-Coulum-

It was 1.22 stable but I have spread false info. In the mission I was playing there are enemy AT in the distance. While I was shooting the hunter I think a rocket hit it and I mistook it for my .50. Oops, hehe. Yeah the hunters are pretty much tanks now. But regardless the issue still persists. Basically if you shoot anything enough times, anywhere, with a strong enough gun, it will explode, in my experience. For example unleashing on an offroad bumper with a .50 cal machinegun will cause it to explode. (I made sure to test that one proper). That doesn't make sense.

Yeah, if it weren't for the inevitable explosion, vehicle damage is actually fairly well handled. Its just that everything seems to have to blow up when it is disabled which is dumb. The other day I was bored and tried shooting the driver of an Hunter with an MX. Didn't do anything. Then I say "Hey I'm sure a .50 cal would punch through that glass.". Tested it out, and sure enough it did. It made me happy because I love to see that kind of detail and penetration simulation. Then I went and shot the gunners glass twice. The entire car blew up. How dumb is that? You guys are so close to having a "reasonable" damage system for your vehicles, please just take out the explosions!

All the things. I really don't know if I can choose one. I guess if BIS were to only perfect one thing I would want it to be the ai. Vvehicle simulation and editor would be last on my list. Sound as well, but only because there are/going to be great mods that improve the sound greatly.

Yes, I concur. It does feel weird compared to real life though, but no matter what you can't achieve that feeling with a mouse and keyboard.

No I am absolutely serious. BI can pretty much do or not do anything they want. Obviously I hope that they take into consideration what I and everyone else wants, but at the end of the day its up to them. Whatever they do there will be good and bad consequences. I will try not to rant, but it erks me that often this community comes off as overly entitled. I actually think BI has spoilt us with their above average community involvement and constant support. Not many games are supported so long after they are released. Even less have plans for new free features and game mechanics. And yet we complain because we might have to see a few pop up ads when using optional dlc content that we didn't want to pay for. Quite frankly, its ridiculous. We bought a single product from BI. Not a service. And now people get upset because BI is trying to encourage you to buy their new product so that they can continue to provide you a service, for free. I understand that Lite was better for us, avoided splitting the community, yada yada yada, but sometimes the reality is a good idea simply isn't feasible. So is the customer always right? Hell no! Sometimes the customer is fucking delusional and has no idea how much work is going on behind the scenes to satisfy their precious desires. Varanon please don't take what I say personally I am not directed this at you, its just that you inspired me to write the impression I get from some of the community. I do not mean to offend you or anyone else, just to express my opinion. Sorry for the rant/offtopic

What oukej said, plus mods like asr allow you to change skill of units based on their type/faction. Having the ingame slider for both east and west was poor IMO because it could easily mess up the desired balance of a mission. I always ended up putting them to the same values anyways. Options are usually good but excessive "moving parts" in a system isn't.

Damnit I knew that my post was too vague. I totally agree with you. Customer is rarely "right". In the end BIS can only do so much and please so many people while still accomplishing their goal of making money. Like you say, community feedback is just one of many factors to consider. And in the end it is BI's game. They can do whatever the hell they want with it, regardless of customers.

I pretty much agree with vegeta and darkside. The ai is generally pretty fair. They have limited abilities, and you can position yourself in relation to the ai in order to gain the upper hand. Generally if you lose, at some point you made a mistake. Whether it was sticking your head up too long or simply attacking a force that outnumbered you too much, at some point you fucked up (minus the rare stray headshot). It is important to remember that often when the shooting starts it is too late. No amount of repositioning is going to save you if the ai catches you exposed and outnumbers you. People need to recognize this and focus on planning their assaults, movements and defences. The planning and preparation is pretty much when success is decided against the ai. Despite them being relatively fair they still aren't realistic/human human (ability wise). Spotting especially needs alot of work. As for accuracy, the ai is well balanced but a bit on the easy side right now. And it needs to be more dynamic. I am hoping that it will be increased a bit but player actions will effect it more. Ie. Ai will be less accurate the more incoming fire they are receiving (sonic cracks, impacts explosions casualties), and their accuracy will also be effected by how well they can see the player (peaking out of a bush vs standing in the middle of the road.) I am really hoping that the devs will achieve these things by continuing to expand the "dynamic error calculation". What they have done already with that has really helped make the ai more balanced.

Damn right it not the word of god. I don't understand why people get the idea that the situation is otherwise.

Yes I did misunderstand. That would be good but I think would allow a bit to much freedom to make the dlc actually worth buying no? Lets say only one person in the server has the dlc. The mission has 5 dlc helis all requiring 2 men to pilot/gun them. Even though only one owns the dlc, all ten of them could get into the helis right at the start of the mission with no penalty (first time is free) and play the entire mission. Without any need to buy the dlc. Of course this is awesome for the players but I don't see it being profitable for BI. Or am I still missing something?

