Sandy*

Posting from phone so have to rely on my bad memory, but somewhere in the mission select/start screen there should be a button to specifically restart it instead of continuing where you left off.

So what happens when you put a >200km2 map into it full of much more detailed textures, trees, buildings and other objects, less intrusive LOD, dozens of AI controlled infantry/vehicles, and actual game mechanics other than just flying a fluffy monster?

Even if this was still possible, what would you tell people who needed to reinstall the game, not to mention entirely new customers? Not that I have a problem with autoupdates myself, but Steam never really supported playing older builds so smug comments like these don't really have any value.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mumble_(software) Preferred over Teamspeak by many.

I assumed you were talking about depth of field, which in terms of videogame post-processing is nothing more than a glorified blur effect used to simulate camera lens/eye focus by blurring objects or the entire image at certain distances. It doesn't allow you to see through anything, as at the end of the day you're still looking at a two dimensional picture on your computer screen. I don't think there's any practical solution/compromise (aside from transparency) to this issue unless one gets hardware that actually displays a different image for each eye (= VR goggles).

I don't get it - how would you be able to see through/past the sight without transparency? A DOF effect would change nothing. The transparency is there to simulate stereo vision. Meanwhile, iron sights should really have such a feature as well. One tends to use the other eye to see past obstructive iron sights while tracking targets, and some guns have really obstructive iron sights. Not sure though how this could be implemented well, as you'd have to lose the ability when actually aiming and shooting.

Is it also part of the marksman and sniper training to not read OP's past the thread title? ;)

Arma is not like regular shooters. There is no magic dispersion that makes bullets fly in random directions inside a cone. Instead, recoil and sway are added the weapon/player but the bullets still fly wherever the barrel was pointed at at the moment of firing. So with that in mind, the "growing" UI crosshair is a really bad and wrong representation of the situation and it probably shouldn't even be in the game (sway behaviour is different from complete randomization). You should only be paying attention to the UI crosshair as a stamina indicator (how much sway you have). When firing, there's a lot more recoil than sway added, so naturally the crosshair doesn't grow in that sense. And while there's a lot of room for Arma to improve, regular shooters have it all wrong from the basics.

Oh, I'll have to take back what I said, I never noticed that the pedal controls are linked. Why would they do that. :confused: While I often fly helicopters with MKB, I always stick to a joystick with fixed-wing planes so I never noticed any problems.

You'll find a solution by actually taking a look at the game's control settings.

Haswells indeed run quite hot, I was a bit surprised when I upgraded from a relatively cool-running AMD machine to a 4790k. However, going 70-80 celsius in Arma doesn't sound right. I've got mine overclocked to 4,4GHz with an aftermarket cooler, it goes a bit over 60C in CPU-intensive games, while it's possible to hit ~80C with prime95 or video rendering but that's pushing it. Does your mainboard come with some fancy software to control fan speeds? I got a ROG mainboard, with the default settings the CPU was overclocked yet the fans were in "Extreme Quiet Mode" where they barely even did anything at high CPU load. And one of the software updates reset all my custom fan speed settings back to the quiet mode all of a sudden one day. His GPU temps are fine.

I accidentally skipped your post last week, so pardon me for the late reply. But 20 to 30-year-old designs ARE relatively new, not to mention that the delivery of purchased vehicles often take years, even a decade or longer if the quantities are large. For example, Poland made contracts to produce the Rosomak, a variant of Patria's AMV, in the early 2000s. The numbers have been raised so high the Polish military expects to receive the last of them by 2019. Military assets are not produced, sold and transferred in a heartbeat. To crosspost from another similar thread: We also have upgraded T-55s stashed as war reserves. My point merely is that AAF's arsenal is new enough to display no hints whatsover that one would expect from small/poor countries, especially ones ravaged by war.

