Clarkey1

Yeah I agree, I like that martial sounding music in RS games, or any Tom Clancy game for that matter. I think it's the way to go with military games and the music in the new teaser trailer is just the right amount of that orchestral/martial sounding music and electronic ambiance. I think they're already on the right track with music it just always makes for great discussion though.:)

I really don't want any dubstep in the actual game. I don't think it can hold it's own in a soundtrack, I imagine it would just sound out of place. I wouldn't mind if I heard it used in promo stuff, I actually agree with you Mr. Bravo in that it can add intensity to sequences in promo video's if it's done right. If you haven't seen this video I think it's a good example of using dubstep to make an intense sequence. It was actually nominated for an award in a community competition a little while back. (can't remember if it won or not:confused:) The dubstep is only at the end of the video and other tracks are used in the beginning which IMO is a tasteful use instead of the entire video being dubstep. The example starts at 3:26 for those of you that don't want to hear Barra Barra for the zillionth time (personally I can't get enough, Black Hawk Down ftw!):p Edit: Rock? Overused? PFFFFT!

@ maturin: I find even a lot of the vanilla animations don't have very smooth transitions. SMK + SLX has made a huge difference in terms of movement, at least for me. Especially in the crouched walk animation, there's more looking down the sights and less headbutting them. I don't know if we'll see any more work on smk though with Smookie now working for BIS on animations for A3. Personally I'm pretty happy about that.:)

Thanks I'd never heard of this before, a lot of screenshots I've seen on these forums make sense now!

Yeah I'd be happy with this pay and contribute Idea, I'm itching to play the alpha anyway. So, BIS...

+1 I've seen a lot of game with auto lowering, even while facing friendlies, but I think most of the time their purely aesthetic and would actually be useful in arma to move the guns collision hitbox out of the way enough to turn around in tight spaces. I'm not thinking lowering as in the 'safe' animation lowering but in a similar way to how slx, or smk_anims does it. Where the weapon stays aligned with the right thigh and can quickly be raised back to the ready position.

They could always just replace the lean keys with the left and right variations of each stance (if they are actually similar to peeking). And for up down maybe double tapping or holding stance keys for up and down variations. I don't think it would require more keys, and if it's implemented properly it shouldn't need any new keys. Currently I don't think there's a way to do anything by 'holding' a key down. Only single tap and double tap, so if the control system supported holding keys down for certain actions it would open up a lot of possibilities. EDIT: Oh yeah, movement keys obviously support holding keys down.:p I mean something like a different crouch position when holding the crouch key and another when tapping it/double tapping it.

It's confirmed by a dev! The tactical pace will look exactly like this! ZOMg everyone tell the news media!!!:p I agree with HKFlash, I think the whole point of a tactical pace is to have your weapon already raised, if you fire while doing it you're not going to be as accurate as if you stop or drop to one knee. So no I'd say even though it might seem like we can "run & gun" now I doubt it would be effective for anything short of shooting someone a few meters away. Maybe tactical slings will be introduced, and wearing one will make you more accurate while moving!? O.o Ahh just dreaming...

Heads up rolo87 your last three images are over 100kbs! I'd like to see an animations menu for the AI. Basically the way you can set an effect on a trigger using the "effects" button. Having an "animations" button for units would be pretty useful. Seeing units carry out simple animations is a really good way to add atmosphere to environments like FOBs and markets and it would be cool to see their use streamlined, less time sifting through all the animation codes looking for the ones you want. Also only adding the in the full cycle animations and not all the different sections as well. Although if A3 has a 3d editor and the anims could be viewed in real time while creating the mission the separate sections of the animation cycles wouldn't be so bad.

