Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Medals

Everything posted by JojoTheSlayer

  1. JojoTheSlayer

    Which CPU for Arma 3?

    When it comes to CPUs for Arma you should get the best you can afford since Arma is a CPU heavy game. That said your local CPU is just half the battle and the sever matter just as much. However, I would personally go for a i5 or i7 quad core with the fasted core clock speed I could afford (its the turbo clock that matters). The core clock being the most important part for Arma fps. An i3 is too low for other games that uses more cores effectively and its not future proofing your PC so you are better of saving a bit for an i5 at least. Why not AMD? Because AMD in my view seem to have more issues in Arma and provides lower performance at this point in time compared to Intel. For other games it a bit back and forth, but Arma wise. Intel is King. While this is something you dont want to hear. The best CPU and the only one I would consider TODAY if I was to upgrade. is the Intel i7-7700K (Kaby Lake). You might be better off saving a bit for the high tier CPUs if Arma gaming is your target for your first PC build. Since I already have a i7- 4400K I am not interested in upgraded yet, but Intel Coffee Lake is coming out in 2018 which is rumored to have some performance gain, compared to what I have, to the point it might be worth it. 2018 is also rumored to have an AMD processor that might actually compete with the high end Intel ones because Intel CPU gains in performance between generations has been slowing down because of the lack of competition in that market. Time will tell though. My2cent
  2. JojoTheSlayer

    Oh the humanity ! Please save our AI soldiers !

    I bought both games, but I still agree. :D
  3. JojoTheSlayer

    Bad ArmA Trends

    1. Yes, during my service you had eye region face frames you mounted the NVGs to. The reason being simple. A) We had none tight fitting Vietnam era type helmets and B) some of our NVG, specially one called night binoculars (they were not "binoculars"), were 3 times longer than the classic "Arma 2" type. It felt like having a PC PSU on your face. :D 2. Do you even Winter warfare, bro? :D I think I had nose cover on my white balaclava, but personally I preferred the headover. 3. I dont really care about stuff like that. What annoys me a bit is stuff like being able to "deploy" bidod while prone without a bipod. Like shooting on the move like that is like shooting at a fireing range where you can stabilize your arm with ease etc. Which is not reality and none "deployed" ingame is still pretty leveled from the get go. Or "reloading" AT4s or M72 etc and such. Or able to "side strafe" gamey like in contacts which no one can in real life etc. Those are the kind of things I would want see changed or have better solutions for. For the latter, lets not forget that in Arma 2 you couldnt really sidestrafe and shoot because there wasnt a "tactical pase" walking mode. Which made contacts more life like and "shoot, then move" was the mantra rather than "move sideways while shooting". I dont want tactical pase removed, but I wouldnt mind seeing more left right weapon sway while doing so to incentive people to stop when shooting and thereby get more life like contacts and such...
  4. JojoTheSlayer

    HEAT powerful than APFDS? what does HEAT mean?

    No, HEAT is a reverse cone, in regards to where it hits, layered with heavy explosives on the "outside" of the cone. When the explosives is triggered. It goes via the weakest point which is the tip of the cone and forces all of the explosive power into a beam of molten copper, what the cone is made of, which burns through the enemy armor, super heats the air inside the small compartment a tank is, which makes the air expand faster than the speed of sound thereby becoming an explosion, and the tank blows up. Maybe triggering secondary fires, explosions via ammo cooking and so on... So the HE is in regards to the explosives used on the "outside" of the cone and since its "only" anti tank. You also have the AT, ergo HEAT.
  5. JojoTheSlayer

