rye1

Found some videos, that is actually pretty cool. Could be workable. Floppy hand. :cool: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7LIELrGRpdE The we as in the main people who talk about this topic and agree on certain points or talk to dismiss others, think from a non-developer stand-point on ideas, references: Me, Coulum, maturin, metalcraze. Insignificant, probably right depending on gameplay point of view. I for one constantly play close quarters and room clearing, and is in a clan which constantly does too, so priorities to ideas change on individual level. For the general purpose, correct. If they could pull such a system off... from the advertising and playability purpose, absolute jackpot. Thanks for the input.

Ask for ideas then dismiss them as overcomplication. :rolleyes: As we said before, we solely want tweaks and small features if they fit in with the game, we are open to features that will make gameplay better - CQB easier, long-range harder perception... There are a lot of good ones in the past 3-4 pages for those interested. As you stated, "solutions". Well we're not scripters or developers, we can only offer ideas, perceptions or possibilities. I don't know about you but I see very little evidence of characters in game using Travis/Chris concepts and techniques. And if so, that's no argument to diversity... otherwise I'll end all my arguments with "I think we better stick with what Paul Castle said". It sounds to me like you didn't really read the past few pages, more skimmed over it. And the complication argument could be countered using imagination - it's a game, anything you perceive as complicated then think of an idea to make it less so, such as a better selection system or a favourites bar which isolates all the none needed things to the stuff you regularly use. @Pd3 Trespasser? What did it offer in comparison to Arma and the subjects of this topic? And overburden is something BIS wouldn't do. They'd change the GUI and key system to NOT overburden you.

Oh it's not a magazine-fed shotty. Nice find, again.

"JayPaul9". Born in 2009.

Yes it is actually now I think of it. LMG's in CQB do pretty well. If you've ever seen the FN Instructor video talking about FN Minimi use in CQB, I'd suggest checking it out. It seems to me in Arma that 10m actually looks around 5, it could be depth perception, etc, but I've said this all along. For instance we can see 500m and identify key features, or zoom in with just the human eye. I think that makes what we perceive to be easier for longer range. Yes, exactly. I'd want it to be well deployed in short-bursts also and virtually below average in long ones unless fully stabilised and breathing properly. There must be some amount of recoil management so you can differentiate skilled shooters. The proper use of bipods will be great. I'd prefer more controlled for CQB, harder to get on target and potentially 'jerky' or at least more difficult for long-range. The hard part is differentiating and working out a way to do this. Arma 2 as it is now 'fits' both categories in the same box and shooting function but the CQB element isn't as good as it potentially could be (which would attract more players) and the long-range seems too easy. If longer-range was harder it would mean longer and better firefights based on maneuver, and really putting the shits on you when a HMG opens up!!! Sway should be stabilised when moving perfectly forward, backwards or side to side, and an oblique angle should be a little harder to add to that. That and the upper body range of movement just right may improve CQB dramatically. Another question is: How should stance and angle of movement affect it? I.e. crouched and moving laterally or diagonally. Maybe to add onto your idea (and the idea next paragraph you posted) where your characters aim dynamically changes how you act, where you aim via a distance calculator. For instance go in vanilla and click space, it tells you distances. Maybe this distance calculator should change aiming and accuracy? So when you do aim 500m away you have to take your time! It should then be negated if you're just looking in that direction, i.e. with binoculars or without aiming down sights, because you're not engaging or getting ready to accurately engage - but down sights it kicks in. The problem I could see with that may be, you are aiming 200m away then suddenly an enemy pops up, it would have to instinctively adjust so you could engage well in CQB... and that may be off-putting because you may have to actually aim at him or near before the calculation would kick in. Just a random thought... again, from a none-scripter or developer POV! How about this? The CAR system is a great CQB grip**, especially for pistols. The CSM is a great CQB grip for rifles, swapping shoulders while staying on the trigger. The list goes on... these styles really differentiate players. It actually reminds me of the game Fight Night which promoted all the different animations for boxer style such as Mike Tyson and his leverage technique. ** "its comfortable & has less muscle fatigue; can be used in confined spaces too. Also has reduction in recoil, target acquisition, reloads, etc." Maybe a button that could swap or change your default in real-time, for instance I'm in game, holding the pistol as we do in A2. I come to a door, I click my "Y" key (or whatever) and swap to another grip in logical order. I swap until I find the C.A.R. method and run with it. SHIT! I'm engaging my weak-side corner, I press "U" and swap hand side. I now move in the room and have a better muzzle-line shot without over exposure. It could even go so far as basing it around doctrine, for example if Israeli's were in game; they have a very large, flat stance for pistol shooting, the Israeli method, could be added or used by the Israeli characters (if in game). I'm in a stance which is too front-on heavy, so I click "H" and go to weaver. I'm leaning on too much of an angle, I use an RVS-type system to lean where I want. I think this system would be better with a better GUI/selection menu, pops up and you can quickly select (better than the "F" key for firemodes we have now). I also have a vague idea that may be cool... "Warm-up", "Fatigue" or "Stress" dynamic animations. For example if you haven't reloaded in 1 hour of gameplay there may be a random chance you get it wrong and the reload will take longer - or the more stress you are in, the bigger the firefight and closer rounds hitting the worse you are (micromistakes, slightly longer time, making offensive actions by the enemy more of a threat) so you have to work on a recovery to re-gain advantage instead of "RELOAD, SHOOT AGAIN! YAY!". Maybe even the MORE you do something i.e. a reload in a SHORT period of time with a randomness factor means some slip ups. Or for instance the quicker you are to reload for instance when you run out of ammunition in your magazine, the quicker you are from that point to reload or transition the better it will be. Fatigue idea by Corvinus here: http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?122794-ARMA-3-development-blog-amp-reveals&p=2157954&viewfull=1#post2157954. Great idea for fatigue in place, but the recovery period would be... HOW? Especially to recover and stay ready to engage; this would need a fast draw speed. Low-ready or high-ready, again maybe a separate key for these animations. Gun weight idea explained better here by Batto: http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?125819-ArmA-3-Community-wishes-amp-ideas-NO-DISCUSSION&p=2158028&viewfull=1#post2158028. Note: Don't agree with the full statement, what I'd add is "cannot stay in the ready-to-fire position for long periods of time, with lull times for stamina collection and recovery. This means you can engage well in crouched or while stood up, but only for short periods; also encompassing short-bursts by MG's and not prolonged long bursts." I agree with his other points such as raise speed. Example below. He gets better the more he does it, slightly faster. No two reloads are the same in terms of precision, accuracy and quality. The randomness is create: malfunctions, quality, slight mistakes to perfection. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_bfb7Ks9Yhs Mixture of grips shown. Some others: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZprHSWBDP4A&feature=related Well, that's a lot of ideas put into the last few pages. Some are OK. The best I can hope for is CQB weaponry (sub-machine gun, pistols) can be this good and moveable with your animations in A3!

