fraczek

That's the exact thing why the current 10 year old implementation is plainly bad User Interface design, ain't it? Mixing fixed and context sensitive commands in one place is always a bad idea. Not for a rose or anything myself, just pointing out (again) the obvious flaws in current system.

Well I can't be bothered to look up my old, rather longwinded post on UI design, so just a quick reiteration. Some basic rules of good user interface design: Never have same control perform widely different actions. Never change the way controls are spatialy ordered. If BIS learned at least that, we wouldn't have "Open door/Touch Off Explosives" hiccups. We wouldn't have the frantic scrolling to enter the hovering CASEVAC heli while under fire to only stand there dumbly while your character changes weapons. Our carefuly placed in cover AT AI subordinates wouldn't rush running towards an all-guns-blazing T72 because the "all to intelligent context sensitive" cursor changed from Attack that... to Move to... when our mouse went one pixel off. We should have had donated some basic UI design books to BIS very very long ago... At least a simple suggestion, reiterated all too many times, uselessly so far: Do not share World Interaction with Playable Character Interaction. No more scroll wheel options for things you point at mixed with detonate satchels and change weapon. Simply adopt ACE-like system of separate Self interaction and separate World interaction. The Space key could be used for World - it's already ingame, context sensitive so it would do all from opening doors to accessing gear crates to getting into vehicles. If there were more options for a given object, like vehicle positions, a simple pop-up menu would do. And the key would do nothing else than that. Generations of gamers are used to one key for picking up objects and opening doors from simpler shooters, why not here? Nothing against scroll menus myself, especially for complex games, if only they followed basic UI rules for such menus. But you state exactly the two rules that are broken, and broken since OFP, IIRC <g>.

Metalcraze, I think nobody would want to bring back the old boring A2 way of comfortably plinking targets 600m away with complete ease. But surely you must realize that as it stands now, already in the Beta stage - whereas Alpha was supposed to by focused solely on infantry (getting infantry right in the first place!) - it is lacking. Very random sway (I can't see any rhythm at all), coupled with the exagerated recoil and nonexistent recoil management or bipods/resting, animation errors that exagerate paralax difference between POA & POI in prone position (and prone position only!), might be taken to the other extreme. Try making a two rapid sucession fire hit a man sized target at 200m with an assault rifle with the 4x optic from crouched position...

Please search before posting, and take the discussion there to the mentioned thread. Thank you!

I was more like responding to the "12 year old engine" argument with the VBS one. Of course I know completely nothing about how much work would it entail to have it in A3 :) Perhaps too much ATM...I guess at least the animations need to be reworked, manualy spliced together, and some engine work done. Keep in mind it took until VBS 2.12 to have that feature...

Nonsense re the engine. VBS 2.12 has weapon switching on the move and it's based on Arma 2 (sic!) engine. I guess same thing was with the reloading on the move back in A2 vs A2OA. It might not be easy, it might require engine changes or more animations for what I know, but quite probably it's possible. In VBS it does look a bit awkward, since it seems it's two animations spliced into half (lower torso running, upper torso changing weapons).

IMHO this "feature" is just bugged and plain wrong. In order to prolong firefights they are introducing an artificial handicap instead of a solution, a handicap that doesn't even apply to the AI.... I am all for prolonging Arma firefights, unlike Arma2 where every scoped weapon was an instawin in five seconds, but do it properly instead of "Battlefield x" style please... No offence to the Quality Assurance Lead, but all that artificial sway and recoil seem to me like newly introduced "solutions" to balance things out ("Battlefield land"), instead of real solutions that would work (vis his Dev Log re: weapon recoil). And worst of all, it only applies to players not AI (vis all the tickets about bullseyeing AI in A3). What is so difficult to just copy VBS2 figure of eight sway into Arma3? Anybody that played BIS JCOVE LITE or actual VBS Personal Edition would quite probably agree with me. And it didn't have any of the strange "recoil up into the sky" problems either (although its recoil was a little too low IMHO). Just add a tiny bit of randomness to the 8. Still it was effective enough that one had to adjust his POA (Point Of Aim) to hit anything properly, especially when under fire. Even the UK free version of VBS (VBS Lite) had this in Arma 1 (sic!) engine for YEARS. 1) figure of eight weapon sway dependant on fatigue, stance and injury and focusing ("hold breath") 2) more realistic recoil (although underdone IMO) without any of the stupid "your weapon is now pointing to the sky after a full auto discharge" which is utterly pointless gamey balancing mechanic. 3) Player (and AI) supression when under fire, player jerking when not fatally hit. In Arma3, I get nonfatally hit my vest's plate, I don't even jerk a tiny bit just continue fighting...In VBS your POA would instantly jerk a lot, putting you offtarget, your view would change (postprocess) making it much harder to return fire. Same for AI IIRC. Another problem with the random weapon sway is that it is bugged! See the ticket on 3D Sights. It's about parallax. There is misalignment between the sights Point Of Aim and Point Of Impact that is dependent of head (eye?) position in Idle animation, but this misalignment: 1) only happens in Prone position, where you would be most focused on the sight view, 2) Does not happen in Standing or Crouched positions, or is much less there, contrary to common sense, 3) It isnot dependant on Holding Breath/Focusing at all because it is "feature" of Idle animation apparently, 4) It is not communicated to the player at all, bullets just land elsewhere than the Point Of Aim (crosshairs) is, unlike RL where you would have at least a tiny indication you are not aligned with the scope properly for your target distance (crosshair moving over target, scope borders blacking out). 5) Is not consistent with the scopes used, because the HAMR/ACOG style scopes are supposed (according to manufacturers' specs, 1st hand users correct me if wrong) to be paralax-free in the vertical axis to allow rangefinding with the reticules, while the paralax errors happen in both axes. ---------- Post added at 01:29 ---------- Previous post was at 01:14 ---------- All in all, I am all for prolonging average firefights in A3, because in A2 it was more like press RMB, line up, estimate distance, shoot, repeat for next target, 10 NME down in 5 seconds (if they are at least 200m from you so they stick out on the plain texture). But NOT by introducing overly ridiculous gamey handicaps with modelled but unusable bipods. Just do it PROPERLY. Instead of better configured AI (why do we even have to use mods like ASR_AI to get more realistic shooting AI? Not bullseying you from 200m with a pistol - happened to me in a mission unless the death screen info was bugged) from the start, missing Stratis midrange textures (again, why do we have to use a workaround like Babe_Midtex instead of proper midrange clutter textures which according to some reports have even been in A2?) to at least somewhat mitigate the scoped view advantage, et cetera?

Thanks. Might be just borked configs at my installation, although I did uninstall with delete configs. I just noticed, that the actual path inside the .rsync/config file points to the path chosen at mod installation, and doesn't change subsequently when I change the path and diagnose. So at least my A2 and A3 rsync packs are separate. I just have to remember to change the path to correct one when installing a new mod until it's resolved, so no big deal :)

Equal. At least for A3. Actually I suspect it takes the one which was changed last, and uses that for both. E.g.: I have mods on C:\MYDOCS\A2 (fast SSD) and have sync files on T:\A2TMP (slow HDD) Ran the new preview 3. By default the path was set to C: Changed SYNQ path to T: Updated. Crunched a while, ok. Restarted PwS P3 Noticed mods now show INSTALL instead of LAUNCH. Noticed path for MODS and SYNQ was set to T: (while obviously my mods were still on C: so it didn't see them installed) Changed MOD path to C:, restart. Now BOTH show as C: That's why I think it takes the last user changed path for both. Endresult, not possible for different path. /edit: Actually it seems although it shows the SYNQ path in settings as C:, it still created the SYNQ data in T: in Arma2 case, and in C: in Arma3 case. ---------- Post added at 16:11 ---------- Previous post was at 15:38 ---------- What's worse - last stable (1.30.0474) does NOT remember a separate RSYNC folder for each game installed. When I set Arma2 to use T:\A2TMP and Arma3 to use T:\A3TMP in each game settings, it uses the one which was entered latest for BOTH games. Now the RSYNC folder gets mixed up content, potentially screwing the update process.

Some moderator please close this "AnotherUselessEngineThreadLikeThatSince2005"...

Can't set different mod and synq path. Well I can, but it changes to same path for both upon restarting PwS Preview 3.

Wooohooo!

I understand : ) I was asking you and .Kju if your settings might be included by him in AiA by default, per island basis, with due credits :) Although I have no problem with running it as a mod of course!

Very nice! Can't wait to try it. Might this be included in AiA?

/deleted/

IS that a lake I could see shimmering in the distance on the new video peak of Altis?

I have overwritten the PwS installation with the new PwS Beta files. Updating mods (as in automatic convert to synq) inside PwS Beta now gives me error. Report sent. W8 64bit, ran as admin.

Mansen, if you had actually played the Beta instead of just spamming the forum, you would have probably noticed that the Autosave is separate from the User save.

There had been a discussion about this already in the helicopter thread. Please search before you post a new thread :) Tickets are already all over the feedback tracker. There are actually two different issues: 1) analog controls do not translate in 100% movement ingame even if axis is at 100% - noticable in choppers cyclic, vehicles turning (not sure if still is). 2) analog axis on controllers (i.e. triggers, up/down axis on a thumbpad) that self zero (unlike thrust lever on joysticks) result in dropping collective to zero and you falling unless you keep the axis up. Whereas thrust axis on thrust controller has a middle point where the collective keeps "steady". That is more of a feature of the way the controllers work or are mapped (I guess normal Thrust axis on thrust controller has 0-100% with 50% in the middle for steady hover, whereas a gamepad controller has -100-100% with 0% in the middle). Could be solved with some 3rd party remapping software, or BIS would have to add another separate analog thrust input in the game with different behaviour. And please be so kind to find the previous thread and continue there :)

Seriously, DO NOT SHOOT! Who knows what might happen, some cascade failure probably... Although it would be helpful if you posted this with GFX card, drivers version, OS et cetera...

The issue with TrackIR and new scopes has been AFAIK reported. Upvote if you find it a problem. I no longer have a working FreeTrack (fried my diodes <g>) so I can't tell if it's really such a problem or not. Although from few comments in another thread I guess so.

Dsi24, this is not a 3D picture in picture thread. And it would not solve the perceived problem at all.

Nice ticket. Indeed the eye misalignment is bigger in prone idle animation. I suggest to update the ticket description to note that.

Just a tidbit, ain't the BCO/ACOG style scope supposed to be parallax free in the vertical (ranging) axis though (and in the vertical axis only)? But I for one support our parallax overlords, though as Rasden noted it should be minimised when you are holding your breath.

I can see it now, strange it only shows up sometimes, even when prone and not moving. Indeed it is not much. Still a bit strange when you are not moving. Warrants an eye to keep on it (pun intended) :)