@spotter: I think I know what you mean, and I think it's mostly an issue with AI path finding. Well maybe not an issue but the amount of points the AI can move to is lacking. Looking at the green line that represents building points an AI soldier can be ordered to really gives us a good example of this. I think better path finding for AI would go hand in hand with improving the way AI operate in urban environments. Having a small amount of positions for the AI to move to works fine out in the open but when we try to manage them in tight areas it really shows how limited they are. Things like moving around the other side of buildings in some sort of weird attempt to stay in formation. Maybe only ramping up the number of AI move positions in built up areas and leaving the open terrain as is would help keep the number down while improving urban path finding. After all we don't need thousands of positions out in the middle of a wheat field. Another way to improve AI in CQB could be to make them more automated when ordered to certain positions. i.e. Instead of ordering units to go to a wall or building individually, being able to order multiple units to a single point and have them stack up at adjacent points would increase the speed of navigating urban environments with an AI team. Also the way formations are maintained could use improvement. I'm not so sure on how this would be achieved. But making the AI mirror the players movements while avoiding doing a lap around a building while moving down an alleyway or inside a house? Maybe having tight, loose, combat (default) formation options might help, and again having better path finding could improve formation 'tightness' and synchronicity in CQB/MOUT environments. EDIT: I just remembered hearing in the GC presentation last year that AI path finding would be improved, just don't know how or to what extent yet.

I might be a bit sketchy on my SF knowledge, but isn't that the exact reason the Tier One designation exists for operators? I guess your not likely to see a general infantryman going undercover, but if we're speaking about the NATO umbrella I think it's absolutely something they (NATO/JSOC) would/have done when the circumstance calls for it. Exactly... And if NATO is on the back foot who's to stop their soldiers, trapped behind enemy lines, with no official support, from wearing civilian clothing and planting IED's to take out Iranian troops. @Whirly: This is a good read mate, thanks for the link.:)

Oh man, I always do this. "Oh whats over the... ah damn it, I guess I'll just have to turn my whole body around like a chump!"

They were set up behind the UN medical area of Koalasalad's Loy Manara Airfield template (the R&R area I guess), I changed it around a bit to fit on Faysh Khabur, and viola! I guess they heard some gunfire and needed a special kind of healing...

Of course it will be optional for mission makers. It's ArmA FFS! :p I think this feature is getting blown out of proportion by some. I think BIS are a bit smarter than to just throw in a brand new feature and not allow us to enable/disable it. And if what Tonci87 said is true then it's probably just a script like FEINT's 'Sniper Camo Changer' script.

Hah, removing free look would pretty much cause a riot on BIS' doorstep. I think he just meant that the AI will have an ambient scanning animation instead of using the free look as a player would. It does make them look a bit weird sometimes so this should be a good thing. It's purely aesthetic I'm sure.

This video is incredible, so much more relaxed (I'm going to guess this is "safe" mode animation) looking good BIS! Can't wait to see what the combat animations look like. Notice how the guy that walks across the screen at about 0:09 - 0:13 doesn't seem to have any weapon clipping through his ammo pouches? This is very exciting. Thanks BIS! EDIT: Just realized the guy's arm walking directly in front of the CPL, clipping through his AT launcher pretty badly. Still looking pretty amazing for a game that is only just in alpha though! :)

Awesome new video showing off one of the new animations. The music sounds pretty good, sort of electronic, suiting the 2030's setting. The production value is tons better than anything in previous games. And I love the radio chatter, really effective for the patrol setting of the video.:D