    Arma3 Videos

    Rolling Thunder 21: Bluefor Helicopter UH-60 Recommended to watch in HD. Go to YouTube for the click to time stamps to work. ----------- Click to skip, time stamps: ----------- 00:00 Intro and Recon Insertion 01:30 Some time later... 05:50 Tank Platoon contact 08:10 Where there is smoke 10:36 1st Platoon rolls 13:50 Default was NOT Default channel 19:12 Unknown Flipper 22:19 Red infantry smoke? 23:11 The Hunt for Redfor CC? 27:31 Redfor Logistics spotted 29:33 Where there is Logistics 30:39 Attempt to flank Redfor staging 33:55 Zone Capture issues was ongoing 40:00 Logistics got away 40:35 Continued Zone issues 44:38 Zone zone zone 47:31 Back to Sput... Instant contact 50:58 Lone tank gets killed 52:45 Hotel Contact 56:05 End of the road for contact 59:36 Is Karlis going to support someone? 01:04:34 Enemy heli downed 01:05:54 Vostok full of enemies 01:10:09 Vostok cleared out 01:13:30 Now Sputnik 01:17:38 Forest infested with enemy infantry 01:23:27 More enemies go down 01:24:20 Ghost tank 01:26:10 Push on Bluefor Hotel 01:28:12 New contacts now on enemy territory 01:29:05 Both Redfor and Bluefor pass each other 01:33:34 Falling back to defend Sputnik 01:37:11 Final Battle for Sputnik starts 01:39:13 All inn! Even the heli is taking fire now 01:44:18 Mopping up starts, but... 01:46:38 It is over. GG! 01:46:49 Outro and Score Rolling Thunder is an ArmA-3 PvP tank focused event that is run on a semi regular basis. Usually one every two months (MilSim). Want to apply or know more: http://www.rollingthunder.it Thanks for Watching :) Credits: JojoTheSlayer - Gameplay & Editing Carpet Brut - Turbo Killer - Music excerpt Guns & Roses - Estranged - Music excerpt Mark Snow - Xfiles theme - Music excerpt BDR - Rolling Thunder Event holder Bi Interactive - Arma 3 Game (This video is not a commercial product)
  6. JojoTheSlayer

    Favourite/Least Favourite Aspects of Warfare/CTI?

    Pro: Scale and Core Concept. Commanding a bunch of units via voice command and actually beating players. Epic servers could some times have large battles without slow downs. Cons: Overall balance in regards to limited long range Ai capabilities. The fact the game mode turned into "super gear soldier" vs a ton of Ai = no problem. Tab targeting from the air (should be less of an issue with Jet DLC). Commander having the ability to wreck a game within minutes, while a general game could last up to a day. Server performance. Newer version going further and further away from the Ai commanding aspect to just become a large scale player vs player thing. Tbh what ruined it for me was there was just too much gaming of the system. With limited recon abilities a single TOW could hide on a hill forever and never be spotted. Cost 100$ and kill a whole platoon worth 100 000$ without an issue because Ai are bad at attacking long range etc. Arma Warfare just never seemed to get the level of balance that say "Natural Selection 2" got. -------------------------------- If a mode similar to warfare re-emerged. I would probably think it would be better to have a bit more RTS focus with other players being able to take control of a unit leader that the RTS player have already spawned in. The RTS player would mostly command via the map, but could have "satellite" upgrades or drone options to get "eyes on", but the general idea is to have him spawn in whats needed, send them to a staging area for whatever needs to be attack and then have actual players select the group they want to control dynamically as a force multiplier and take the Ai into contact. So no more "Rambo unlimited AT rockets etc" In turn you would need to make the player Ai commanding controls allot easier for that mode alone. Basically something like having Aggressive - Defensive, combat modes. Aggressive being "shoot on sight" and Defensive being the Ai would only fire AFTER the commanding player fired (within say 60 seconds and then go back into "just report" mode). And having a choice between column or line formations. The former being for transit, maybe give it a "speed boost as well" so the player would be given a incentive to give the Ai an easier time, and line for combat. The rest could be removed because it wouldnt be applicable. So the basic outline would be that you have 2x RTS commander facing each other (min amount of player needed). That can only spawn predefined unit groups of X (infantry, armor, aa group and so on). The supporting players could only take control of leaders in one group and from there control it (ala Zeus jump into unit). When they die, they go back to the map overview or Commander view, ready to select another unit leader if available. The goal of the game is to gain resources via capturing towns or similar, combat other enemy units consisting of Ai or Ais and a human commander and lastly combine all of that until the enemy HQ/Base is destroyed. In short, retaining the core aspect of the original warfare mode, but making it more streamlined and thereby removing allot of the abilities people had to game the system. Hopefully making it more fun to play for more than the guy that had 1mill$ because he camped at some hill with a TOW and got easy kills for 3 hours .
  7. I dont know how VAC does it, but I do know that VAC input symbol in VACbuilder changes if its not a international key and the output keyboard is another region than the profile was built on. Sure, you could circumvent it by asking people to change regions every time they want to use it, but that is not very user friendly in my view. The issue is probably at the voice programs level, like you assume, because for example. The ingame "select all units" key is the same physical key on my keyboard as an English user, but my output on that physical key is | (Nor) instead of ` (Eng), but Arma 3 makes the correct action regardless. However that could be a "translation" thing that is done when a "new" ingame player profile is made. If you manage to make a solution for it via VoiceAttack. You might want to contact the software make and tell him about it. Since that would make it easier for people all over the world making profiles that might want others to use as well. In any case, Good Luck :)
  8. Great to hear you got it working. It was still interesting. I wanted to check if the {57} was similar on all the other keys (keyCuratorPingView and keyBuldSelect) in another region regardless. Which it was, but at the same time some keys have very high numbers which are not directly reflected on the keyboard layout link. Maybe they are some combinations of keys or something, not sure. Anyway, at least it confirms via 3 regions (German, Norwegian and Swedish) that 57 is spacebar Space on "Use Default Action" with the fix = You select all AND tell them to move instantly. Space on "Use Selected Action" with the fix = You only open the user action menu. So no you have to remove "space" or similar key from both, but I do recommend having another easy to reach button on "Use Default Action" apart from just the required "enter" key. Because that is the button you use to confirm an order. Which means it has to be manually pressed if you only use a "selecting" voice command.
  9. JojoTheSlayer

