-Coulum-

Pretty much. Before the last bunch of patches the most I was able to get the ai to survive was seven 5.56 shots to the head at 600 metres. At point blank it was 4 hits when I purposely aimed for the very edges of their helmets. Now, after the latest patch, its no more than 2. But a solid head hit from a rifle will kill in one shot. So unless your "entire magazine" only has a couple rounds left, it is extremely unlikely you hit the head with the "entire magazine". In the end, damage is the same for player and ai (assuming the same armour is worn and on regular or harder difficulty). Make a vid or better yet steps to repro. I know I sure have tried. But I can't get it to happen.Assuming you aren't over exaggerating I would say that the only way this is possible is through lag/desync or damage mutating scripts/mods.

I don't know about others, but I think this latest tweak did it for headshots. Too me they are pretty balanced. Basically rifle will kill with one direct hit. At close range, a 556 glancing hit will not kill. 6.5 glancing hits will not kill at longer ranges in one shot, and 7.62 glancing hits will not kill at even longer ranges than that. Pretty solid. I think its as balanced/realistic as headshot are going to get at the moment. Good work. Now for vests. In theory vests are "alright" as is. But it still ruins the enjoyment at times. I can understand 556 being relatively ineffective. And 6.5 I can also see being just average. But I don't know, having to put two 762's into a guy to drop him throws me off. I want it to be one. But at the same time armour would,, and should have benefits even against 762... Maybe, would it be possible to make it so the 762 is one shot kill in the torso but loses this ability at ranges over, say, 300m? I really don't know. I will have to think and test on it some more. What do others think?

Devs already acknowledge that this would probably be the ideal way to do it. They tried and are trying. But at the moment they can't get it to work apparently. Right now the immediate thing they are limited to is making armour soak up more or less.

Yeah helmets really aren't that effective against rifles at close range. How does this sound Direct hits from any rifle will one shot kill Indirect glancing hits from 556 will not Indirect glancing hits from 6.5 at 300m+ will not Indirect glancing hits from 7.62 at 600m+ will not Personally thats the kind of balance I think helmets should offer. They should offer some protection against rifles - but defnitely not at point blank or against direct head on hits. I have made a mission that tries to achieve this balance by multiplying damage (by 1.6). Do you think that kind of balance would work? There should be (albeit rare) conditions that allow you to get hit in the head and survive. There have been reports of soldiers getting hit and saved by their helmets from AK's. Of course the quality of the ammo might of had to do with it but still, it is possible. And maybe these helmets are not only be kevlar any more...

In general the ai is too caught up with the enemy and not focused enough on keeping themselves alive. Basically between trying to stay in formation and trying to shoot the enemy, ai rarely has a chance to go find cover. However, in a game as unforgiving as arma it should be one of the first things they try to do if the enemy is not closer than 20m. It always erks me when my guy sees an enemy fireteam at 100m while in the middle of the road. I am begging him to come to the other side and to safety with me, but no, he wants to kill baddies. Despite an entire fireteam opening up he continues to shoot rather than running to the buildings on the side of the road. If he is lucky he gets one before he is pulverised. Annoying as hell. Bcombat does well to try and fix the ai's priorities (though I don't think it works to make them obey better). I really hope bis see the positive results of this and try to recreate it, in the far future, when they are able to try and improve the ai behaviour. Unfortunately probably not any time soon. They already have a lot on their plate.

My thoughts exactly. Yeah pretty much this. I doubt anyone who plays arma 3 wants arma 2 movement back. But that doesn't mean that arma 3 movement can't use some improvement and limitations. And it bugs the hell out of me when people jump to the conclusion that those who want a bit of change, want to fully revert back to arma 2 clunkyness. Really? Its unfortunate, but many arcade games do have more realistic mechanics than this.

Yeah pretty much. Arma body armour isn't at all realistic. But it is there. In games like GR1, arma 2 its just ignored. But I am totally in agreement that it results in a dumb thought process for players. Because in real life people are worried about being shot period. Doesn't matter if its in the head neck vest arms or legs nobody want to get shot. In game world however it is different. Nobody wants to die. A shot that is nonlethal is not an issue, especially when they have a FAK. And when it takes at least two shots to die, sometimes even more, people act different. And, well, ai act like ai. This relates to what roshnak was saying earlier, the penalty for getting shot (but not dying), is not high enough. The only thing people are worried about is immediate death. All that said though I don't think it is impossible to have the both realistic armour and realistic gameplay (at least on par with arma 2). The system just needs to be ALOT more detailed. That was awesome. I believe your clothes would even visually get wet when you waded through water, aswell.

Yeah your right. What I should have said is "you want the possibility for lethal one shot gameplay". Basically there should alsways be a way to get around the armour if you are good enough and set up the scene right. Now there is not due to the limitations of the game. Your legs can be shot out (but only prevents you from running) and getting shot in the arm does decrease aim - but like you say that is pretty minimal. Especially when a FAK and 3 seconds will fix that all. I do remember in arma 2 when your arms were shot out and you were exhausted - now that was some negative effects. Bleeding is good to though it doesn't really act as a penalty on your combat ability. But for a realitsic wounding system, concsiousness and bleeding are definitely a must. Yep. That is really the biggest problem. It would be great if they solved it. Then you would be able to shoot guys in the side or in the shoulders when they are prone and the bulllet would go straight into their torso with lethal strength. Right now you shoot a guy where the the collor bones meet - a place that is very vulnerable and be very crippling and likely lead to death in little time... and it makes no difference. He flinches and acts as if he took it in the plate. It is clear that things are lacking to fill our need for "allz teh tihngs1!!!". But the devs do know this. And though I doubt they are going to make a simulation of all the arteries in the body and each scratch in a plate, I do think that they want to and are putting time into improving it. Its just these things aren't something you just "put in". You have to figure out how to put it in. Quotes like this aren't promises but they give me hope: For now we just have ignore realism and suggest to them how to improve the system for gameplay by simply making armour better or worse. Because at this time its all they can change. Hopefully with time that will change.

I mistyped in that quote, should be Regardless. Yeah you are right. If they could add some hit reactions and make armour actually cover realistic portions of the body the system would be near perfect. And both of these have been suggested many times here and on the development forums. Problem is the devs have already said several times in the development forums that they can't do this at the moment (though they claim "the fight is far from over"). Thus for the time being, I repeat:Its all about finding the right balance - You don't want armour to have no benefits, but at the same time you want lethal one shot type gameplay.

Once again you guys are going in the right direction. These latest changes are really quite close to hitting the sweet spot (for headshots). I encourage you to take it just a bit further. Everything seems just tad bit too weak still - 5.56 are capable of one shotting people at point blank but still are 2 shots at anything over 5 metres and even 3-4 at anything over 100m. If the damage was bumped up just a bit, it would be a pretty awesome balance - yeah helmets are something you are definitely going to want, but no, they are not going to save you from a good shot or a good gun. I made a mission that artificially multiplies the headshot damage dealt. I found that a multiplier of 1.6 achieved the balance I was looking for. I am not sure how you tweak the system but maybe that its something you could work off of. And of course this is just my opinion. I hope others also contribute their's. Keep up the good work devs! I'm am not really sure what the definition is. The way I understand it though, the problem with ragdolls is that they are unpredictable. When you ragdoll there is no way to predict in what position you will land. Therefore it is impossible to create an animation that will move you from that fallen position to an upright position. So what is needed is to dynamically create an animation, in game, depending on how the character falls. Making something that is capable of doing that, from my understanding, is no small task. Making it look believable/natural is even harder. Its why systems like euphoria (which does exactly this - dynamically animates character) are awesome. It does seem that BI has done a bit of this already - in , at 2:50, you can see that dynamic animation at work. It just hasn't been fully fleshed out to work when the character lands on his back yet. Plus it seems after a ragdoll you are automatically forced to re-shoulder your weapon from your back.Now there is the option to just make hit animations. It is possible to predict the characters position after the fall/stagger animation (since it is always the same) and then create an animation to bring that position back to the normal upright position. The only reason I am not that keen about it is because it makes things alot more predictable to the player (if you shoot someone and he animates you know he is not dead) and I would be scared that we get the delayed reaction similar to arma 2 hit animations - In arma 2 sometimes you could shoot a civilian and he would literally take 2 or 3 seconds to animate and fall (In SP too). And even then creating staggering/falling/getting up animations isn't a quick or cheap process. But take all that I say with a grain of salt. There are MANY people here who know tonnes more about this stuff than I. And I could be feeding you false facts. This is just how understood things based on reading and what those people say to me:).

Pretty much. If anything, the arma 3 system is better - bullets can actually pass through limbs and hit the torso. Glancing hits are actually less damaging than direct hits. The actual meat of the system is better than arma 2. And as for lethality, in arma 2, a 556 took two shots or so to the torso to drop someone. In arma one shot from a 556 and the guy drops, every time. Its just the damn armour that makes it so weird. It would be okay if there were weak spots to aim for or angles that expose vital one shot locations, but that's not the case (and apparently isn't possible at this time). And the problem is compounded by the ai's reactions to being hit. Anyway, everyone unhappy with it tell them how you feel in the soldier protection thread! The devs seem to want to make it better. Its all about finding the right balance - You don't want armour to have no benefits, but at the same time you don't(EDIT) want lethal one shot type gameplay.

I think it would be good to have something inbetween 762 and .50 like the .338. Something to punch through the armour a bit better. In this future armour is obviously pretty effective. So you would think militaries would arm their soldierS to deal with this. A larger claiber then the 762 would do that. Also it would be great to have ammunition that is clearly armour piercing. Its okay to make armour and what not - it actually has the possibility to add quite alot of depth to the game - but they need to provide us with the tools to deal with that armour. Right now, only the antimaterial weapons are fit for long range fighting and to some degree the 762 if you are close enough or have the tools to ensure headshots (with the latest dev patches).

Okay... I take it back. I can see why you guys don't want to simply ragdoll the unit after a hit. I was fooling around with ragdolls (quite fun by the way!) to see the transitions and my findings were If they ragdoll on their belly they actually animate to prone quite well If they ragdoll on their back they instantly pop into prone, usually facing a totally different direction then there ragdolled state. Then they spin on their belly to face the direction they were originally facing. And on top of both of these effects, the gun automatically floats to the ai's back. once he is fully in prone he has to reach over his back and shoulder it again. Here's a video to demonstrate: I can see why these wouldn't cut it. When they land on their belly its good. When they instantly flip from their back to prone its okay for those used to "arma quirks". When they always re-shoulder their weapon from their back... that's a bit too immersion breaking. That being said I do think it is a good idea if it could work smoother. But perhaps its not as easy as I or others would have thought it to be. Well, we can hope.

Also been having this problem. Figured it was due to mods but never bothered to fool around with it. Are you guy on dev or stable. Are you using mods? I just switched back to dev and I am using the A2 map pack, JSRS, Blastcore, and of course CBA. In the development general discussion thread there was some talk of this problem. Seemed to have to do with mods but it wasn't really pinpointed. some claimed removing A2 map pack helped others said it did nothing but removing other mods did.

Unfortunately it does very little/nothing to help. Not saying the ghost recon system was bad, or that arma system is cutting edge, but I really don't remember ghost recon having realistic armour. It was just super unforgiving. Not exactly realistic. But I did like the fact that GR wasn't so hitpointish. Now matter what the gun there was always a chance of the guy dying instantly or taking several rounds. Better guns tended to perform better but there was no guarantee. Really added to the tension. That aspect was pretty realistic imo. But not the armour. But the hit reactions were pretty damn awesome too.

Nothing new really. Before, certain heavy armours (paratrooper armour for example) were so protective it prevented that little flinch people do when shot. BI have changed it so that now, no matter how effective the armour is, the soldiers do that little flinch when shot. At least thats how I understand it from what the devs say and my tests before and after the change. Really nothing to report home about (although it is nice to consistently see soldiers reacting to hits, even if the reaction isn't all that great).

Are you sure they were able to do this in VBS2? As far as I can see in your the previous vid, the vest covers the whole chest, not just the small area that would be covered by the plate. How do you know the helmet only covers the top of the head. I actually am not sure my-self on the exact VBS mechanics but I wouldn't be so quick to jump to the "VBS does it perfectly" conclusion. Regardless they are different games/programs. And just because something is generally possible doesn't mean it is possible to do in a reasonable time/manner. Obviously BI, at this time, is not able to get that kind of detail in. They say they are working on it, but have been unsuccessful up until now. Time to move on and suggest how to make the system better in ways they are capable of changing - until they do get around to implementing bigger changes. But what about for pistol shots? should they also go right through the helmet?

Yeah pretty much. But even if BI did put us into "laser tech future" it could still be a realistic sim... if they did tonnes of research and had a very intimate knowledge of low level physics and were able to simulate those low level phenomena - obviously not going to happen. But often simulators are meant specifically for simulating possible future events. For example I am sure there have been many simulations of say, how structurally sound building materials and designs are - even though the structure has never been built before, it is possible to use simulations to predict how it will stand in the future. The question is, is your sim complex enough to accurately produce realistic results. In arma, the simple answer is no. Its not even complex enough to recreate events in the past, let alone the future. Anyhow, I am rambling. Moral of the story, arma is not a simulator(tion). In fact, in the protection feedback thread the devs basically said "sorry, we tried to make it realistic and complex, we were unable to, and now we need to know what you guys like best for gameplay purposes". Forget simulation or even realism... for now. Best we can do currently, is get the damages to generally result in generally realistic gameplay. I don't think this is only when they get hit though. In general, the ai seem to be overly accurate in close combat. Its just all the more frustrating when you are hitting them as well. How do you think they should be changed?

Been peaking in here everyonce and a while, forcing myself to wait until 0.15 before I give it a go... and man o man, I must say Fabrizio, your hard work, and the feedback of your testers has really, really payed off. Ai cover taking is really, really good. Of course there is still some problems with precision of cover taking, but the main thing is that they actually try to take cover. No more sitting around trying to shoot first and then move to cover. And most importantly, they do it fast. There is urgency in their movement. Love it. The suppression is great as well of course and combined with the cover taking makes for some believable reactions. I regularly see at least some ai ducking down behind cover when lead starts flying their way, which is not only great for immersion, but increases the longevity of the firefights. And it seems you have not only made the ai suppress-able, but also better able to suppress, which is awesome. And I have yet to see any weirdness regarding this feature (unlike when Zeus Ai tried to do similar and often resulted in ai shooting at an invisible air target while all the enemy were already long dead). Another feature I noticed was grenade throwing. Its pretty sweet as well. The times I have seen it, ai seem to throw smoke in a good location (though of course the wind and wimpy smoke grenades don't help - Blastocore fixes that though). Like froggyluv described, often on first contact the ai would leave me unsure of their whereabouts because of their use of smoke and fast manoeuvring. Maybe I am jumping the gun, but I think this is probably the best behavioural type Ai mod I have seen for the series. It works well, its well polished and clearly has been thouroughly thought out. Congrats on release! Keep up the good work! Ooooh! Sounds nice! expanding on that train of thought, I alway thought it would be neat to have the direction incoming fire approaches from effect the severity of suppression - ie. shots coming from the flank or rear of a squad/unit will cause more suppression than that coming from the front. More reason to envelope the enemy or not let your squad get flanked... Amen!

Well arma 2 did have suppression, I guess. Technically. Basically if bullets hit objects or the ground within half a metre of the ai they would suffer massive aiming penalties and I believe they would try to seek cover (with about as much urgency as arma ai can muster). It wasn't well balanced (ai aiming penalty lasted far to long) and far to hard to trigger (you pretty much had to hit the thin bar of grass right under the ai). Most often you were more likely to kill a unit outright than to suppress him. All in all it wasn't a feature that you could really put to use. Basically for suppression to be a true part of the game you need sonic cracks/bullets within 2 m or so of the ai to trigger the effect and the effects to be short but immediate severe aiming penalties (ie "increased dynamic calculated error") combined with slow, long term morale degradation (leading to further aiming penalties (ie. lower "aimingaccuracy skill") and even surrender/fleeing). To put it a cherry on top, add cover seeking and lower stances and you've got a good system. Mods show it works well enough. BCombat especially as of late. Arma 3 ai does suffer a slight accuracy loss after being hit in the arms (at least since I last checked a couple months ago). Its just very small and usually made up for when they go prone. And when they do their little bob upon being hit it does mess up their shot quite a bit if they try to shoot simultaneously. Not saying its good enough but they don't totally ignore being hit. What I believe needs to happen is that millisecond of inaccuracy while bobbing must be extended for 2 maybe even 3 seconds longer. Anyhow just the fact that the devs have acknowledged that there is lack of reaction to incoming fire makes me happy. One day...

Headshots still need to be more lethal (of course in my opinion only). This video gives an idea of how well different calibre fair against the different helmets (all helmets seem to protect more less the same). 7.62 testing is right from the start, 6.5 starts at (1:46) and 5.56 starts at (3:43). To sum it up: Current Headshots to Kill at Close Range 7.62: 1 shot if in the centre of the head. 2 shots if one is slightly of centre. 6.5: 1 shot if in the centre of the head and at point blank range (less than 5 feet). 2 shots if not at point blank range or if one shot is slightly off centre. 5.56: 2 shots if in the centre of head. 3 shots if one shot is extremely off centre. This sucks not only from a realism perspective (which we will have to accept will not be satisfied at this moment) but also from a gameplay perspective. With this sort of protection bullets simply aren't scary, unless they are 762+. 556 at anything over 50 metres simply are not a threat to a fresh uninjured soldier. Not even a chance of being lethal. Changes I Would Make I believe that 5.56 should behave as the 7.62 currently does. Then it would follow that 6.5 behaves even better with lethal/effective ranges being longer than the 5.56. And 7.62 even longer than that. I think that would be fair. The helmets will save you against pistol round and occasionally 5.56 but not against 6.5 or 7.62 unless at longer ranges. They're not necessarily a life saver but still worth taking just in case. Vests generally need some nerfing as well though I haven't tested them enough to really formulate more detailed feedback than that.

Actually... yeah it would be! It would be awesome.

Cool thanks for the details. One question I have is what happens when an ai sees you, shoots at you, looses sight of you and then regains sight of you? Is his "error" immediately reverted back to what it was just before he lost sight of you? The fact that the size and loudness of the weapon make a difference seems a bit... weird, but I guess you can make reasons as to why it makes sense. But another thing I think would logically have an effect is optics. Right now the error seems well calibrated assuming the ai is using some form of magnification. But when using ironsights or holosights I think the error should be even more. Just a suggestion. Effect of optics on ai accuracy is definitely an issue I think needs addressing in someway at least. You would be a GOD if you ever make this happen. Ai being effected by incoming fire (not only impacts but sonic cracks of bullets passing by) is one of my number one wishes for the arma series ever since I started playing. There would be very little better than telling my buddies to lay down fire and knowing that it is actually effecting the ai, allowing us to manoeuvre better. Anyhow good work, its really cool to see arma ai slowly, but surely, progress. Keep it up!

Well... yeah... but thats some very twisted logic. I think its simpler to say that neither are a simulation. You can shoot someone straight between the eyes with a pistol in arma 3 and he won't die. I would prefer to say there is a lack of simulation rather than it is a perfect simulation of forcefields around the head that transfer only a portion of a shots energy to the head. Even VBS doesn't appear to be much of a simulator in comparison to something like DCS. There just isn't enough detail in each feature for it to be. But, generally, both arma and VBS do produce gameplay and dynamics similar to that of real life - Well at least compared to other games they. Its just the means of getting there is far from realistic/simulator level.

Okay thank you. Of course not what I was hoping for, but at least we know better how to provide feedback. Here is mine (though it sounds like you guys already know what needs to happen) Basically you want armour to have enough of effect so it matters what you wear and what you were shot with, but you don't want it to be too effective and ruin the unforgiving nature many love about the game. This table summarizes what I feel would achieve the optimal balance using only the features we already have in game. For the most part Vests and Uniforms perform almost fine right now. They should be a wee bit less effective at range. Helmets need more work on the other hand. Basically they seem too effective a deflecting shots leading them to often require 2 and sometimes even 3 shots to kills. Rifle rounds should generally result in one shot kills when they hit a helmet at ranges in and around 200m. Yep. Sure it would bring some complaints with it ("Ai come back from the dead! how could BI let this bug in", or "Ai get stunned then instaflips from ragdoll and headshots me!"), and I can see why QA would have problems with it, but I don't think it is something that should be dismissed too quickly. Seeing a guy take a shot to the face and flinch a bit would probably be hated more than occasionally seeing a guy snap to prone from ragdoll.