Nice finds. NVG's? Looks a tiny bit like the rangefinder model which is quite funny. Flippable NOD's, flashlight or helmet camera attached. Intense. Possible strobe or LED on head. Erm... bullpup rifle (or shotgun?) without a magazine inserted? Palm trees of different sizes, whoop. Backpack straps actually fitting the character model, not going through it when you hold certain stances etc. Handgrip with your hands on it (unlike that article months back where the hand wasn't properly on the grip) Front sight post laser, unlike A2OA's left or right rail laser. Excellent choice for accuracy. Rear sights put down due to the other sight attachment.

Yeah Coulum, spot on. For a dynamic game-mode I believe this is perfect but not linear, they have to react in a certain way - I wonder how you could do this easily (using mission editor options and not jumping straight to scripting). Fully agreed about the use of cover: Cover from fire, cover from view! The difference between cover and concealment. Can I survive and can I do my job? HIDING is not using cover. Using cover is being able to employ yourself while maintaining an element of security and being able to fight: Getting rounds on the target, observing the target, pulling in when you need to use it. You've mentioned a lot of points that just make you facepalm, bringing up memories of seriously clumbsy AI.

Some clans do train and play together - joint-operations (joint ops, JO's) which can include joint-training sessions. We've done it a few times, including teaching Basic CQB/CQC for two small clans who were fairly new to 'tacticool'/'realism'. Other big events include community nights such as the Ausarma community night/event where a mixture of clans and public players come together.

But most realism units limit roles to learn that specific doctrine and modify it for Arma, such as TF313 with American doctrine and tactics, and 16AA/VCB with British. That's probably one big reason why, that doesn't mean of course that they don't play missions as other countries or militaries from time to time or on odd occasions. For instance you base your whole philosophy, tactics and clan around the Australian infantry then play as the Russians with no idea of Russian tactics, equipment, it just wouldn't be 100%. It wouldn't fit right with me anyway, hence why whenever I want to play like that I actually go to other communities such as a Russian community.