    Arma3 Videos

    Footage from the Rolling Thunder 20 (milSim tank event 09.04.2017): Short Infantry promo ( Its a tank event, but I didnt play in a tank! ): AT Infantry point of view during the battle:
  10. Could you create another ingame Arma 3 character and uploads its default profile file (see 3 below) here: https://files.fm/ You dont have to provide a email or anything as long as you select lower than "permanent", but you need to post the link to the file on the forum of course. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The issue is still present in the game and my manual edit works. It also worked on a newly created arma character. Maybe you should try to create another character and test it. Might be you are using space or your other key for something else that is creating a conflict or you put the 57 between the [] instead of the correct {}. Try this: 1) Create a new Arma character to make everything with that one default. 2) Go into Options_Controls_Common and remove "space" from Use Default Action and Use Selected Action. Press Ok. 3) Go to C:\Users\YourUserNameHere\Documents\Arma 3 - Other Profiles\YourProfileNameHere folder, find the file YourUserProfileNameHere.Arma3Profile and open it with a text editor. If you cant read anything in the file. You used the wrong file. There should be 3 files in that folder you can open. Try the other ones. Only 1 of them has a wall of READABLE text. 4) ctrl+f and search for keyForceCommandingMode and put 57 inside the {} 5) Save the file, shut down and restart the game. Go into the editor and put down a squad with you as the squad leader. Press space and you should select all of your guys. If this works... Then you might have a control conflict with the key you are trying to use on your main. Otherwise, it might be that the numbers are not the same in all countries ether. Since the keycode page for Bi does site it being a German keyboard, but then again space is a international key... However maybe the numbers differs some, but I cant tell unless I see a file from another computer, ergo the above. https://community.bistudio.com/wiki/DIK_KeyCodes#German_keyboard
  11. If you are making a voice profile for Arma in X voice program. Here are a few universal things you need to take into account: 1. If you are planing that other people will use your profile. You must use international keys for the important stuff, not regional keys. If you have F-ed up with that and the profile has a plain text file. You can use a program like TextCrawler in order to try to fix most of the issues in one go. Basically you can look for a pattern in the text that would only change the keys you want and in turn change it to whatever you want. Thereby saving hours of work compared to changing each one manually. Just keep in mind that it has to be 100% accurate. An unintended spacing or extra . might break everything. Ref 5! 2. Ingame the Arma command menu is affected by fps. So if you have lower fps at the time. The commands needs to be pressed slower or the buttons will be pressed faster than the menu can change and in by doing so you will skip parts and mess up the voice command result. If you have over 60fps however, that shouldnt be an issue. Then again, most dont so... 3. Have at least two syllables or syllable like features in each voice command and keep those that are not able to do that, like "one" for example, to a minimum. An example of avoid it could be using "off now" instead of just "off". This to both increase accuracy and to prevent false positives. Specially for people with thicker accent or similar. 4. Create and test your voice profile on a generally low standard headset microphone instead of studio quality ones. This because most will not have the latter and if some voice commands are hard for the computer to understand. It will most likely fail if people are using worse gear. 5. Keep backups of older iterations just in case you have to roll back major changes to avoid unnecessary work load. Bonus. My2cent :)
  12. JojoTheSlayer

