pettka

Thanks a lot for reporting the issue, we are already working on the fix. It actually goes through our internal QA process as the programmers have possibly isolated the issue :icon_twisted:

That particular changelog entry was only about AI driving, it shouldn't affect player driving the car at all. We are trying to find the source of the issue too, could You, please, try to provide more details about mods in the Feedback Tracker? :icon_twisted:

We are still investigating possible connection of Squad Radar with other systems, namely Revive, it may take just a bit longer to hit the Main Branch of the game :icon_evil:

Definitely a good choice, dropping feedback is always beneficial, thanks a lot! I was just a bit confused that there might have been something more broken that I have missed during fixing the initial issue :icon_twisted:

It seems to me like You are on the main branch of the game. I was not able to reproduce it on Dev-Branch of the game as it should have been fixed some time ago even according to the changelog :icon_twisted:

Food for thoughts: One more point to the marketing communications, that is kind of different from industry standards (not that there aren't companies doing that, as it makes sense at least from our point of view) - we don't have much of a marketing staff but we rather prefer direct communication by developers. That comes with a prize however, as the developers usually don't have that much time in the last parts of development - we focus more on the actual development than marketing. That means we spend more time reading the feedback, adjusting the development accordingly where it is possible, but don't reply as much as we would like to. Realistically speaking, it seems like a no time to write down a post on forums, publish a screenshot, provide some description, but thanks to a passionate crowd, it is a huge deal of responsibility every single time. Anything we mention is analyzed to last detail, which shows a great dedication, and imposes a solid barrier to developers to just write a reply and forget :icon_twisted: Yes, we know we kind of suck at communication on the forums, but it only gets better after the release, as you may see on several occasions in Dev-Branch part of forums. Our marketing and communications lads are working hard to improve this, but it takes time to make a solid connection between devs and marketing crew. Lets see in the near future, as we prepare the plans and intend to share them to see your feedback :icon_twisted:

As far as I can tell, there has not been any such change. All the vanilla assets should be still fully available without any changes. Could You, please, possibly provide us with some example of what can be the issue? :icon_twisted:

21-07-2016 EXE rev. 137676 (game) EXE rev. 137682 (launcher) Size: ~968 MB (depends on Apex ownership) DATA Added: Hull hit point with damage material to RHIB ship so that it visually deteriorates under incoming fire even when not destroyed Tweaked: Updated vegetation LODs to smoothen the transitions between them Fixed: Limping should no longer have a shake in the arm. Positions shouldn't jump when switching to pistol, and movement was dialed down for launcher idles. Fixed: The CMR-76 6.5mm could get stuck during reloading in the prone stance Tweaked: Weapon switching on-the-move has been disabled for all Revive-related animation states Fixed: Adjusted get-in memory points on the Tempest The East Wind (potential spoilers) Apex Protocol (potential spoilers) ENGINE Fixed: Script command inArea for triggers Fixed: Localized the axis strings for detecting joysticks

15-07-2016 EXE rev. 137574 (game) EXE rev. 137571 (launcher) Size: ~484 MB (depends on Apex ownership) DATA Tweaked: Disabled saving in the Main Menu scene Tweaked: SMGs (Sting, Vermin, PDW 2000 and Protector) can now be stored in vests as well as in backpacks. Therefore we have four distinct categories of weapons in regard to their allowed inventory storage space now: Pistols: uniform, vest, backpack SMGs: vest, backpack Rifles: backpack Long rifles & launchers: none Tweaked: Decreased mass of SPAR-16, SPAR-16 GL and SPAR-16S weapons to better match the size and weight of their models Fixed: Increased engine and fuel hit point armor on Kajman and decreased their armor on Taru Tweaked: ORBAT credits Tweaked: The best matching server is now selected as default in MP Quick Play Eden Editor Added: Waypoints for Vehicle-in-Vehicle operations are now available in the Eden Editor Added: Eden Editor Attribute for setting custom textures on selected objects (e.g. laptop or TV screens, billboards, helper signs, etc.) Added: Ability to merge a scenario into the currently opened one (external files will not be merged) Potential spoilers ENGINE Fixed: Countermeasures for Car vehicles (T117552) Tweaked: Speed of AI driving Tweaked: Disabled soft formation for car formation driving Fixed: Less clunky parachute landing Fixed: AI in a vehicle loaded into an empty vehicle will not process their unload command Tweaked: Optimized visibility check (AI agents will not do raycast tests to another friendly AI agent) Fixed: Tactical pace is now slowed down in shallow water Fixed: The filePatchingExceptions Dedicate Server config param should work properly now Added: diag_ActiveScripts script command returning an array of running scripts Eden Editor Fixed: The inArea command was broken for triggers Fixed: Disabling attribute when more values are there in case of the same per object type with different objects

Thanks a lot for the note, this may deserve some explanation. As a rule of thumb, we don't translate faction names, call signs and abbreviations. I hope it makes sense now :icon_twisted:

Dragon01 is right, I'm sorry for the confusion. We take one (limping) step after another. The first was actually the limping itself to provide players with a mean how to distinguish damage to legs and its results. Revive is another step, actually two, with scripted implementation now and hopefully a full engine support later. While the full battlefield clearance and medical system may be the ultimate goal, the road is still long and I cannot promise when neither if all the parts are going to click together in the end. We would like so, but it's a development, even three years after the game release :icon_twisted:

PC Gamer (via their Youtube channel)

The texture differs, NATO is a lighter green one :icon_twisted: Other than that, they should behave the same.