Walk behind UN aid center. See this. Wat do? :p

I see where you're coming from, and I have to say I partially agree. I really enjoy large scale missions, realistic missions, and I think the bigger maps add to the feeling of being in a realistic theater of war. A larger map also opens up more places you can build FOB's our COP's without being restricted by the terrain (not that this is necessarily 'unrealistic'). I've recently been playing on Kaysh Khabur and CLAfghan and I have to say it just sort of 'feels' more realistic. Granted the only reference point I have are military videos/documentary. But if you look at the scale of an afghan valley from a camera mans lens and compare it to either Takistan or CLAfghan you will instantly know which looks more realistic. I'm not saying Takistan is bad in any way they probably weren't even aiming for a legit full scale Afghan map, but rather a generic desert/mountain map with a little bit of everything (that they could fit in) that you might come across in a mid eastern theater. That doesn't make Takistan or Chernarus unrealistic terrains on earth come in all shapes and sizes. And that is sort of my argument to the contrary, that even though it's possible to make large realistic maps BIS needs to balance realism with playability and overall performance. I think the same will be true for Limnos and A3, they need to appeal to as many people as possible. And I don't think reducing the scale of Limnos by 70 odd km² will reduce the realism of the map (off the top of my head I think the RL landmass of Limnos is 477km² and the BIS version will be 400km²). From what we've seen to far the map looks very impressive and convincing as a real world Limnos. Very big hills with huge flatland's full of farms, towns and soon FOB's OP's. And at the end of the day the community is full of talented terrain makers so we should have no shortage of huge and realistic terrains. Maybe even more so with the new engine.:)

Good to hear. This mod is great, especially the inclusion of the RAAF skins. Cheers mate!:) And with mando missiles... a whole lotta fun. Looking forward to seeing what you can do with them when you get back to it.

Hey Stagler, how are you getting that m72 to hang off this guys back like that? Looks alot more realistic than the default vertical position.:)

Of course! I totally agree it would have to be completely customizable. It might be used for PvP over COOP, as [EVO] Dan said, just putting no one into a squad in the lobby and sorting it out in game. This would obviously be preferable when doing missions vs the AI because players will want to do different objectives and you can't expect everyone to be locked into a role and agree on doing the same objectives. As it is now, with game modes like domi, patrol ops, etc. having/swapping roles isn't really necessary when changing roles is basically just going to an ammo box and swapping out your M4 for and M24 when you spawn. I can see it more as a PvP thing, so features like spawning on your fire team make it preferable to be part of a fire team, and being a SL you could spawn on either of your fire teams and call in support that isn't available to TL's and fire team members. So I'd agree this is really an option left to the admin depending on what type of mission they're running at the time. The possibilities are endless really, I guess that's the beauty of the ArmA series though, even if you aren't happy with the missions that ship with the initial release you can pretty much create any scenario you can possibly think of to play instead. When it comes to new players though a lot may be expecting that what comes with the game is all there is in terms of MP if they're not familiar with the series, and might not stick around for all the great user missions that will be inevitably be made.