    How to report enemies

    Default should be aim at the enemy and and press and HOLD the right mouse button for a short while. This should send the enemies you have spotted to the command targeting menu (Press 2). A way you can test this is to go into the editor. Put down a bluefor recon squad behind a hill and then put a redfor squad far away from that hill with their backs to it. Stop all your guys behind the hill and go up alone. Use your binos and do short press and holds while "aiming" at the enemies. You should hear your guy start talking and if you press 2. The target should be in the target menu. You from there order your ai to attack and so on via Fx-2-x "Status red" usually means the Ai is in a vehicle that is locked, so they cant get out, but the vehicle is very badly damaged etc. It can also be that the Ai himself, being an infantry, has gotten shot. What you can do when that happens is to use the command menu to get the Ai out of the vehicle, get them to heal themselves, or order someone else to heal them (Press 6). You can also use the same menu to repair the vehicle if one of them is an engineer. Report is just the Ai telling you hes status. It doesnt make him do anything. Injured is YOU reporting to your Ai squad leader, if you have one.
  13. JojoTheSlayer

    Using AutoHotKey with ACRE2

    You know what. Since I got a Rode NT-USB mic a few days ago. I am also going to add my other "help" scripts here that might help people out in Arma if they get similar setups, aka Using a Desktop mic with speakers rather than headphones. (Direct copy/paste from my "backup" .ahk files and just simple explanations and a few copy/past and adapt examples) How to lower speaker volume while you use a Push To Talk Key. ; Script on/off. $PrintScreen:: Suspend,Toggle SoundPlay, %A_WinDir%\Media\Speech On.wav return ; While Push To Talk is held down: Lower or Mute Windows speaker sound volume. ; (Balance sleep times if people can hear speakers at the start or end.) ; (Default can be high as 700ms on bad mics or as low as 200 (Mute) and 100 (Lower Volume).) ; (Røde NT-USB needs 200 on Mute and 100 on Lower Volume.) ; (Koss SB45 needs 700 on both.) ; (Point is: Mic quality matters. PgDn = Key you press. F11 = Actual PTT setting.) ; Mute: ; (Note: Shadowplay ingame sound is also affected) ;$PgDn:: SetKeyDelay 50 Send {Volume_Mute} Sleep 200 Send, {F11 Down} KeyWait PgDn Send, {F11 Up} Sleep 200 Send {Volume_Mute} return ; Lower Volume. ; (Note: Use this for Shadowplay to keep some level of ingame sound) ;~PgDn:: ;$PgDn:: SetKeyDelay 50 SoundSet, 30 ; Is in % of 100. Sleep 100 Send, {F11 Down} KeyWait PgDn Send, {F11 Up} Sleep 100 SoundSet, 100 ; Is in % of 100. return ; Lower Volume on Ingame PTT binding. ; (~ allows the ingame binding to still work) ~PgDn:: SoundSet, 30 KeyWait PgDn SoundSet, 100 return ;~Numpad7:: SoundSet, 30 KeyWait Numpad7 SoundSet, 100 return ; Lower Volume on Ingame PTT binding. ; While also pressing Shadowplay recording PTT. ;~PgDn:: SetKeyDelay 50 SoundSet, 30 Send, {F11 Down} KeyWait PgDn Send, {F11 Up} SoundSet, 100 return How to toggle mute any Microphone you have installed on your system. ; Script on/off. $PrintScreen:: Suspend,Toggle SoundPlay, %A_WinDir%\Media\Speech Off.wav return ; Microphone Mute Toggle: ; In order to get the right Mixer channel (Which is 14 in this script) for your device. ; You need to run the SoundCardAnalyzer.ahk script first and then find the mixer nr for it. ; SoundCardAnalyzer (copy paste) found at bottom of page: ; https://autohotkey.com/docs/commands/SoundSet.htm ; What you need at min to change in this script is therefor Master:1 and 14 to the correct ones. ; Tip: ; USB mics show up as their own Component Type, aka Master:1 in this script. ; Only the jack version show up as "microphone". ; A decent way to find out which it is. Is set the mic level to 20 or something abnormally low. ; Find that number in Setting and then set it to a higher number ; and run the SoundCardAnalyzer script again ; to check if its the one via the number changing to the new level set. ; Windows Sounds you can use if you have not made your own: ; SoundPlay, %A_WinDir%\Media\Speech On.wav ; SoundPlay, %A_WinDir%\Media\Speech Off.wav ; AHK Command Syntex: ; SoundGet, NewSetting, ComponentType, ControlType, DeviceNumber ; SoundSet, NewSetting, ComponentType, ControlType, DeviceNumber ; Mic Mute Toggle. $CapsLock:: SoundGet, isMute , MASTER:1, MUTE, 14 If isMute = Off { SoundSet, 1 , MASTER:1, MUTE, 14 SoundPlay, %A_WinDir%\Media\MIC_OFF.wav SetCapsLockState, On } else { SoundSet, 0 , MASTER:1, MUTE, 14 SoundPlay, %A_WinDir%\Media\MIC_ON.wav SetCapsLockState, Off } return ; Mic Off. $q:: SoundSet, 1 , MASTER:1, MUTE, 14 SoundPlay, %A_WinDir%\Media\MIC_OFF.wav return ; Mic On. $e:: SoundSet, 0 , MASTER:1, MUTE, 14 SoundPlay, %A_WinDir%\Media\MIC_ON.wav return Nothing really advanced, but it is still better to find than figuring everything out for yourself once one get that issue. LoL
  14. JojoTheSlayer