While I think that community should create content for themselves, because if not, why would we even bother with the new Eden Editor added thanks to Apex, it's definitely not what I have said. The difference is that You, the community, are better at tailoring the content specifically to the needs of Your groups. Hell, watching for example the way RG (sorry, guys, You had the last live-stream and came to mind first) plays their missions, it is something we may possibly deliver, but most of You would still want to customize it. Each unit has their way of playing the game, with a lot of specifics. That is the diversity of Arma community I'm speaking about. We might have chosen an approach that doesn't fit Your playstyle, still, we didn't suddenly forget how to make authentic scenarios as You may see even in the Showcase: End Game and the new End Game modes. While I have seen tons of comments all along the forums that people don't play our campaigns, and we have some numbers, Apex Protocol is a chance for us to show You something different, something that You would never play otherwise (and no, it's not any "Life" mod). The campaign has been clearly marketed as a co-op one, to be played with friends for best experience, yet, we want to support the military feeling of it. There's an armillion (or two) of things well hidden that support diverse gameplay. Even I was surprised during exfil from one of the missions when my teammates passed me in a previously well hidden van while I was driving a quad that was obvious. And that was just one of many moments when I have realized that Apex Protocol is different. Thanks to Tanoa setting, thanks to Eden Editor, we have created a meaningful environment in the scenarios with a lot of small stories just to be found. While some of You may not enjoy Apex to the fullest because of different approach they prefer, there is still a lot for the community to work with. If the result is an even better quality of community missions, I'll be glad, if it is combined with having a good time playing our content, I'll be happier :icon_twisted:

This should change pretty soon, we are running some last tests before the Sneak Preview branch update :icon_twisted:

First things first, thanks a lot to everyone for the feedback. We are listening to it, as Zipper already stated, and we are already considering next steps. One thing I would like to stress out is the main strength of Arma as I see it - it is a platform for diverse playstyles and we cannot make everyone happy. As diverse as Arma is, it needs even some of Your help to make it according to Your wishes. That's partially where the Apex Protocol comes in - it may serve as a bridge between You, core of our community that has played the game for literally thousands of hours, and newcomers. Apex Protocol was first and foremost meant to be accessible. That may sound harsh, but as much as the scenarios may seem easy and fast paced for You, that much they were harsh on people joining the Arma crowd. We have accepted a compromising condition of the campaign, that it won't be the best thing ever for our core users. Even I like for example the Showcase: End Game better as it provides more military meaningful challenge, but even the approach to the mission matters. For one, I have really liked the fifth scenario of campaign mainly because of the achievement hidden in it - You need to do it without being detected by any enemy. And challenges like that change the experience from playing the campaign a lot. We have played several sessions with our military consultants and the game was really different. We set the rules for ourselves, and we didn't even need any respawn to finish the whole campaign. Working as a fire team of four, checking our approaches, covering each other, all the things I love the most about Arma teamplay were there. The main constraint we imposed on ourselves while working on Apex was to provide a meaningful conclusion of first term after Arma 3 release. That includes adding new vehicle classes that we felt missing, and answering one of the most pressing community request about the East Wind campaign - to provide You with a more explained ending. There were many clues well hidden in the East Wind campaign, but we felt it's our duty to provide some ending that makes it easier to create a canon. This is a double-edged sword, on one hand, we needed to create a story-driven campaign, on the other, we wanted to provide chances for varied community to enjoy the playthrough in co-op. It may sound harsh, but we felt that the more hard core of our community is able to do better scenarios to fill their specific needs than we would ever be able to do, and this is why we decided for more linear story-driven approach that may show the possibilities that Arma 3 provides to the creators even on the production value scale. And obviously, one of the points was to showcase Tanoa as many of the scenarios lead You to the hidden beauties of the archipelago. We would like to return to the roots too, and there are still many plans for after-Apex development that may be closer to what You would expect, while obviously, given the diversity of the community, some of our steps are going to be even in other directions. There is no need to be afraid too much if You see a thing or two leading in a different direction in the future, that's inevitable, we still want to stay true to our heritage and prepare the best platform mainly for military gameplay.

Thanks a lot for report, we are already investigating the cause and working on the fix :icon_twisted:

Config errors discussion has been moved to its own topic :icon_twisted:

A valid point, sure. As far as I can tell, we have read all the feedback, and it's being processed. Warkanaut was aware of some blocking issues in the first release as there was some mismatch of data, the sheer amount of work prevented him from responding sooner :icon_twisted: As for the usability of the system, it's more about doing one step at a time, rather than taking a whole damage system and all the consequences at once and changing it from scratch. It takes its time, and there is a lot of work ahead of us, but we intend to support Arma 3. We would like (no promises) to convert the current system into an engine implementation. That would have all the handles and thingies expected from such system, but it's still a long way to go :icon_twisted:

Dragging and carrying is out of scope of the Revive system. We would like to tackle that if we address the health system in the future, but that's nothing certain if that is even going to happen. We would like to, but that's no guarantee as there is always a lot we would like to do and optimize. Just for the record, by default, I don't tend to address new feature requests in feedback threads to a different feature, that's why there was no response :icon_twisted:

This actually means that Goggles should correctly use their shape on eyes while using both NVG and TI modes. There was an issue before that TI mode showed goggles raised :icon_twisted:

We are considering it, don't be afraid. Artists are now fully in bughunting mode, we hope to release the texture samples for both vehicles and weapons later, when it is calmer :icon_twisted:

We are investigating what caused the behaviour, we hope to have that fixed as soon as possible. Thanks a lot for letting us know :icon_twisted:

Dev-Branch to Dev-Branch. Sneak branch is RC with its own changelog thread. :icon_twisted:

This is actually a more complex issue - collective is used for AFM only and it doesn't make sense to us to have a drone using AFM technology - drones have a complex software simplifying the input to standard flight model levels :icon_twisted: