3 on steam, I was thinking how awsome would it be to just activate it on steam and spare are the hussle with installing from the DVD-s, patching, installing DLC-s, installing beta patches, installing DayZ etc. So I humbly ask for your kindness to allow to activate our retail games on steam. It would be a nice gesture towards the community too, and I don't think now it would need a lot of effort from the company now. It would help us much to clean up the mess and use steam as a common platform for our games now. So please consider. Thank you in advance!

I'm sorry too, but as you didn't read it through, you just replied completly off-topic. This has nothing to do with DayZ.

I just had some time to waste, and thought why not drop here some important development concept (in my thought it's important). I'm 95% sure that this will also end in the infinite void of the forum, but let's try. After years for trying to have fun playing the Arma series, and after slowly lots of improvements were made in the "game-breaking" areas, like the netcode etc., I feel that the (joyful) playability of the game as a military simulator is still limited. I have lots of issues with small technical aspects of the sim, but let's drop those now, because the forum is already filled with that. I finally realized, especially after seeing the success of DayZ, that Arma as a product was never good as a game, but only as an engine and a framework. For a game to work, you need a worked-out entertaining game concept that has a flow and stimulates the players. Even thought thousands of peoples in the community were tinkering and building thousands of missions and hundreds of mods and addons, the military sim part never really worked for me, never felt that this had a working game-flow concept. With the exception of the few thousand people who grouped in organized game communities, the multiplayer part of the game didn't work as an ad-hoc join up thing like with other games. And this is not because it tries to be realistic, or being "hard-core", just because it's not fun, it has no flow. DayZ proved that you achieve the flow with some good concept, and you can build upon the engine to make a good game. But I don't really like zombies, I would like to get back to the military simulator concept, and the question of why did it not work (for me). The best attempt was with project reality, which is a very well made game concept, but after some attempts I still felt that this is far from a war simulator. I waited for more people to join up the server until I played with 100 players but still then it didn't seem like a war simulation because of the lack of a real frontline. I always tried to relive the moment I had with Planetside which even though had an arcade like shooter mechanic, always felt like a real war simulator with frontlines and organized troop movements. I never had this kind of experience with Arma (or any other game), and finally I realized that it's just because you can't simulate a war or a battle with 50 or 100 or even 200 peoples in a vast areas like in Arma. It needs thousands of players at least to ignite the reaction of a war simulation. So I would say that maybe it would be a good idea to consider the direction of going into a massive simulator area, and making the game engine capable of cluster based server systems. I'm not saying that Arma 3 should be an MMO or so, but at least the engine and the server side system should be capable of doing that. Maybe some other company will produce an MMO product with the engine, or the community will do something like that, like with DayZ (even a mod like DayZ could really evolve if such an architecture set up would be possible). My great dream is to play with a massive war simulator, which has the graphical aspects of Arma but the massiveness of Planetside or even exceed that. The only other game concept like that is WW Online, which has a base engine from the previous century. I'm sure the company who will manage to produce such a game, will win over the industry. And also don't forget that maybe the VBS division could benefit from such an architecture too.

Now with 1.60 patch our crew started to get on some server after a break. We went to XR-DAO to play some C&H and to WASP to play some Warefare (vanilla co). Strangely the game got some very significant graphical lag, low fps (around 10-20) in some spots of the maps. Mostly near towns, bases etc. All of us had this, but a few month ago the game went very well for all of us on these servers and missions. I must also add that a few weeks ago we just joined one of these servers for my buddy for 5 mins to test out his new tft screen with other resolutions. The fps was bad for him with the higher resolutons, but unexpectedly it was also much lower for me with my well established rig, with which I played the game for years. That time I didn't care much about it, thought it's something temporary. The point is, we may have encountered this problem well before 1.60 patch, still with 1.59. Although we (me) played with 1.59 for months without such a low fps. Also, I hosted some games for 3 of us, normal coop missions, and the fps was perfect for all of us, stable 50-70. (with 1.60). I'm not sure what the hell is this. Something happed between september and december what messed up the game, but it was not the patch. I'm thinking on the wierd idea that maybe the Warefare and C&H missions introduced some kind of script in the meantime that casues this.

Absolutly not. In arma a 10cm light grass is like your in a bambbo jungle. Just check it out, go to north czech republic where the real chernarussia is, lie down in the grass, and check if you feel your in a bamboo jungle with miscanthus all around. It absurd to say that its realistic about a thing that is obviously not. Everyone here in the forum can just get out the house and check the nearest natural field, try to lie in the grass and see if he can see anything. I've tried it, and miraculously I can still look around. Othervise in real life real solders would not prone in the grass, would they? Or you've seen spec force solders with perisopes looking around? Anyway i dont understand what is "prepping" a site in Arma. Use a C4 to blow up the grass?

I dont think that anything I write here will ever get to the devs, but the view of foliage from close (I mean when you are inside a bush, or you are lying in the grass) should be reconsidered, because the Arma 2 way that you cant see sh**t when lying down is a no go. Solving this is really simple, just make leaves gradually transparent if they are closer to the viewpoint (eyes) than 50cm or so. It natural when something is very close to your eyes, like a haulm, and your focus point is far away, then the close small objects get outblurred.

As you wish Sir! NosplX4QHdc

wow, this preview is awsome... All my dreams come true with this engine upgrade... trackir 6 dof, better flight phisics, interactive cockpit etc. I just hope all this gets into Arrowhead and Arma 3.

Reezo! Me and my squad mates love this mission. We play it all the time since weeks. We had so much fun on it, that i can't express my graditude! May I ask your permission to modify some tiny things on it only for internal use of our squad, like the checkpoints layout and gear layout? If there would be some major change or we would like to share it with the community, I will ask again for your permission.

Yes. I'm sure the Nomad is just a universal portable computer, and its connected to a detector array. The full kit can be seen here: I'm just curious who produces it, and how is it actually used in the field.

Could you tell me please whats the name of the real life IED detection kit product, where the TDS Nomad PDA is used in the kit?

I tested it, but it doesnt seem so. If I sethit ["", x], getdammage unit outputs 0. (it should be x). sethit ["", 1]; doesnt kill.

Thank you, I can see clearer now... the next question would be, what does getDammage read then?

"1" means 100% as i know. Im testing now if the problem is with the unit class. It was a "US_Pilot_Light_EP1", but after changing it still does not work with a "US_Soldier_EP1" I will try it out within an empty mission. ----------- UPDATE: Thanks, now i found out the problem. There was a loop running setdamage for this same unit. It seems setdamage overrides the sethit somehow, and heals the legs. (As i know it shouldnt because the overall damage is independent from the bodypart)

yes i checked that translation list too and used the Czech variants for leg, legs etc., but they dont work... "legs" may be correct because of the pain effect it seems to do something (Czech "nohy" doesnt have pain effect), but it doesnt affect the movement at all