    Disaster at OFFICIAL servers after 1.60

    I am not asking for a removal of the U menu though. I just want the team structure set to everyone is in the same team at the start of the match. Something that would technically only take ca 1 min to change in the mission via the editor.
  15. JojoTheSlayer

    Disaster at OFFICIAL servers after 1.60

    Considering this thread is about End Game. I would propose a change to the mission structure that defaults everyone into the same "Army" at the start (Alpha squad for example). So that that people need to actively leave and create their own squad if they want to. Every game I have played of End Game, specially on Feres (I think), there is this legitimately spam about joining the single team army to allow everyone to be able to see icons on each other an thereby avoid tking. Those that tend not to do that because they are new or they think joining the team entails something else like following strict orders etc. Are the new guys and guess who tend to tk by accident more than others when they are not a member of the "army" team... ------------------------- On the aspect of vote kick vs vote admin. I generally get the impression that vote kick are seldom successful and its most of the time voting in an admin that gets the toxic person kicked.
  16. JojoTheSlayer

    Why more content how about fixing major issues first

    Nice obfuscation attempt. If you dont get my point, which is rather simple, that is on you and that is fine, but I dont get the impression you are really asking. Enjoy a picture of what you would most likely call, apples and oranges. I still think Bi needs to think in new ways in order to get their tech running better... Just like I thought Arma 3 would be better served on the Steam platform because of community sync in context to updates than how Arma 2 was released. Which also wasnt that popular to say back then...
  17. JojoTheSlayer

    Why more content how about fixing major issues first

    Yes and that has NOTHING to do with the point I was making. The placeholders in PA are practically Arma3, but in a very small format and still it has both performance and network issues... You have to see my comment in context of what I am replying to because I am not really talking about PA here.
  18. JojoTheSlayer

    Why more content how about fixing major issues first

    That is fair, but why does Project Argo run bad and have netcode issues then when its just 5vs5 on a half sized Arma map? In that context why does BF2 or BF3 etc run great with more stuff and players than Project Argo. Why does Planetside 2 run better despite having 1000 of players on the same server. Some times you hear the "every bullet and artillery shell is calculated" argument, but in that case Planetside 1 actually did have long range artillery that could be firing none stop for hours. Probably more simplistic ballistics, but still the amount of data would still be larger than most Arma games or severs. Server structure, client side hit detection some might say, but maybe Bi needs to think about such in regards to their game as well. Because I just dont buy this notion that it is "practically impossible" to improve the performance in Arma because it has some Tomahawk missile or artillery being fired from the other side of the map...
  19. So I just noticed that making map markers have been made easier ingame now. Which is great, personally I have used a small Autohotkey script to have a easier time with it myself for years now, but there is one issue that the current marker system still retains. Which is in a dynamic game that lasts a while. All markers are practically USELESS unless they have a time stamp added. The way I solved this back in the day was via using this (example): ; Infantry : Quick Map Marker. $F9:: SetKeyDelay 50 Send, {Lbutton}{Lbutton} Send, Inf Send, {Space}%A_Hour%:%A_Min%-UTC{Enter} return Enter the map, in this case press F9 where the mouse is to mark that spot with Inf and a time stamp grabbed from Windows desktop clock that I would sync with ingame clock time. It also had some other stuff to get correct color and icon, but that isnt needed anymore etc... Not that "strait forward" to the average gamer, but practically a must have for solo flying and spotting via map. Point is, with the new "write box" for the markers. I dont see why it couldnt have a tick box for "Add ingame TimeStamp". So that a marker that read: bla bla would be presented as bla bla (18:55) on the map, reflecting the ingame time when the mark was made. Giving people a one time setup with both, side, color, icon AND adding timestamps or not during a game. Making the "readability" of a marker ingame by other people much easier. A 15 min old marker that says *Tank is NOT as useful as a marker that says *Tank (17.35) for example. Image of the above ingame:
  20. JojoTheSlayer

