Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Medals

Community Reputation

28 Excellent

About martin_lee

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. martin_lee

    AI Driving - Feedback topic

    @pr9inichek for some reasons when I first load this page the video are from 2016, in which the tank's path finding is ... horrendous, to say the least. Those back flips and explosions 😓 When I revisited, the videos are now the new tests. There are still some quirks, but quite a long way we've come in these 3 years
  2. martin_lee

    Can this AI behaviour be fixed?

    I had been and had seen others being ran over. Most of the time they are moving at some (admittedly not what we call high) speed, and just couldn't stop in time. I'd say if they had hit the brake a meter earlier it would have greatly reduced this problem. There should be a new guideline for all the new recruits (and hopefully, those currently in service as well, compulsory 'refreshment' for their R&R) I did saw an interesting case when a vehicle killed someone while turning. It is in a city when the Marshal tried to turn around a corner, the poor guy is kind of being pushed by the front corner of the vehicle and died after being pushed for several meters. It's not being ran over that killed him, it's the push... p.s. Well, they do have thing for the hearts and minds of the indigenous goat population...
  3. martin_lee

    Handicapped player

    100% agree with this. As an airsoft player, I can tell you that it is difficult to "jump" over a waist-height wall. If I were to get over it, I normally would just step over it (you know, crossing one leg at a time). AT MOST I can just about vault over it, which is NOT easy when you have to use at least one hand to hold your rifle. And more importantly, why do it? Why expose yourself crossing over them? Unless it is the great wall of China, or a waist-height fence, we just get around them. Most of the time they are good cover anyway. Airsoft gears (which are just puny toys compared to real steel counterparts) are very forgiving already in terms of weight. My gun is already on the HEAVY side for airsoft AR15, weighting at nearly 4kg (just about a real steel loaded 16-inch AR15). Our magazines are light, weighting usually around 100-300 g, depending on whether your gun is gas-powered or battery powered (I think mine is just below 200 g loaded), and I carry just 6 of them. My plate carrier (minus the steel plate of course) weights around 1.5 kg (give or take) with all the necessary pouches attached. A replica helmet (just hard plastic) weighting just below 1 kg. Add my phone and wallet into the load and I am carrying around 8kg of airsoft gear. Gun: 4kg magazine: 0.2kg * 6 = 1.2kg plate carrier: 1.5kg helmet: 1kg personal items: 0.5kg With 8 kg you already feel the weight. You are not as swift and agile as you normally are. Imagine carrying real steel equipment (30kg, I think?). This is another good point. Weight is not the only issue, the more important part is, are there any advantage what so ever? Like I said earlier, there isn't really a need to get over things, just run around them. There are not much advantage climbing onto things either (I can only think of climbing onto a crate so you could look/shoot over a wall). Being swift is more important, as you will have much less exposure time to enemy fire. Think about it, if we are running 110m hurdle race, we can just about jump over a 1m high obstacle. And in high jump the world record is 2m, and for that we have to run, cross the bar with our back and land onto soft cushion. Those are 'fancy stunt' that have the sole purpose of crossing over obstacle. Also, we are carrying a rifle, where our arms can't swing, and that has a big effect on a sprint. (try timing your run with and without a stick in front you and you will see) If anything, in the old Arma days, when we see a wooden fence, we have to get out of the way. But in Arma 3, we can cross the fence, we can win. No longer are we to knuckle under (or craw under in some case) to a fence. The only thing I could see as an improvement is for the "step over" animation to be faster, and maybe an action to climb onto waist-height things.
  4. martin_lee

    Which mouse do you recommend for ArmA

    Thanks for the sharing Seems like it is the child between a joystick and a mouse Have you tried using the joystick function in game for, say, flying a helicopter? Does the gyroscope works well? Seems like I may have to start saving up... (And think of a way to survive the wrath of my girlfriend... )
  5. martin_lee

    Which mouse do you recommend for ArmA

    Now, that mouse... God that was expenive... But man is it packed with features. I am very curious about how it performs. Would you share a bit with us when you've used it for a while
  6. martin_lee

