DarkOddity

I came up with another idea to add to the list. MAPPING/MODDING In-Editor Terrain Generation and Building (From Scratch) Support for small maps with no terrain/loaded resources outside the intended combat area. Mini-Session Support So, my small map idea is mainly to allow editors and modders to give us smaller environments with less play space to aid in infantry specific combat. What I have in mind in particular is Counter-Strike styled maps. The mini-session support is also like counter-strike. You spent 30 minutes on a map, and have several rounds that lasted up to X minutes. It would be nice to have the ability to do that in stock ArmA 3 without extensive engine modding needed. Why? Some people like to play TvT (PvP) without respawns but don't want everyone to have to wait forever. The mini-session with team swapping functionality would allow for objective based missions in a TvT be possible with a defending and offending team and a time limit. Now isn't that an awesome idea? Throw that in with small 100% custom made maps designed to provide specific tactical challenges and advantages with real military equipment and you have yourself the ability to make repeatable missions. This would effectively allow players to create the instant-action multilayer content. MULTIPLAYER MAP & MOD SUPPORT In-Game Map Download Server Browser Mod Information I would like to see Bohemia provide us with a section on the ArmA site that is used to register mods. While it would be nice, this does not mean they need to host the files for the modders (though that would be nice. ;)) but what it does mean is it's a centralized place for players to look for mods. Basically modder pops on, registers a mod and it is provided some sort of unique identifier. Then, when in-game and looking at a server they can see what mods are running on that server if any. They want those mods? Pop on over to the Bohemia website and get the referal links to download the mods. This also implies in-game mod support built in from the get-go without the need for third party launchers and complicated (for some) shortcut editing. IE.. the ability to toggle mods off and on. The registration on the ArmA site of mods would obviously not be required, but it would allow for the servers to provide the mods unique ID instead of a full string of information. In turn, that would ensure the user is referenced to the proper mod on the site and not a potentially different mod with a similar name.

I noticed a problem with my friends remaining interested in ArmA as well. Hell, I have the same problem with it at times myself. Why? Because it can be hard to get into when you want instant action. I have a group of friends who enjoy shooters, and they are all big fans of the realism that ArmA brings to the table. However, what they aren't fond of is that when they want action they don't go to ArmA, because it's slower paced as you prepare to enter combat. That, or there isn't enough combat. What I personally would like to see is the addition of support for smaller maps and game mode editing. Like sessions and mini-sessions. (Think of how Counter-Strike worked). Give the modding community to do this and they can add this content into the game.

I've retained some of the most important things (or oddball in at least one case) I support. In addition to that, my suggestions or notes on why I support an idea are bolded for easier identification. GAMEPLAY Co-pilot to be able to take over controls after pilot has been hit (It was incredible to see this in TOH. I'd love to see it implemented in all aircraft that have a co-pilot.) Hydration (Not vastly important to me, but worth mentioning that I like.) The ability ride on vehicles without the need to script it in Down-force effect on trees Scalable Flight Mechanic Difficulty for fixed wing and rotary wing. (As already done in TOH) GAME ENGINE 3D intractable cockpits and environment (from TKOH) Flammability (Vehicle's, vehicle components, buildings, environment) Voice control of AI. Weather effects on landscape (more variety of weather in general, would be nice.) Optimazation suggestion Drastically reduce the HDD performance requirement during play. Drastically increase the range of supported hardware. IE, let us scale up to 32gb of ram or higher and enable full support for multi-core processors. CONTENT Fixed wing: VOTL's. Fixed Wing VTOL's. As many as you can fit in. Rotor wing: Retain Access to modern day helicopters. Ensure at least one rotor wing aircraft is capable of air lifting a main battle tank. MISCELLANEOUS (All mine, bolding removed here) TrackIR Unobtrusive and small UI element that appears while on foot that helps show which way you are looking in relation to your characters direction of travel. Controls Separate bindings for Flaps and VTOL turbines/tiltroters. Include support for analog for precise control, instead of only allowing pre-set angles. Additionally, remove "Auto Hover" as a pre-requisite for putting an aircraft into hover mode. Auto hover should keep all aircraft stable. The term makes no sense for switching the mode of the aircraft. (THIS IS SUPER IMPORTANT TO ME!!!) UI Full head helmets should include over the eye HUD's to add things like compass direction, three digit bearing and current GPS coordinates. If you do not have said helmet equipped, you don't get the HUD. Same helmet could theoretically allow you to see lased targets marked solely by the laser code.

I'm a huge fan of realistic flight simulation and I want to see it in ArmA3. Here is how I feel about it, and allow me to refer to ToH real quick. In ToH the difficulty of the flight engine for the helicopters is scaled up, from Rookie, to Trainee and finally to Expert. The higher up, the harder it gets, obviously. Now, as some of you may or may not know there are some groups within the ArmA community that will only play on Expert, with max difficulty settings. These groups do this so they can strive to have the most realistic experience possible in the ArmA environment. Now, with the difficulty settings in ArmA 2 to me as a helicopter enthusiast this seems quite unfair to me. I try to keep my play to these communities in order to get a realistic experience out of my game time in the form of teamwork. What I don't get however from playing on these types of servers is a more realistic flight experience. Therefore in conclusion; I feel that it is only fair that the flight experience should scale up in difficulty with the infantry and vehicle combat. It makes perfect logical sense in my personal opinion. Why? If you want to be a pilot in a 'hardcore' simulation ArmA3 group, you should have to be able to handle the hardcore requirements. --------- As a side note on the same topic; people who are as into helos as I am will likely have noticed this: Hardcore sim groups in the ArmA community do not have as much respect for dedicated pilots as most, if not all of their members can easily fly a helo in ArmA2 with a keyboard and mouse as good or better than some people with a full flight sim setup. Now I'm not saying easy is bad, but what I am trying to say is that blanketed simplicity however, is.

I had a similar issue with the medium military helo when practicing for the parade. I tore the engine apart trying to keep in formation with the AI. It would still fly, but with severe damage and when I got the the aerobatics portion.. A crash was imminent. I have yet to extensively fly the medium helos however, I've primarily focused on Light & Heavies in my Career mode.