    Feedback Thread

    re 1: Because I dont think the majority of people would use it at all if its not defaulted to toggle. Doesnt mean I think people shouldnt have the option to reBind it back to hold though... Secondly, an aspect that is missing, sprinting should reset lean back to normal instead of how it is now. Just like in R6S. If lean strafe speed was faster in this game. It would be useful. re 2: Gameplay in Argo is faster. So it would make sense to have dynamic movement be faster in that regards as well. The sitting stance does not aid that happening. It would be better if wasnt there so people could play more dynamically with the stance in a fire fight without keeping in mind the "cant strafe while still kneeling" stance before prone. re hipfire: While I agree that the model is technically shouldering the weapon. What I mean by hip fire is that you are not really aiming and since its a video game you always have a perfect leveled hold on the weapon etc. Making shooting like that very unrealistic IF that is not one is going for. I would actually want to see this address in Arma 3 as well. Because originally back in Operation Flash days. That aspect of unrealistic was why they had the "partially move weapon before model would move" type system. While I agree that wasnt ideal. I think the static isnt that much better since it creates other issues, but a good system that works is the one RO uses in my view. That said, I actually think adding such a system to both Argo and Arma would be nice. It would lower the none ADS (medium to long), but still make hip fire doable short range in Argo because of the "zero movement penalty" it has.
  21. JojoTheSlayer

    Map markers Improvements (Feedback)

    I can give you a practical example: https://youtu.be/OgNviSnoz1k?t=35m25s (Old video from Rolling Thunder (Arma3). People should check them out if you are into tank warfare events. Not sure when the next one is though.) For the rest its more about "oh didnt think about that" and/or convenience... if its automatic then you dont need to tell people more than once and they tick the box. Most people do not want to spend that much time on the map, including me considering I use macros for such...
  22. JojoTheSlayer

