lightspeed_aust

For those of you having mission problems - it's likely due to some updates in Arma, or changes to Lingor which have changed the map so that my missions no longer fit on it. I won't be going back to fix those becoz time has moved on, but........ Variable and CIA's new video has inspired me to pick up mission making again (coz I do it for the players to enjoy). Not going to say much yet but I had a bunch of half finished missions plus room to reinvent these ones and create some new ones. Will be a new campaign on Lingor, new enemy, new objectives - war on Cocaine Trade codename Operation PowderBurn.

Slight change of plan. I need cocaine packages about 1 kilo blocks of the shit. Thanx.

I'll find some pics. @scorch There are sandbags in the editor already.

I have a special request for materials that one might find in a drug lab to produce meth or coke. I need for a new campaign, plz let me know if that's possible. Thank Lighty.

Looking forward to this release. Might get me mission making again.

You know that's a good idea but with a slight tweak. Given the importance of stance shifting versus menu, perhaps it works better to make stance the default and Ctrl+mouse wheel for the menu?!

Lol ok

Perfection!

Of course it's a system. There's more to camouflage then pretty swirls or dots on cloth, do some research before you post or you will just lose all credibility.

It is called a camouflage system. 'Nuff said.

This.

I support this, current process is an immersion killer. I thought about the mouse wheel but then where to remap the ingame menu scrolling.

Scrim, I don't think anyone is saying that tech and robotics will transform the battlefield nor render obsolete the infantry on the ground, but there are likely to be some new gadgets and other in use and this is the opportunity to discuss and propose those possibilities.

What's your point exactly?

Ok gents, well I don't think we will all agree on the way forward but I will live with whatever BIS decides. Cheers Lighty

I decided to go back through the thread and look at some of the vids to see examples of suppression. Now this vid is a good example of ppl not understanding suppression. In the start of video, the soldier is clearly not suppressed, if he was, he wouldn't have been able to move freely in the open. Bullets are not directed in a tight proximity to him so he can move to counter attack. He doesn't know where the enemy is but he can still move and attempt to better his position and turn the situation to his sides favour. Later on he takes some hits and is forced behind a rock. He is pinned by bullets landing close and he also gets shot. Great suppression! Never during that moment was artificial effect required. His wits were sharp, he didn't have blurry vision or inaccurate fire (obviously when he got shot in the arm things changed but let's not bring that into it except to say that due to accurate suppressive fire, I.e. bullets being accurate on target, he got shot. So I looked at the other videos and you could hardly call either of those suppressive fire. Just because you're taking fire, does not mean you're suppressed. :)

I think the critical point of your statement above is....That if your position is being suppressed, and you stick out your head, chances are you'll die. The act of effectively suppressing enemy forces is the all that is required! You don't need nor should there be an artificial effect to indicate that you are being suppressed. You hear the bullets, you see the dust kicked up on your position. You are suppressed. On the other hand, spraying bullets from an LMG in general direction will not and should not by default, create suppression. The bullets must be accurate or an enemy under fire will realise that they have room to move, or an opportunity to counter. No smoke and mirrors required folks....just accuracy.

Just want to clear up that I think we both agree.

Maybe there are suppression issues in PvP or with your AIs ability to suppress or AI to be suppressed in SP - these issues I would not know because I don't play SP or PvP. I play Coop - and I can say for sure that I have been suppressed by AI who's bullets are flying over my head or landing near me. Did I need vision to blur or to lose control of my weapon or aim to some degree? No, I just knew if I stayed where I was or stuck my head up, I would die sooner or later. In this case, the AI had achieved successful suppressive fire. I still believe though (and have read articles that attest to the fact that) unless bullets are within very close proximity to those being suppressed then you will not achieve nor maintain suppression. Basically, spraying bullets in the general direction will not achieve desired effect - the bullets have to be within a metre or two. If you fail to keep the bullets within this proximity then you open the door for the suppressed to become the suppressors, or to allow them to get out of danger and potentially turn the tide in their favour. And this is why I don't support artificial effects - because the suppressed should be able to switch to the suppressor if and when the opportunity arises. In a PvP scenario, some players are saying that other players can stand up and snipe them - I would argue in this scenario that you have not achieved suppression. If it's because the players standing up know they can respawn a la BF or CoD, then this is not a reason for creating artificial effects. It is a reason to reduce or remove respawns. I hope this makes some sort of sense.

I disagree with the cowering in fear. For a civvie yes, Trained soldiers, however, would be focused and looking for a way out of the situation. Would their vision be blurry or their weapons shaking as bullets fly overhead or land nearby? No, I would not expect this to happen, that's Hollywood to me.

I am back from holidays now so will start work on tutorial this weekend.

can really see the difference now - does look good.

What I'm seeing does not look dissimilar to what I already see from Bad Bensons mod. I was expecting to see significant difference between BBs and your concept.

My two cents... The idea that you need to add some imaginary effects to Arma3 to simulate suppression is complete bollox. If the rounds are landing close enough in this game then you are ( by default) suppressed because you know if you stick your head out there's a very real chance that you're going to lose it. If the rounds aren't that close, then you won't 'feel' suppressed because you aren't. Don't need any BS.

Map making is something I'm considering tackling this year but as I'm quite time poor I would like an idea of what I'm up against to determine if it's feasible. If I decided to tackle a map say 5x5km how long would it take to create the island without objects? To create one village with say 10 streets and 50 houses and other bits and pieces? To add trees and grass? To place the roads? What else has to be done? If I decide to go 10x10km do I get some economies of scale? i.e. instead of it taking twice as long, it's only an extra 20-30% effort? I know some will argue over hours spent but I'm just looking for approximates. Thanks Lighty.