I think the best example of realistic unit structure would have to be the group "ShackTac". They use a realistic platoon layout with the only difference being a medic/corpsman at squad level. Now this is a clan of course and as antoineflemming already pointed out not everyone is going to want to join a clan/group just for some sense of realistic unit cohesion. I think the first problems with gearing players of any particular MP game toward working as a realistic platoon with a chain of command starts in the lobby itself. When you join any public server ATM you get a whole bunch of open slots. Now while all these open slots are structured into different groups and individual roles I think the fact that I can join and just jump into a random engineer slot on an empty team for example. There's also no guarantee that a public server will have enough players to make a whole platoon at any one time. This is all fine of course, alot of pub servers don't really give a toss about realism and are just on to have fun. But at the moment if someone does want to have a more realistic game one night, with a proper chain of command etc. Their isn't really that much on offer from my experience without joining a clan and using a private server (which some of the newcomers to Arma3 might not be too keen on at first.) So to get to my point I think if the lobby was organized in a way that the chain of command was always maintained and AI could fill the empty slots to have a full platoon at all times no matter how many people were on the server it could be a good starting point for a more cohesive team without all the unfilled roles when the server isn't very populated. One way to organize the lobby in such a way could be to: 1. If the server is empty the first person signing in will only be able to select the role of platoon leader with all roles beneath PL locked and occupied by AI controlled by the PL with High Command at squad level. So one player on the server means that one player will be able to use 3 squads of AI with HC and have a team consisting of platoon sgt, medic/corpsman etc. who can be given orders in the usual way. 2. Once another player signs in they have the option of any of the squad leader roles or as the platoon sgt or other support roles under the PL's immediate control while the TL's and fire team member slots are still locked as they have no human leaders yet (apart from the PL with HC of course. but even then he cannot control his fire teams separately without the help of a Squad Leader). 3. A third player signs in, now he also has the option to join the PL's support team or take a squad leaders role and if the previous player took the role of SL he also has the option be become a FTL as both FTL's of one squad now have a human player commanding them. I hope your with me so far... 4. Now let's say another 3 players sign in. They can also take any remaining support roles under the PL's direct command including SL slots. Lets say the precious player chose to be FTL. Now these three new players can actually make up the rest of the Fire Team if they choose. 5. Ok so now hypothetically we might have a PL, a SL, a FTL, an AR/MG, a Grenadier, and a Rifleman. I think this could create a chain of command by not allowing a player to be a fire team leader unless said FTL has a human squad leader, or not allowing players to join as a rifleman if there is no human FTL for that particular role. Now what happens when a PL, SL or TL leaves the server? I guess the PL would be replaced by the most "senior" SL (or just whichever SL has been online the longest). Of course if someone wanted to remain SL he could always offer the role to another SL, fast track a TL or fire team member if they wanted or even just use a voting system like in Warfare. So the problem with that then, is if there is no one willing to take on the role of the PL. Well this would be the exception to the locked slots with AI leader rule, if you've been on for an hour or so and your PL leaves but everyone is happy where they are then the role of PL is simply taken over by the AI (which could just be voted for such as in Warfare or similar). Then the next player to sign in will have to assume the roll of PL as no players previously wanted it. I guess having a voting system or some other sort of 'role switching' system would be needed and maybe even being able to vote to relieve a rouge PL from duty if needed and demote him to a SL, TL or whatever other available slot exists below the rank of PL. Then the PL would just go back to AI control. I know this isn't the ideal system for a chain of command and there a probably lots of holes in it, but I think it (in theory) it could make game play on Public servers a bit more cohesive and Command & Control oriented. There could even already be a similar system in place out there in one of the many MP missions. Well I guess at the end of the day it's up to the mission makers, but I think it would be good to see something similar to what's being discussed in this thread straight out of the box. And thank you if you made it through all this! :)

Thanks for the update shay_gman. Really liking the mod version so far. I have a few questions! 1. Is it possible to change the rounds of guns and mortars placed with the 3d editor? I've tried changing the classname of the round from "Sh_85_HE" to "Sh_85_ILLUM" and "Sh_81_ILLUM" in the init field, also tried WP. The mortars/guns are still firing and I can hear HE rounds sound FX but they don't actually impact. So I guess the rounds have to actually be defined in the script that the Artillery Support option calls in the 3d editor? If so would you consider adding an option for different types of rounds to be used by the script later on? I understand if it's to much of a PITA not to mention it would add alot of clutter to the drop-down menu if you had to add a new entry for each type of round. 2. Is High Command suppose to work in the mission editor/sp? If so I can only get it to work in MP for some reason. 3. This might have been mentioned in the manual but I can't seem to find anything about it: Is there a way to add a 3d editor placed unit/group to a Zone? i.e I made a group of units using "[this] join soldier1;" and now want to have them integrated into a zone. Well thanks for this mod and congrats on the new version really happy to see gun-run's are back!:D Keep up the good work Shay.

Good thread, hopefully it will stop all the "OMG future weapons aren't realistic!". On Iran using Israeli weapons. It does seem a little far fetched, but I'm sure stranger things have happened in wartime, who knows maybe it's just a Limnos thing? Maybe their just placeholders for now and BIS hasn't created all the Iranian vehicles/weapons yet? Anyway even if the vanilla game comes with Iranians using Israeli weapons for whatever reason I'm betting the ACE team will get onto it and make new weapons/configs like they did for the US Army, etc. in OA. tl;dr Good thread pure. For the love of god, think of the mods!:)