Like it was mentioned earlier in thread, using real life countries/militaries/conflicts in games that depict war at such a detail and close range, there's always a possibility of someone getting pissed off. The local authorities on Limnos had been displeased by Bohemia's decision to use the island, and eventually things lead to some unfortunate events (Greek military/intelligence being silly and paranoid to begin with). http://www.polygon.com/2013/2/8/3959776/arma-3-bohemia-interactive-prison-ivan-buchta

You also have to remember that many of the assets seem to have been from the original planned setting for the game, and ended getting distributed quite randomly to between the factions/sides. Altis was supposed to be the real Limnos, and instead of CSAT there was the actual Iran that had annexed Israel. So FIA's TAR-21s and NATO's Merkavas were likely OPFOR assets. Whatever equipment BIS considered for BLUFOR and Independents back in the day probably made a lot more sense.

Which specific features exactly are missing from the wide array of community made AI enhancements for Arma 3? I admit I never used Group Link and such in A2, but most of the features were present in other people's works already back in the day, and so they are in Arma 3. Althought you say that "nothing in A3 approaches that level" and talk about wanting one complete mod, it reflects that you just haven't bothered looking for replacements and putting together the perfect mix. :confused: So in the end, this isn't about A3 missing mods vital for milsimming, you're only criticizing it because some very specific niche things your group likes aren't present, and 3rd party modders/scripters aren't catering to your needs. If you want something uniquely fitting for your gaming group, why don't you work on it yourself? Many groups do.

The OP asked for new features to the existing system, not a redesign of the user interface. I pointed out that he's unaware that something small already exists in the squad management system, though it was not completely what he wanted. Nobody defended the existing UI. Neither does the ability to send AI to complete task autonomously have anything directly to do with the UI, it's an AI/mission design issue. So why don't you stop sperging and derailing the thread. I'm sure there are a thousand and one threads detailing how bad the user interface has been since OFP.

It would've however suited AAF much better to have older vehicles upgraded with better optics for example, instead having only relatively new ground assets.

My group's still mostly been playing A2 due to having so much more content mods, but we're slowly transitioning. This one I don't understand though. The vanilla AI is the same, with A3 having minor improvements. Can you give examples of these majorly important A2 AI mods or scripts you describe, that haven't been ported or remade, or lack an equivalent in Arma 3? Everything we had in A2 regarding the AI works the same in 3 except performance for huge numbers which we avoid anyway.

PWS user interface has always been a mess, even back in the days of 6updater. You just have to get used to it.

Such an apologist I am for telling the OP how the game works. By not even playing SP due to the terrible friendly AI and the interface, and just pointing out features the OP thought didn't exist, I'm clearly defending Bohemia's lack of progress. :j:

Yes, they will split when you order them to. Just like you can give orders to individual soldiers with the function keys, you can select the different fireteams with shift+F1,F2,F3 and so on (or whatever your keybinding are). As for AI autonomy in completing tasks, like I said, everything would have to be scripted. If BIS created such a system, it would not work in user-made content without extra effort.

The functionality to divide your squad into different fireteams is already there, though. Edit: This sort of feature would potentionally require a ludicrous amount of scripting from the mission designers, as the tasks can be pretty much anything. The game's too open and full of possibilities to have an actual core game system where the AI would know how to follow and complete tasks, so it's better to leave it for the individual mission makers.

Harvest Red with the Chedakis is about well-armed and skilled militants. Takistan provides everything to create your setting, but you just want more urban maps. There is nothing "deeper" in what you describe, and Takistan draws just as many parallels with very recent events. You are only rooting for a setting that is exactly like ISIS, which would not only be a bad idea for BIS to create due to aforementioned things, it would also be too much like Arrowhead. They can't please everyone, and probably prefer making something new for a change. I've enjoyed the official campaigns in the series, but they've never been important to me other than giving a nice backdrop for user made content. A2CO vanilla content provides you with all the assets to sew together an ISIS-based mission, while Arma 3 is starting to have a big collection of Near East style mods entirely new, or ported or refurbished from A2. You can literally cherry-pick mods - what do you need BIS for?

The earlier games in the series were exactly this. Fictious conflicts that nevertheless drew so much inspiration and familiarity with real world conflicts that they were very believable and easy to relate to. It is only Arma 3 that created an alien geopolitical environment and quite a messy or lacking story around it. You are rooting for a setting that isn't that much different from Takistan.

People are calling the setting futuristic, not a setting with futuristic technology. There are several things in Arma 3 that are futuristic concerning the different factions.