    Feedback Thread

    Not totally sure what style this game is going for, apart from action, but the game is very hip fire like. It actually gives a good indication why vanilla Arma 3 should get a more RO (Red Orchestra) weapon sway while side strafing and hip firing without ADSing. Not a return to OPflash, but more RO like. Project Argo feedback: I think hold lean left/right should be removed as default QE and instead toggle lean should be QE and that lean speed needs to be increased to the same as hip fire walking speed. That would make it much more useful in a game like this. Hip fire should have some penalty over range. Like maybe earlier bullet drop or something. Giving people the natural feel in the game to still ADS long range. Sniper rifle optics should NOT have dual sights. They should be forced to use a pistol for short range. Both in Arma and PA. MGs seem unbalanced. They basically have dead on hip fire and little more recoil than an assault rifle with the added upside of not needing to reload. In PA I dont really think they should have red dot or optics at all. Forcing them to use iron sights would at least give them some limitation over the other setups. AK with 40mm seems fine, but suicide range needs to be increased to avoid noob tubing. Its not tactical or even skill based when you can side strafe around a corner and shoot someone at unrealistic short range and still not die yourself doing so. Its just cheap. In a game like this I would rather see more self dmg than enemy dmg close range to avoid it being too viable for that tactic. At range however it seems weak enough to not have a huge impact. Even with only 10 players in a smallish area. The netcode seems too "arma wonkey". I would actually like to see if the "feel" of the game felt more fair at times if all dmg short range (except pistols to negate OP snipers) was instant kill. Currently there are just to many you shoot, he dies, but he shot you as well so you die, situations. Heck, I even had one kill (both sub 100ms) where I was prefiring a door he was coming out for ca 1-2sec and he still had the time to open the door and walk out while shooting and getting me. BI wont get "away" with using Arma excuses in a short range game like PA. A perfect example would be R6S where people are getting upset about 0.1-0.2sec hitbox out of place. Netcode issues is really noticeable in PA, clearly indicating that its not just about a large battle space and a ton of stuff happening. Time can be reduced overall and 10 sec count down could be 5 instead. After a few games, because of the speed of the game, the 10 sec "get ready" timer just seems too long. Performance in general. No matter what setting. I get sub 50fps (4770K, GTX780). GPS should function more like maps do in RO1, BF2 or Squad. Basically a half the screen map that comes out on toggle or hold to see while you can move around. The current tiny box or default Arma 3 see through isnt really that useful. You already know where most of the stuff is locally and going into the M map isnt something one wants to waste time on in order to get a "larger picture". Cap point placement are too open. Making it hard for 1on1 or even 2on2 to go for it without getting side sniped. Ergo, one go for the kills instead of pushing/forcing a cap or house clearing and so on. The inability to really start capping without getting headshot instantly really make the game slow when 4 people die within the 1st min and the last guy sneaks for 3 mins more because he cant stay in the capzone because there is so little cover. Putting more of the cap zones inside houses or similar might avoid this. Doesnt mean every capzone has to be "safe", but currently all of them are pretty much open. Raid gameplay needs to be much more clear when the enemy is capping. Some times one barley notice its getting captured and at others you kill the guy capping. Think its clear only to have the game be over a few seconds later because someone else was there. The taking of the points in Raid are not informative at all. Supply drop capture should be the same button as your "use default action" button. For me at least its awkward pressing space because I dont use WASD keys to move etc. The "walk over" broken wall parts needs addressed. There are several places on the map where you character seemingly cant lift hes feet 10cm to get over something that shouldnt even need a "step over" animation. Global voice should be removed. While its not bad in beta because few play. I highly doubt it would be great in a retail game with 5vs5. Sitting stance seems out of place. I dont think it will be missed if removed because the only thing you notice with it is its severely reduced strafe speed. I would increase default crawl speed and going prone speed while also giving it a bit more "forward motion". To make it more urgent. Overall, I am not sure how I feel about PA. The hip fire kinda dominates the game play feel and I am not sure that is a benefit because everything else does not feel like a hip fire type game. That and the netcode is an ongoing issue it seems even when there are few players.
  23. JojoTheSlayer

    Why isnt end game, game mode not very popular?

    Spawnpoints in context to team play. Most people therefor solo or semi solo.Groups (pressing U to join one) isnt that obvious and isnt promoted at the start.Hard to tell whos on what side because people can partially dress up as 3rd faction and no indication on friendlies despite "all over the place spawn" at times. Arma Ai ether being stupid or aimbot skilled. Making it hard for first timers to get into the game. If Ai kills you with a "aimbot" type shot, you should be informed it was an Ai rather than "WTF, cheater" goes through ones mind. Sniper kits and uniforms making the game have few, but always picked OP kits that prevent good close range fights. Example, take two groups of 5 players each and 1 solo good camp sniper and see a match contain 10 people not having fun and 1 that does. Arma maps overall, while the DLC map is much better, tend to lack good micro terrain compared to say RO2 or Squad. Flora long range issue in regards to taking cover in little micro terrain that is there after spotted, ref back to optics snipers etc. The "End game" capture the flag part can be hit and miss. Meaning half the team doesnt see action before the task is done. Lots of other game modes to compete with in the same browser. Not a large dedicated group of people playing. To mention stuff at the top of my head right now... I think the core aspects to End Game is there, but allot of tweaking and understanding how the game mode is mostly going to be played. Aka, solo peeps semi squading rather than full teamspeak groups that know each other etc and therefor do not see X issue. Is kind what is holding it back overall. I also think they sort of know that "something" isnt working that great with End Game and its why they are trying more out with Project Argo. My2cent
  24. What? You dont like being in a close fire fight, get injured and then suddenly start the "first aid" animation because the * icon popped up? :D
  25. JojoTheSlayer

