gibonez

I am sure it is however what I was trying to say is that I would be completely fine with a new flight model that took advantage of the analog movement that only a joystick and rudders bring. So in this hypothetical new flight model mouse and keyboard would still be fine but it would be the least desirable combination. A scenerio where these are the following control options from most desirable to least. 1. Joystick and pedals 2.Joystick and keyboard 3. Mouse and keyboard.

Buy a joystick ? I would be totally ok with a new flight model that made the ideal flying solution be with a joystick and rudder , worst and less precise method with mouse and keyboard. Not all aspects of Arma need to be super accessible.

Yea naval assets would be useless unless it somehow adds to the infantry gameplay. All in game aspects should revolve around infantry first.

COLD WAR!!! YASSSSS

Amen. A revamped artillery system especially for what is probably the best fit for the scale of Arma , mortars and light howitzers would be far more satisfying is if were player aimed and controlled using analog adjustments. While suggesting that this be 100 percent true to life in its use is not realistic having it be far more complex than clicking on a map would add so much depth to the game. On the other side of the token a counter to artillery could be fantastic with deploy-able counter battery radars giving you map coordinates of where suspected artillery fire came from with the closer the artillery the more accurate those coordinates are.

Will buy all the DLC regardless but sure do hope Artillery gets some much needed love. A completely redesigned artillery computer that is not point and click would be great. Actually aiming the artillery and using both UAVS and team mates for coordinates would be fantastic.

It highly depends on a few simple things. #1. What is the setting ? If arma 4 takes place in the cold war, current setting or even ww2 I will gladly buy it. If it takes place in the same setting as Arma 3 or even farther into the future then forget about it. Single biggest problem with Arma 3 is the horrible setting. #2. Will it remain as readily moddable as Arma 3 ? This is one of the key factors that has led to Armas success thus far it is vital. One thing is for sure I am done buying DLC for Arma 3. The expansion was disappointing and the setting continues to aggravate me. Combine that with the way the Arma community seems to gravitate towards lame, KOTH and life servers and I think I am done with Arma 3 until 4 debuts.

I think it will. It will naturally be the next progression for added features. I can envision it being added when bolt action rifles are ever added. Hopefully however it is not a optional addition like AFM and it becomes the standard model.

The setting could have been fine but the large problem for me was the asset selection for all 3 factions made absolutely no sense and the asset recycling that IS STILL in effect makes all 3 factions feel like souless generic characters. The Western Faction using no upgraded or evolutionary equipment that the west uses now instead they somehow manage to use Israeli MBTs wtf. Same applies to Csat the equipment should have been reflective of what Eastern Bloc nations have historically had outfitted with modernized upgrades but instead in game it fields a completely random roster of vehicles that makes no sense.

Simple question do you think Arma 2 was a more popular game with a higher player count and a larger community ? Or has Arma 3 eclipsed Arma 2s community due to the popularity of Several Arma 2 mods?

I would imagine it would have been the single most complicated weapon to code in game. Shame though since it could have opened the door for all kinds of airbursting weapons in game.

What about the xm25 ? any reason why it might have been cut ?

I really miss the Arma 2 damage model. Getting shot actually ment something. A single shot to the body could and would often times put you out of commission. Arma 3 or future armas need atleast basic medical and to simulate gunshots to organs bleeding out should be a thing from a bad body shot along with the movement and vision debilities that come with that wound.

Awesome. Potential beginning of Map Tools ?

There are plenty of weapons developed during the time period of the Vietnam war that will be relevant and used 50 years from now. When it comes to weapons , effectiveness is king. Just look at the rpg 7 , the akm, the b10 recoiless rifle, the spg 9, the m2 browning. All of these weapons will outlive most of us and will be used 20-50 years from now.

Cold war was a long time. Cold war spans from the end of ww2 all the way to 1991. So really there is a ton of areas that Bohemia could explore. More importantly there are a butt ton of experimental weapons, vehicles, bombers , fighters etc that could be adapted.

Then again Arma 3 also benefited from the added exposure from Dayz. Due to Dayz a whole gigantic group of people who had never even had arma in their sights bought arma 3 immediately. Still don't buy the accessibility leading to bigger sales theory especially since Arma 3 is by all means less accessible than arma 2. Arma 3 has fatigue, uavs , eden and a whole bunch of other more complex good features that are not super easy to grasp and definetely more complicated than their arma 2 counterparts.

Proof ? That would be fantastic btw.

Kinda related to the FCS comment for tanks but any chance that in the future Indirect Fire is looked at ? As in perhaps alternatives to the Artillery computer that currently exists.

Even in this regard Arma 2 might have more sales. Take this example for instance I owned Arma 2 CO both from the Bohemia store and from steam thus I double dipped on the same game. I am probably one of many who have so the true sales numbers might be substantially higher for Arma 2. Especially post day z.

Mid to Late cold war is the best setting for Arma imo. This was the time when the cold war was still red hot thus the military spending budgets of the Soviet Union and Nato were still extremely high, this leads to a wide variety of units, weapons, vehicles and experimental equipment. As far as gameplay is concerned Cold war also means alot of good things for infantry combat. - Little to no thermal optics - Limited optics - Lock on Fire and Forget missiles are rarely in the squad level and instead are vehicle based, meanwhile the most common anti vehicle weapons for infantry are unguided rockets and Saclos missiles. - Recoiless rifles and other towed crew served weapons - Napalm and other less than humane weapons. - Two almost equally powerful factions - Nato being slightly more technologically advanced, and the Soviet Union possessing huge amounts of Artillery and very capable tanks. One Final reason why such a setting might be the most ideal setting for Bohemia to place their 4th arma game in is the Potential for zero licensing fees. The weapons used in the cold war should by and large remain trademark free setting the game in the near future or current day would raise lots of litigious and financial hardship on the studio not to mention the headaches they would get from trying to circumvent silly trademark laws when it comes to firearms and vehicles.

I was a kid back when I played OFP but the one thing I do remember was the sheer amount of Addons that were constantly coming out. While the mods might have not been as ambitious as say CUP or ACE, the sheer quantity of them makes me believe OFP was a huge hit. Also I do notice by an large the Mil sim communities have not migrated towards Arma3, most of the servers I see are KOTH, LIFE, EXILE, whereas in Arma 2 it was mostly mil sim servers who operated their own pubs with their own custom missions be it CO-OP or TVT.

WTF is pbr ?

Brilliant update. complexity and depth enrich the core game and offer players more options in how they play the game. Hopefully such actions are just a glimpse as to what is to come when it comes to depth and complexity in gameplay.

While yes the range of the maps do downplay the importance of artillery somewhat. It remains an important tool that should play a pretty big role in Arma. Regardless of map size indirect, beyond visual range fire missions should be a big part of the game that has equal importance and key word is complexity as Infantry, air and vehicle action. This is especially true in the new environment Tanoa. Tanoa is a map with thick heavy brush not unlike Vietnam. Where contact is sporadic and fire support missions would be called out in an attempt to flush out the enemies from the heavy brush. I will say though due to the map size constraints if there would to be just one category of indirect fire that would fit perfectly with what arma is today it is Light man portable mortars. Sadly those are completely missing at the moment.