    Which mouse do you recommend for ArmA

    (Sorry OP, I didn't see that you want a wireless mouse. So the following is not going to help you. They are all wired.) I would say pretty much any mouse that is marketed as MMO mouse would do. They have more than enough buttons to map my oftenly-used commands. I have used the offerings from Logitech, SteelSeries, and several from Razer. To me, their main difference is tracking and software/driver capability. The later is due to the fact that I use it for work as well, as far as mapping is concerned they are the same. The rest, like ergonomic and button placement, I can adapt to it. Of the ones that I have used, I would suggest the SteelSeries Rival 500. The tracking is the best amongst them. The feel is consistent whether you are moving really slow or really fast. The button placement is not the usual 12-button thumb grid. Most of its buttons are placed around the thumb (i.e. when you grip the mouse your thumb doesn't grip onto a button), and there are a few more next to the left and right mouse button.Software-wise it is stable, I would say. Configurations are synchronised through cloud and it works without problems. The mouse has internal memory to store the currently loaded config/profile. If you ever only need one config, you can uninstall the driver/software once you are done. If you would need to switch to another profile, you need the software. (I kept mine installed) The second place for me is the Razer Naga. I owned the 2014, and the newer Trinity version. The latter is basically incremental improvement over the 2014 version (with one added feature I'll get to later). Main difference is the software/driver. The latter mouse is using a newer driver. Tracking is good on both. The feel is consistent. However, I found that if I move extremely slowly (like a few pixel), it kind of feel "sticky". Maybe it is due to the friction and mouse surface? I am not sure. The button is the standard 12-button thumb grid. They look small, but I don't have the problem of acidentally clicking a different button. One thing I do like is that you can press two adjacent buttons at the same time, if you decided to do so. I mapped the Alt key and the zoom key (mouse button 4) next to each other, so I can make a quick scan around me with only my right hand (I am lazy ). The new driver is mostly okay, but acts up occasionally, and I had experienced problem with cloud sync once, where some macro and config were messed up. Good thing is that you can export all your config, when thay happened I just restore from the export. The newer Naga Trinity has onboard memory for 4 profiles and the macro used. So yes, if you only ever need 4 profiles, you can uninstall the driver should you feel like it. Everything works without the driver installed. THIS IS NOT THE CASE FOR THE 2014 NAGA, IT HAS NO ONBOARD MEMORY AND YOU WILL NEED THE OLD DRIVER. Old driver is more stable, though. The newer version has swappable thumb grip. You can change the thumb grid to 7-button (arranged in a ring around your thumb) or 2-button (like most regular mouse, the mouse button 4 and 5). Although honestly I don't really see a reason to do so. The above should be within your price range, with the new naga being more expensive. ----- I used the Logitech MMO mouse (G600 I think?) but the tracking is horrible. It could not handle sudden and quick movment. When you, say, make a quick movement to the left and then quickly stop, the mouse pointer will oscillate quite a few times. I have tested it for quite a while and I am quite sure that oscillation is not due to my hand. I would assume it's due to the sensor or firmware processing issue. It does have some nice features. There are 3 onboard profiles, and there is a shift button as well, so you will be able to have twice as much mapping in each profile compared to the competitors. I would really like to love the mouse. But the tracking is the deal breaker.
  7. Right now when we use the sight on a mortar, we can get firing solution on targets with direct line of sight. If they make it so that it auto elevates instead of manually adjusting like we do now, that will practically make it dual mode. Well, for players at least
  8. hm... I can't seem to solve the Mk45 issue with the missile artillery Joke aside, I think in the WWII the firing solution is calculated, amongst other things, by inputing the range and bearing into mechanical computer (My secret identity is Captain Obvious, whose rank is less obviously not captain) This is done by some observers with those big weird binoculars (were they called gunlayers?). But then again, for shore bombardment, you just need a map and your location, and then you will have the range and bearing. That wasn't quite unlike a firing computer, and it was able to do some indirect fire. It is not as good as a dedicated artillery due to low terrain clearance and shallow angle. I am unsure of modern naval guns, however, since, as GrumpyOldMan pointed out, missiles filled those roles and have much greater range. Those guns are really now for close range protection I would assume.
  9. @oukej Regarding keyboard controls, I think that, instead of getting 100% input straight away, may be you can set it so that it gradually increase to 100%. That way you can have slightly better control when tapping the keys. Say, when you press the nose up key, the input goes from 0% up to 100% in 0.1s (or may be even faster, I don't know). The same happens when you let go the key, when it gradually return to 0%. I think that's how it is in Falcon 4 if you use keyboard to control the plane. I quite like the result that way. The control isn't all or none, you can have, say, 60% input if you practice a bit with your tapping. You can just about get a relatively smooth, sustained turn. I think the problem is that in Arma, the boundary between sustained turn and loosing speed like a flying brick is very sharp. You either don't loose speed, or you loose it fast. You need to be quite gentle with the control, and finding that sweet spot requires practice. This sharp wall is what made flying somewhat awkward and difficult. ------------------------------- That being said, I fly with mouse in Arma mostly. To be honest, I don't really see why one would need to use keyboard for pitch (nose up/down) and roll when you can do it with the mouse, you got much better control (yawing, on the other hand...). As long as you move the mouse nice and slow, you can keep a sustained turn without stalling. You can also look around pretty easily. The only time I use keyboard for pitch and roll is when I am using the targeting camera (that's the only way to control the plane at that point). But then again, when that happens, my only concern is to keep my nose from pointing at the ground, so I don't need fine controls. The feel and handling could definitely be improved upon. Right now it doesn't quite have the general feel of a flying game. But flying with keyboard and mouse is doable. Practice with the jet showcase, try to shoot down one jet with missile and then dogfight the other one. Or better yet, make a custom scenario, where you are the leader and give yourself a wingman to chase and shoot down (he won't be evading). Use the mouse, keep an eye on the speed, and try to keep it from dropping. Be patient, and suppress the urge to pull hard when when the enemy moved out of view. Your nose is always lagging behind the enemy. When you think there is an opportunity, only then will you pull 100% (and loose a lot of speed) to bring you nose in front of him, and fire a cannon burst.
  10. martin_lee