So what do you think should happen? Personally notifications and overlays while using something that I haven't bought is the least of my concerns. What other way is there to allow people to enjoy the game without buying the dlc, yet be clearly aware of the fact that they have not bought it (and give them motivation to buy it)? The plan they got so far is pretty much the best option because there as been very little else thrown out there. Interesting. I'm not sold really, but I see what you mean by having the need to be able to take over the wheel at a moments notice - ie. if are in a dlc jeep you do not own and the driver gets shot, it would be nice if you could take the wheel to get out of danger. But even then, what if that vehicle is necessary for the remainder of the game? is everyone gonna take 30 second shifts at the wheel? Here's an idea building off of yours sorta: what if there could only be as many dlc users as there are dlc owners in the server? So anyone can use the dlc content in the server IF a dlc owner is not currenlty using the content himself. Now when the humvee driver (and dlc owner) gets killed, the passenger (non dlc owner) can take the wheel for the rest of the game (unless dlc owner respawns and gets back in). So basically every dlc owner can use the dlc content. If a dlc owner is not using dlc content, than some else who doesn't own the dlc can use it. If the dlc owner ever wants to use the dlc content, then non owner will be kicked out of the vehicle (in as nice a way as possible). This should alleviate "couldn't finish the mission because our dlc owners all died" problems. Too me it still all sounds overly complex, but there seems to be a lack of suggestions here so I figure I would try to spit something out. Maybe it will give you guys ideas.

Exactly. And as for the poll itself, there is no clear majority. Many people are voting for "go back to lite" which isn't an option, while very few have their own ideas. And to top it off, of course people will want the best thing for them. If there was an option to just give content out for free in the poll, I am sure that would be the most voted. Doesn't mean its what BI should do. All in all the poll doesn't mean much of anything.

Am I underestimating how many missions will be unplayable due to dlc requirements? I mean lets take the heliopters dlc for example. A 32 player coop includes three transport dlc helicopters. That means that as long as three people, who are willing to be pilots, play, the other 29 don't need the dlc at all. BI said that non dlc owners could still be transported in dlc content. And odds are people who enjoy piloting are likely to have bought the dlc. Are you guys telling me that all 32 people need to own that dlc or this mission is unplayable. That sounds overly dramatic to me. An interesting idea. But as I kind of mention above, it already works that way to a extent. Basically the number of dlc players needed to properly play a mission depend on how dlc heavy that mission is. If there is lots of dlc content you need lots of dlc players. If the mission only has a bit of dlc content you don't need nearly as many. But yes I agree that it would definitely be good if the game could tell you if you have enough dlc players before you get an hour into the mission and find out your fucked because of lack of dlc. making it so meeting a certain percentage of dlc users lets everyone use dlc stuff... I'm not sure. I pay bis back as well as it should. I have three solutions for you. Don't try using dlc stuff you don't own. buy the dlc. Or don't go on servers that use dlc you do not own. No immersion breaking messages. Or do you have another solution that doesn't include BIS giving away free stuff? Amen. If you make it so people want to buy it, the community will not be split and nobody will feel they are being forced to buy something just to continue playing a game they already payed for.

I really don't know what to say... Yes there are valid concerns out there. People who own dlc that play with people who don't might find situations where they suffer. I think less often than one might think, but nonetheless it will be frustrating when half your team can't get back to extraction because there are no able bodied pilots. Or when your out of ammo and go to pick up a fallen comrades weapon only to find you don't have access to this weapon. Some clans might just reject the dlc totally for this reason. Inversely, some might make dlc's mandatory requirement to play. And some will just go with it and try their best to accommodate both those with dlc and those without - I mean a basic infatryman (most often the majority of a team) will not need to have the helicopters dlc to enjoy a mission. As long as you got a couple pilots with the dlc the scenario should play out fine. Infact it will benefit some - I don't fly so I don't have to buy the dlc and I still get nice textures when I see someone else flying it or am transported in it. But the fact is I don't see any better option. Lite stuff gives people too much. Maybe if it was more visually unappealing it might work - if you use a dlc asset you do not own it will just be a bright pink alpha image (too you only), you will have the decals over the screen, and be prompted to buy it. maybe that would work. But I think it would just come across as unpolished and even more "in your face, forcing you to buy" then what BI plan to do now. You can see it, you can get transported in it and test it in sp, but if you don't own it you can't use it. sounds fair to me. Arma 2 lite stuff was fine but I think its time to realize we were very lucky to have it. In the end I think the success of the dlc will be determined by what it brings and for what price. If the DLC are clearly worth the money a clan might enforce everyone switches to it. If the DLC are not the they will not make missions using the DLC. While I know it is just for fun and not a serious dlc, Karts was not a very good example.

The Lite DLC in arma 2, was BI giving things to people for free. Clearly (see poll) lots of people want that back. So yes lots of "people want BIS to just give them things for free". What if when a pop up for a dlc came up there was an option to "never remind me again", that totally removed the content and ads from your game. Would that make you okay with the new system?

I believe the system is fair. The community is not split because you can play with people that use the dlc content, even if you don't have it. But you are also encouraged to buy the dlc because you can't really use the content yourself. This is how it should be. Now there will be certain situations where scenarios are ruined because only one player is left to use a certain vehicle but can't - but honestly that is not really BI fault as much as the player's. If you didn't pay for the content why do still expect to be able to use it? If you don't want a mission ruined like this either don't play the mission or buy the dlc. Its as simple as that. As much as the "dlc lite" system worked in arma 2 for the player, I very much doubt it worked for BI. All the players I know in real life, did not buy the dlc, me included, because we felt so very little need to. blurry textures aren't much of a problem when most of the time you are looking at your surroundings trying to spot the enemy. I can only assume this was the case for much of the community. Why waste time and money on a dlc when I don't need it? Now I am not saying the new system is perfect. I can think of some ways it can be improved. But for the most part I think those that are against have been somewhat spoilt by BI's generosity in arma 2, and are not appreciating the fact that BI is a company that needs to make a profit. They are providing you with new content. It costs money for them to make that content. You can't expect them to just let you use if for free. Compared to other companies, BI is still being quite considerate. For the most part people are voting for what will benefit them the most (not unreasonable). If you added a fourth option that said "fuck it, let everyone have the dlc content for free!"... well I can imagine what the most voted option would be. That doesn't mean that BIS should do it though. I can only assume there is a profits analysis that is telling a very different story than this poll, which is why BI is trying to change things up.

This pretty much sums it up.

Thanks. That is pretty much a wishlist. And I think we will be able to sum it up pretty well: aLL TeH TInGS!1!! Don't get me wrong I like to dream but it is in the end just another wishlist thread. What might be interesting is weighing features against one another. For example, what would you rather: 3d scopes or improved long range textures? Bipods+indepth sway mechanics or wind simulation?

Its not confirmed. They can assign stuff to people but that doesn't mean its gonna happen. It means they want it to happen. But absolutely no promises have been made. Can you please take this off the "confirmed list". As for features, I won't be to specific, but Bipods Weapon handling limitations (can'to insta 360 with a lmg, big weapons are clunky etc.) Really indepth sway/sight misalignment that is effected by breathing/fatigue/stress/focus/movement/weapon/all teh tings/etc. Of course everything else people have been saying I hope for too, but above are the things that are most important to me.

Third person is "cheating" from a realism standpoint, I don't really see any way that can be argued. Yes it might add realistic aspects, but it also adds unrealistic aspects. Lack of a realistic feature is better than an unrealistic feature. Plus firstperson isn't actually that restrictive if you have a comfortable FOV, use free look, and have played enough to generally know where your body is. Yes I will occasionally die because I thought my elbow was tucked behind cover when it wasn't, but I would rather that than being able to see guys outflanking me behind a wall, toss a grenade at them and kill them when I should have never been able to see them. Its like arguing for players to be able to jump 100ft in the air and arguing its realism with: "well its realistic because in real life you can jump". I know, I know its an extreme analogy but I hope you get my point. My feelings exactly.

Actually a relatively fair review. Two things I would like to touch on: Performance is greatly improved over arma 2 and I am happy to be able to play on a laptop with decent settings and performance. BI has done a great job. BUT There are still issues with MP. A well made mission with a reasonable amount of people will run fine. But more elaborate/poorly optimized missions run poorly. This not even necessarily BI fault, but there definitely is room for improvement if they want arma to be as open to ones imagination as they claim to. On weapon handling I generally agree there is a lack of realistic limitations. I do think the new handling is better, but it is still lacking alot. We have gone from one extreme to another. I have a feeling BI is focusing on this issue and will address it over the next year though through their expansions/dlc features. Looking forward to that. Armour is messed up. Shoot a guy with a helmet anywhere in the head and his he still beneifts from the helmets protection. Its better than the total lack of protection in arma 2, but definitely isn't modeled at a fine enough detail. I don't expect any changes to that any time soon, but you do get used to it and it does make weapon choice and closing in on the enemy more important. There is no doubt that bullets are still lethal.

This is kind of worrying. On page 25 it also says: So I wouldn't worry. Regardless of what the flagship is, I think BIS is invested in Arma 3, and I would even go as far as to say that an arma 4 (way way way down the road) is not unlikely. And I am pretty sure this is largely because of DayZ sales (I mean arma 3 sold well too, but not quite the same as DayZ).

Cool stuff. Is this a temporary effect (ie. just after the ai has been hit), or a long term effect (as long as a ai is wounded)? Sounds like its just temporary, but I just want to make sure, and can't test at this moment. Always nice to see the AI changelog bumped!

Lol I personally will try to restrain from overthinking things until BIS actually releases the dlc on dev branch, which is a ways away. No use worrying about issues/features that don't, and may not ever exist. Lets see what they got before we get too, too, excited eh?

Always nice to hear, looking forward to seeing the ai evolve over time.