Omg he's a psychic too. But what did they change specifically about throwing? I mean is it like AA2/3? Is it actually useable in combat?

Breathing control has been done in other games such as AA2/3. You get in a stable platform; you can hear your heart rate, your breathing rate, you take aim and slow it by using the right mouse button, the sights move up and down with your lung expansion; inspiration and expiration (tidal volume, etc) and a small holding space allows you to engage in the most stabilised position. The bar at the bottom simulates stamina allowance, once you get over it you start shaking and lose aim, you have to breathe in. Sight picture? No idea. Make it slightly blurry when fully focused? Sight alignment? No idea. I have a vague idea that is hard to put into words, especially with mobility i.e. transitions and angular shooting. Don't some other games simulate these or one of them? Pretty sure I've played a game that does and you have to make micro-adjustments. Sometimes in Arma when you're on certain heights, platforms or moving your alignment is off, especially during parts of the movement animation whilst looking down sights and you have to aim further down (by inches) than usual. This happens a lot for me in quick deathmatch PvP's. Follow through? I don't see how it can be done. You keep your finger on and it may probably keep firing. Just like trigger control - it's up to the individual. I mean you can't model trigger pressure either... a mouse clicks straight down, no lee-way. Sometimes Arma 1 did a better job ( ) for reactiveness, animations such as the walking one seen in the video. How fast the guy can spin and stay on target in a microsecond. The only bad thing is really that hunched over, quasimodo type jogging animation.And yes deffo about moving and orientating while having your weapon up. I like the way AA3 does it (and even Skyrim's new mounted combat) because your upper body has a big range of movement and it makes it easier turning into corners to engage, adjusting to enemy position quickly, etc, in CQB. Deadzone tweaked properly in-game may around this range of movement but even that seems stubborn at times. Really, it's not about just fixing things but tweaking them. It's on how BIS model the shooting aspect for instance recoil management and recoil recovery. Maybe there could be a point where a good ROF could be more accurate. For instance GEARS OF WAR have the correct reload point, when you reload you have to click it in the tiny gap available to do the perfect reload. If Arma had something similar for a good rate of fire, that we could not see, maybe a shooters 'skill' would become more apparent. Bit of a dodgey idea now I look on it... Anyways putting the ideas out there. I'll keep thinking about your statement. What ideas do you have? Thinking about this. Assume not. We could try throw this idea out there... When you create your character you can model individual points which can be changed through the edit profile -> edit character options in the main menu, just like your facial hair and face. Stance, grip, strong hand, leaning. Does he do weaver? Isosceles? Does he shoot left or right handed? Does he do an SUL grip? CAR system grip? CSM grip? How does he lean? What do you think? (Remember it's only a random idea). It is just like the weapon preferences they are adding, customising weapons but for your character. And on that topic, customisations will affect accuracy such as bipods, tripods, attachments with muzzle-end weight.

Have they changed the throwing animation? troll award of da century

Air resistance... hmm. W-i-n-d?

Super-human teeth? Sometimes to the point of no good gameplay so you have to dumb them down to human level then a little bit more! ;)

Hey if you guys are ever up for SWAT 4 (SSF mod, TSS) or RVS, PM me!

ROSTOV HARD, Russian. WARP, Russian. OPFOR (New Zealand Based). I have played with them, pretty cool communities. English? British* 16AA 6th AD VOLCBAT (VCB) There are many! Australian, Canadian. You name it.

Yeah agreed, what did you think of ZEUS AI and ACR AI compared to vanilla? Sometimes I dare not face them.

Tactical philosophy: You can create the advantage for yourself. Layering of fire, interlocking fire, out-range the enemy, create sectors and rates of fire, provide suppressive or preventitive fire to isolate the enemy. Haven't you played PR:A2? If you get a good fireteam in a Jackal and mount some vehicle-bourne operations you can kick arse! Same goes with the APC's, IFV's such as the Warrior. We have easily racked up 15+ kills to every death, and that is purely based on some simple tactics, minimal movement or exposure. I'm disturbed at how well you can defeat people in such a PVP game-mode with some simple tricks up your sleeve. One subject for this topic is; Arma 2 currently has a maximum amount of groups. Now with dynamic game-modes such as Domination (? Kind of!), the MSO, so forth, which I believe still have to play by this maximum rule... it leaves one question... Will the maximum number of groups or individuals be increased in Arma 3? This may be due to the fact that you are fighting in a bigger terrain with more towns and even more open-water space.

