sqb-sma

Yup, 3rd person really breaks the experience, I'm surprised so many servers allow it.

Toe brakes are just brakes that are at the end of the pedals, you can give them varying amounts of pressure giving you great control over slowing the plane. Or you can just use them as extra axis for anything.

Some simple things that would make the ragdolls look better: * Restrict back bending to make the back slightly more stiff than reality * Add more weight to the lower abdomen and head * Use a slightly curled hand model rather than the current cardboard cut out hand More complex things: * Add stretch characteristics to major "bones" in the skeleton, provide rotational resistance through these stretch values (same method as F.E.A.R) * Transition from animation to ragdoll with appropriate momentum for independent body parts * Ragdoll animations (such as Red Orchestra 2)

Also the crosshair thing doesn't work with trackIR. So... yeah we can't actually aim our guns and rockets.

We have a winner. Arma is not a game where two factions spawn on opposite sides of the map with equal means at their disposal and duke it out, balancing of every weapon and vehicle is not required, in fact the imbalance and differences between factions is what makes the game fun.

Perhaps just have it automatically dim at night with a button for red mode? It would be very cool if bringing it up caused your player to do the map holding animation but with a light in his hand, so units viewing their map would be visible at night, except with a red light at max dim setting.

The lilac tone is a bit of a plague on Stratis. I'm hoping they do some work on colour correction and remove that from the water and fog.

So I've been playing on Ultra textures for a while now, but since the beta the options for very high and ultra have disappeared from the menu leaving me with the highest setting being the (compartively uglier) high option. This is a little frustrating, and while the Arma 2 troubleshooting threads suggest changing the vram setting in the config file I notice this line is not there in the Arma 3 file. Anybody figured this out/got any suggestions? I'll update this if I figure out the solution in the mean time. Thanks for any help! :D EDIT: Setting maxvram to 2gb+ unlocks the very high setting (to do this go to set launch options in steam/whatever you use to launch the game and add the line -maxvram=2048), ultra is still missing even if ludicrous values are inserted.

I may be alone here but... I don't think it needs any work at all. Sure, sway's getting in the way of you making that snap shot... that's realistic (and good for gameplay, if realism aint your thing). If you practice you can get good at shooting in ArmA as you get used to the sway and holding breath features. That's what I want in a game. Something to perfect, to train, to improve. Something (skill wise, not these shitty unlocks you see in most FPSes) that separates an experienced player from a newcomer. It's something that's vitally missing in many modern games.

I get something completely different. Testing the same location etc etc I get hit in the first 3 shots and killed within 2.5 seconds. It does need some work though. I then went to record and... here's the weird thing. I made it to the grass, he ran out of ammo! Load up the CPU with fraps and the AI can't shoot for shit! Using DXtory, running the game at 80 fps. Didn't make it 2 meters! USE DXTORY FOR RECORDING SINGLEPLAYER!!!! Edit2: The rotation speed of the AI is locked at a very low rate, you can sprint around them at point black. Edit3: but if you stop sprinting they turn RAPIDLY and shoot at you. Seems like there's some "if enemy is strafing" script causing havoc here.

I completely agree with your argument, but I disagree about going iron sights causing you to hold your breath. I often run tactical pace with the gun up and only upon spotting a target do I hold my breath and prepare for the shot. I like the separate button approach. Also... I don't feel like the sway's too much. Holding rmb causes the gun to be completely stable, if you're not holding rmb it's as if you just raised the gun to your shoulder without focusing on gun control. Next time you go shooting think about that, you can look down the iron sights without focusing on a target and the sway is remarkably close to, probably slightly more than, arma. Now when you see a target you tense your upper and let your steps flow, when moving there's slightly less sway irl. But when standing still? It's fine.

Huzzah, and the .45 ACP pistol is fantastic. I much prefer having that firepower over the larger mag sizes of the 9mm pistols.

More screenshots added to my imgur. Full library with 1920*1080 versions is available here: http://imgur.com/a/X6qka#0

But think of the balancing! :D

<br> ;) That's absolutely ridiculous, a pistol round to the head should kill somebody, and if you're balancing it so that that's not the case... you're doing it wrong.