    Tanks DLC Feedback

    People seem to have mentioned most, but some more simpler things I would like to see is a few more default Ai behavior in regards to vehicles. Ai default behavior: Turrets: If an Ai is in a gunner seat of a tank or large turret IFV (Stryker 105mm, CV90 or Bradley etc) and in combat mode. He should not watch a "hard" direction, but scan a bit left and right of that direction. Watch North should, in combat mode, mean a gunner scans the turret between NE to NW. If hes ordered to watch somewhere else like South. He should do that and if nothing after a few sec, start scanning slowly between SW and SE. Minor turrets on lesser vehicles like a gunner Ai on a Landrover or something should automatically scan 360 in a slow manner if in combat unless told to watch a given direction and if so do the same as the "large turret" units. Vehicle Formations: Ai formation should have presets that are dependent on how many they are and what formation they are using. Basically, if an Ai commander has 4 tanks under hes command and in combat mode. The "where to look" default should be in regards to type of formation. So line formation would be all units scan front, bit left and bit right in ref to hull heading. If its a column then the lead vehicle would scan N,NW,NE, the next would East, NE, NW and so on so you would get a more visually realistic combat advancement. Hull down and up: Ai, if on a hill or similar, should have an ability to reverse into cover between main shots like 120mm and so on. Obviously slightly slower than humans do in real life, but it should have the ability to do so. I think this would be doable if Arma had a dedicated "reverse" core script command that enabled units to just reverse instead of turning around or similar silly stuff. With such a command one could check if terrain behind vehicle was ca 10m lower than current position and thereby deduct if it will have terrain cover if it backs up 5-15 meters. If yes, then do the back and forth between shots etc to emulate what tanks would do in real life. If the tank hits something while reversing, just have a max time to reach "reverse point" and if that time experiences break out of the "hull" up down script with a few min cool down before recheck. Most likely the contact will be over by then with the tank winning or destroyed before it does a recheck behind after shooting at an enemy. Catastrophic damage: There should be a check on damage done. If the incoming fire on a Ai tank does "massive damage", aka the tank blows up. The Ai should be deleted from the vehicle instead of having that silly "thrown out" thing one sees today. Crew bail: A crew leaving a tank after its disabled should be a % thing. Basically to emulate panic. A zero chance of panic should prevent the Ai from leaving regardless and so on. Giving mission makers the option towards what they feel is more fitting. If the Ai panics because of disabling damage they should get out and flee away from enemies or have a switch between flee or defend vehicle. 3D modeling and armor: Reactive armor: I think Bi should consider making (modern) tanks in a manner that reactive armor are separate parts added on the core model. I am not thinking of this in regards to older T72 type reactive all over the place armor which would be impracticable, but the more larger part of default hull types one start seeing today on the Leo 2 ingame or the Russian T14 etc. This so one can, similar to Ironfront (ww2 game based on Arma engine), have more realistic armor while at the same time being able to blow those separate parts off without having some "decrease value to penetrate" thing. Its ether penetrate, yes no or reactive armor triggered. A tank takes a side shot, the reactive armor triggers, the model part falls off/blow up etc and you see the core model under. How weapons act can be a setting on if they have tandem HEAT or similar. Basically a tandem HEAT would be a double hit for for example 150mm/1100mm. Meaning if the reactive armor has 50mm to trigger. It will blow and the armor under it will then only be defeated if its less than the second charge of 1100mm. A modder wants to change the core model with new types of reactive armor or similar he can do so without needing the change the whole tank and so on. Reactive armor than be config changed etc. I also think this will make it easier in the future, Arma 4 or whatever, to "update" tanks with differing looks and such if such tech was added. Just to explain a bit more with numbers on tandem HEAT: (RA= Reactive armor. HA=Homogeneous armor, aka pure steel) Missile: 50mm/800mm. Armor: 30mmRA/900mmHA. Result: RA destroyed, tank unharmed. Missile: 20mm/800mm. Armor: 30mmRA/900mmHA. Result: RA not triggered, RA destroyed, tank unharmed. Missile: 20mm/1000mm. Armor: 30mmRA/900mmHA. Result: RA not triggered, RA destroyed, tank unharmed. Missile: 50mm/1000mm. Armor: 30mmRA/900HA. Result: RA destroyed, tank destroyed. Missile: 1500mm (no tandem HEAT). Armor: 30mmRA/900mmHA. Result: RA destroyed, tank unharmed. (Sabot needs some game wise math formula to decide if it penetrates. For example maybe: SabotPen=RA+HA*1.3) Sabot: 1000mm Armor: 30mmRA/900mmHA. Result: RA destroyed, tank unharmed. (30+900*1.3=1209-1000=+209) Sabot: 1500mm Armor: 30mmRA/900mmHA. Result: RA destroyed, tank destroyed. (30+900*1.3=1209-1500=-291) Sabot value = On contact at X range. Obviously mm would reduce over range, but that is not the point here. My2cent apart from the standard stuff other people have mentioned.