This is true. As you have stated before, "Arma has it backwards - aiming in close quarters is too hard, aiming at far range is too easy". This is exactly right, even with "Close Quarter" weaponry and sights or attachments it is still flawed. The only thing I agree with in that sense within Arma is fighting with a sniper or marksman rifle in Close Quarters is way too hard and awkward. As Tango says, it's about "shooting on the edge". I must note as well in the top videos the amount of demonstrations we see: Full or partial pistol transition, one or two hands. Combat or tactical (retainment) reloading. Hand and shoulder transitions. The stabilization during shooting in cadence(*). All mentioned before earlier in this thread and others such as the animation topic and wishlist. *This type of stabilization with LMG's I don't think we shall see, but it is a good reference video. What do you think accuracy and accuracy factors should be like in Arma 3 with LMG's or HMG's? Because we are going to see them... and use them. No doubt about that. Some previous posts have mentioned America's Army 3; though good I do not like the accuracy within: http://www.americasarmy.com/images/forums/tt3_9.jpg This cone of fire, dispersion level to me seems a bit overkill. It's just wrong, it narrows within too close a distance. It would make a game like RVS or SWAT 4 where you can be 1-4 meters away and still miss, whilst aiming DIRECTLY at target. http://www.americasarmy.com/images/forums/tt3_8.jpg The instinctive shooting accuracy is totally incorrect. They should research point shooting and its benefits. This makes it seem like 'running and gunning' in reality is not possible with accuracy - when that is entirely wrong. Compare it to SWAT 4, The Regiment's or RVS's movement and orientation speeds is fine but definately not accuracy! All these games lack it in controlled accuracy because they are purely CQC games and 'total' accuracy may spoil them. SWAT 4. The accuracy is just a disgrace in how over-exaggerated it is. What I can agree with is bigger movements making bigger dispersion patters, but the stabilization time is too long, it should take the maximum of a second or two to stabilize yourself (even while in flight) to engage the suspect. The first videos point really evulates it around the 3 minute mark. Second video notice the reticule adjusting to movement and so forth, but how wide it gets for simple movements. You have to virtually be stood still when engaging, which some individuals teach in real-life, but is virtually stupid for gameplay. RVS. In RVS it is the same, stopping and crouching or proning. The CQC side even with the reticule perfectly around the target can leave spaces for misses, 1-3 inches even at 1-3 meters. It can be a joke. Anyone who has ever played these games will get it... and it is very hard to find videos which demonstrate it. Around the 0:40 mark demonstrates accurate hits that miss! Slightly adjustments somehow change a hit on target from a 1 inch miss to a centre mass hit, virtually impossible in reality and stupid. In both games the movement, reactivity and responsiveness is great for CQB but the accuracy and terminal ballistics are terrible. Watch any helmet camera footage, you'll get the point. The Regiment. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9bo9RaLn3Yo Another great game of its time, this time the opposite in what we're talking about. Great accuracy, response, control, etc, most of the time except for the training sessions where it's nighe impossible to complete. But useless animations, it's virtually burst in, shoot, move on. Nothing really special in those terms. COD or BF3 like... You can get quick firefights going and really good conventional game shooting, which is needed for Arma CQB in some sense. An accuracy/response system like this would be great. Bugs and features to work on: - Clipping especially when your sight aim is 'pushed' because of an object, instead your character should move with collisions i.e. bringing the pistol back into retention so you can move around the object and still shoot. - Possible features talked about like breathing control, heart rate control, longer time to line up the shot for harder long-range accuracy. - Better reactiveness with smaller weapons, talked about above. CQC Combat breakthroughs for better and quicker fights, especially for moving onto and acquiring targets (shooting in cadence, close combat accuracy).

More importantly Max: for female soldiers in a combat role in a FUTURISTIC game depicting a HUGE war between big military members of our world.

Depends on situation doesn't it? Aussie Commandos have faced dire numbers. And USSF have faced big numbers too. From Vietnam till now. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shah_Wali_Kot_Offensive In the MSO our team has faced at least 50 in support. Some engages have started out with 10ish and attracted more, including vehicles. Rommel also made a 'swarm' mission where level by level they grow... getting in their 30-40's+!!!