Arma 2 ACRE that appears to have some functionality in Arma 3. From United Operations (should work with latest CBA, rather than UOCBA) http://www.mediafire.com/download/wv2epr3767pgy6q/%40ACRE.rar We've noticed some failures of this with higher player numbers, but it's certainly better than default A3 voip!

Well seeing as VTS weapon resting came out so quickly, ACE did it in Arma 2 etc etc it's obviously not the hardest thing to implement, and I'm going to hazard a guess that it would be easier to implement this than the some of the diving elements.

You could create a huge bunker type building on a hillside, with a covered top... That would be pseudo underground. Just saying, because I love the underground parts of stalker.

God. Dayum.

Wait, trees don't look like that for you IRL? We're looking at next gen graphics here.

Actually an ACOG will generally always be on target, if your eye gets misaligned the whole thing goes black. (hurray?)

Yes! Same here, huge stuttering. Every 1/2 second to a second it pauses and stutters. Annoying! ATI 6870 I5 3570k at 4.4ghz 8gb Ram HDD Win 7 64.

I only disagree on this point, they do crouch, but here's how it works: Default: Standing, joggging. Takes contact: Stands still and looks at enemy, NEVER EVER SPRINTS WHEN CROUCHED Shooting at enemy: Fires a few shots whilst standing, Turns slightly to either side for no reason, crouches to keep firing or prones and starts slowly spinning to either side. This is what the AI always do, it's fairly predictable and makes them easy targets. I'd rather see them sprint/crouch sprint to cover on first contact. Regarding medics: We should be the military simulator, I'd love to see a proper medical simulation with morphine and blood loss and all that jazz. I don't care about seeing the gore graphically, just the gameplay. Regarding balance in general: We don't need it. What is this nonsense, this isn't a game where two equal 32 man teams get pitched against eachother... This isn't an arcade FPS. Why is any time being spent on this, making already unrealistic weapons even further from reality...? I'd love to see the Arma series progressing not just graphically, but also in fidelity and gameplay. The movement and aiming changes are a decent start, they have their flaws but I much prefer the control over the weapon when standing, but there's more to do. Things that are making their way into arcade games because they make sense gameplay and realism wise, like bipods and weapon resting, are remarkably absent in Arma, the military simulator. What does this make Arma; the slightly clumsy FPS where you spend way less time fighting and way more time walking. That's not fun. We're still using the VOIP system that Arma 1 got in a patch, why not try to implement something like ACRE. We're still missing weapon resting and bipods, even though the models all have bipods on them. We're still missing a medical system. We're still missing certain realistic features that modders have to add in, that not only make the game more of a simulator (which should be the goal of Arma, the box art of Arma 2 was right "thrilling realism/authentic simulation") but also make it more fun. Backblast, stamina (partially in A3) and more. That's what the Arma fans want, not two equal sides duking it out. Give us Arma, not Battlefield (though I hate to make that comparison, it is quite apt here).

What's this balancing nonsense that people are talking about? I thought balancing was down to the mission maker, don't tell me they're sacrificing realism for "every weapon must be exactly the same... it's only fair"? Now that I think about it... the blufor vs opfor guns are almost identical... See, in my opinion, the teams should be balanced in other ways than making them identical, like the ol' m16 vs Ak debate, the m16 can be fired faster and more accurately, but the AK packs a bigger punch and is more reliable. If you give one team a weapon that is obviously overpowered then it's up to the mission makers to build around it and make things interesting (god forbid). Take Rising Storm for example, only the yanks get a flamethrower, and boy is it deadly, they also get semi-auto M1 Garands by default whilst the japs get 5 round T99/T96 bolt action rifles. However the Japanese also get interesting gameplay elements, they can banzai charge and soak up damage in their adrenaline rush, only falling if a vital part is hit or they're lit on fire, their weapons have bayonets (seriously, on EVERYTHING, the machine guns have bayonets!) and they can plant booby traps. Basically they're encouraged to fight completely different to the yanks, they sneak around, plant traps, then rush in with grenades and bayonets once the squad's flamer goes down. While the yanks are encouraged to move slowly, pick off targets then set up bases of fire and flank + manoeuver towards the enemy. If both teams were given the same weapons it would be extremely boring.

It'll be ok buddy, we'll get through this.