    Tanks - Damage improvements

    I think this is quite an amazing implimentation, especially when it can work on buildings and bunkers as well. Spawning fragments on hitting anything could have an unexpected (or expected?) advantage. Say if I shoot at an unsuspecting tank with turned-out crews. My shot falls short, for reasons best kept secret for eternity, the fragments would still hurt the crews. Could you share your computer spec as a reference? I am wondering if a mid-high end laptop would show a noticeable slowdown in the short window when the shell hits. It does sounds promising, though. I am wondering, say I have a few miniguns going off, would that amount of bullets have the same load as the fragments?
  11. A question: I haven't played MP for a long long time... Could human commander switch into another human players' seat in a tank? Personally I am okay with instant seat switching between AI crews. IRL tank commanders have a function that could bring the gunner's view to his own, or the other way around. (I THINK commander could also fire the gun as well?) Since Arma do not have that function (yet ;P ) so I am willing to think of seat-switching as an abstraction. Now that AI tank driving has improved quite a bit, and the PIP driver view available, I am happy enough to be not able to switch between commander amd the driver. If I am playing with human player I'd probably like it if we can't switch seat without getting out.
  12. I think they removed their ability to lock onto laser a while ago. At least that's the case for the titan.
  13. hm... No one experienced this? May be it is my control settings then...?? Just to clarify, I am in the commander/gunner seat with an AI driver. If I turn the turret the AI turns the hull as well. EDIT: Okay, I think I know the problem now. If you have mouse left/right mapped to car left/right and an AI driver, you are controlling BOTH the turret and the hull. Now I am kind of embarrassed ... let me hide inside a tank for a while
  14. The trouble I am having now is actually the hull trying to align with the turret. As long as you are not turning it too fast or using turn left/right, the hull would try to align with the hull. This current mechanism works okay if you are just cruising around as commander, since it is just like driving with mouse. You move the view, the vehicle turns that way. But when you are in combat, if you want to scan to your left? You have to press turn right so that the vehicle doesn't turn with you. In such case, the old system is actually better, since the tank just continues advancing whilst you scan and engage targets. From these I think it is clear that neither the old and the new system were ideal for all situations. A toggle to enable/disable turret stabilisation is perhaps the way to go - it can (kind of?) allow us to toggle between the above two behaviors. if a toggle were not possible, at least what I'd like/prefer is the old turret behaviour (always stablised and AI does not try to align the hull), and the current AI response (instant response to WASD, basically like driving yourself). Together with the PIP driver view, I think that could make a placeholder/compromise between the two - you could see where you are going, plus the ease of scanning during combat. Oh, and one extra annoyance about aligning the hull with turret (and not the other way around). Whilst I am using the Nyx in the campaign, I found that if I turn the turret, the hull turns as well (as expected). But since that turret is not stabilised, what you will get is the combination of the turret rotation plus the turning of the Nyx, causing a very sensitive and imprecies transverse. I am wondering if "lock ground" could be modified to used here, although tank gun stabilisation is about freezing its orientation, rather than tracking.
  15. That will make SP driving much easier :) Although irl I think the indictor is how it is now.