Thanks. They sound like pretty achieveable ideas based on a good philosophy of the game. My idea won't be incorporated so I hope the figure-8 sway is slowed naturally, especially for close quarters and point or instinctive shooting. I agree with what you have stated. They feel clunky to me also. I've gone through 4 years of Arma gaming, 3 mice, multiple different in-game settings and configurations such as deadzone, axis sensitivity, graphics and FPS-speeds to finally get a workable responsive setting that is good for common situations but not all. For instance, I still get over-sway at times, I am still a bit stuttery (the 'weight' factor) trying to get on target with the mouse - in COD/BF3/Nameyourshooter (Sorry metalcraze!) it is a lot more "I see a target at close range, move mouse, I'm on the target, no problems". Fast gaming, the exact needed for PVP/URBAN/CQB. I'd like to expand... Basically you're right. I'm suggesting closer combat weapons are easier for the player to use, not just handle in terms of accuracy: - Less sway and over-sway (Figure-8; stationary and moving) - Faster and more responsive to mouse movements (like a conventional shooter) Larger weaponry or calibres should have: - More sway dependent on breathing etc, and moving sway similar to now (with better character movement animations it could be way easier to control in urban settings) - Less responsive actions as compared with smaller weaponry The simple basis could be: Weight, size, calibre, role/use (I.e. CQB-only or long-range). Note: Stance, leaning would change test conditions and possibilities for A3. "Testing" standards: 5m distance. 1m spacing between targets. Moving or shooting is up to you. M16 Stationary Standards. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RCO_SfEc5oM Start from a right facing position, lateral/pararrell to the target. Power turn into the target zone, bring up sights and sweep from left to right and back. You see some amount of over-sway and brick-like hesistation to drag the sights on target. A "spin" and unnatural movement within the sight picture, my guy must be on crack. Real-life M4-series comparison. He has faster cadence, better control, more responsive shooting, less sway, more accuracy down sight or barrel line. M16 Moving Standards. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1QvlytfCDsE Now this video is all down to HOW YOUR CHARACTER MOVES. He shakes a lot, he wobbles, does he have a peg leg? MP5 Stationary Standards. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Re8GuT6WfGw A hell of a lot more reactive and accurate but still vitally important that it can over-sway easily and miss simple shots. MP5 Moving Standards. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y0CA6hncOcU These standards are better than the rifle moving standards. I think the sight and angle of movement helps a lot. Multiple rounds were put down giving more hits, and you could lead the target easier with it being more reactive and movement. M9 Stationary Standards. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vn9sOoxY-Y0 Way better in terms of recoil obviously but also reactivity and sight picture. M9 Moving Standards. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vn9sOoxY-Y0 A lot weaker of a run. A less stable platform when moving. Combat pace here we come... MP5 and PISTOL REAL LIFE COMPARISON ABOVE, TOP OF THIS PAGE, SF VIDEO. For longer range you should NEED more CONCERNTRATION and SKILL to use it. The opposite effect is seen in Arma for CQB: You need to concerntrate heavily to get line-of-shot, POA/POI. It should be negated in CQB, especially room clearance. Orientate, engage. *NOTE: This is not true research, try it for yourself. I'm not saying BIS should base a conclusion off this post but I'm trying to hit points I find hard to put into words.

Agreed on vehicle controls... But what do you propose they do or what do you want to see as the final outcome?

What do you think tactical pace with pistols will be like? Dual-weilding accuracy is going to be so hard... Flame-bait without mentioning BF3, where's my sticker? Slovakian Special Forces (c.2009, by Tango, SF TL).Love the accuracy seen here. Little sway, cadence of shooting, easy maneuver, stable moving platform, quick shots in succession. I dream tactical pace will be this good... *drool* http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XckaAP8frcE http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XckaAP8frcE Slovakian Special Forces, Linear Range Drills (by Tango SF TL). It is an MP5, I get the arguments. I had a discussion though with Coulumn, I don't know what others think of the idea... But what if certain weaponry changed the way it handled (hold up, I know it already does that) in terms of these new features/ideas. For instance you needed real trigger control, good consistent breathes and a slow heart rate for a sniper rifle but it was really negated for the MP5 or a pistol, what you needed there was good sight alignment, picture and a small amount of recoil control.

Well there are other topics that talk about AI improvement, realism, accuracy which all add up to a longer and harder fought firefight. Was that an MP game shown, PVP? Or was it SP? You can get some great firefights going, it's all about tactical and strategic placement of troops, normally encompassing a linear-type mission.