Mirudes

I don't want to put a tombstone on this thread, but I want to answer the question: The developers have to rely on a functioning single-player mode. The SP mode is still a cash cow. In my opinion there could be problems in the single-player campaign when major changes are made. Only as an example: The AI is not good at lying with Bipods. This could discourage the developers to complete all these functions that are so strongly demanded here. I also find it sad: You will not be able to play ArmA3 without mods if you have the normal standards of a simulation. The complexity is growing due to the fact that every function is somehow connected and interacting with the other. All the players have different hardware and some are already at the limit, even without additional features. Some players simply do not need a working AI, because they never play these missions, they simply don't want to waste processor power for that. When I think about it, it looks as if BIS supports the user-mods from the beginning. One can see it through the early support of mods in the Alpha/Beta stage. The basic program acts as a framework that is well prepared and can be easily extended by Mods/scripts. There are dozens of evidence for functions that are already integrated but not work (yet) but can be extended with mods. I believe the company will force the user to use mods. Back to Topic: Works the AI with the weapon resting and bipods? Is it better to realize this missing feature in the future with a mod?

Graphic settings Auto downgrade? Dynamically adjusting graphics settings while game is running? There is a basic stamina system integrated; when you running out of breath, your view becomes blurry. Then it should go back to normal after a while.

I agree. But how was the role of the medic any better? He could heal 100 times, even the same player, without supplies, always up to 100% health. Some player have even choosen the medic-role only for the capability to heal himself, but have never healed another player! As this thread is about balancing, lets talk about HOW TO BRING BACK THE MEDIC first. When you have ever played as a medic, you will have generally noticed that this role is less attractive. Why? In ArmA2 the player have less slots for weaponry, can't take any AT-weapons, can't take any "good" rifles. Besides that, in some popular missions like Domination every player can revive other players. And to build a mash isn't even a native ArmA-feature, it is a user-made script. The medic is always forced to help injured players. The medics have less freedom but is forced to interact with other people's mistakes. Most injured player know what to do: They fall back to a safer place and call for help. But disproportionately often you have to heal always the same player, again and again. It is like a Rambo-player, boosting his killratio, unable to work in a team. When I play as medic, I was always killed because I have to run to the neewbs --who are generally at the worst places-- and I get killed just only because of their incompetence. I would like to see some constructive proposals on this topic: How would you balance the medic slot for a public mission?

That's indeed a nice finding. What I have learned so far is, that the Developers always seems to connect some features together. In the case with the topic here: ‘Simulation fever’ - No bipods without weapon resting?, it is also connected with the way, how the recoil is simulated. I think we agree that the recoil was made too strong, because...

We can not have Tank Interiors , because the series is infantry centric. :p How about to leave out the cockpits of the helicopters and the planes? :o

Which grenades and rounds would those be? That does matter in addressing SaMatra's remark about lack of "even lighter" vehicles and/or "low tier" AT... The role of that "low Tier AT" is meant to be the newly introduced heavy sniper rifles (anti material).

Second mouse button issue. :confused:

@DM Do you remember that the people here in the forum already have paid for ArmA3? It's Bohemia Interactive who already have taken their money and still wants to sell more copies of this game. Therefore they are using a voting feature in their bugtracker: No female soldiers models available is actually on the fourth place with 1142 : 697 votes. If it is a NOT so important feature, why is BIS using female avatars in the DayZ-standalone? Where is the synergy-effect from DayZ-Standalone to ArmA3? Why not simply take the female modells from DayZ?

And here is another quote from the ArmA3 website: Full details here: http://alpha.arma3.com/sitrep-00014

All physics are running since ages on the CPU. You don't need the PhysX technology when you want to do this. BIS has made a decision to use the PhysX from Nvidia. Do you think they are testing the alpha and beta with it and are going to release the final version of ArmA3 without PhysX? :confused: Well, how many vendors of graphic adapters do you actually know? The chances are 50:50 for the better choice, even in the worst assumption. ( ) ATI (Plus another bonus-game) ( ) Nvidia with PhysX specially used in ArmA3 The developers can't give a even more clear advice to the customers. They can't be more straight. Really, really not. ;) Than you will need a stronger CPU. Right? That is history. The intension of PhysX is to change this and put the related physics-calculations to the graphic processor unit. Do you even read the forums? Do you realize how much stress the CPU already have? No matter how many cores you have... I don't know why? Are ATIs so much cheaper? I have a Nvidia for A3 now and feel somehow safe. If the PhysX integration is growing, I have an option, what I don't have with a ATI. Nvidia has offered in the official forums that they are ready to work together with the ArmA3-Devs on a customized driver. ArmA3 is going to be optimised for PhysX and that is a brand from Nvidia.

ArmA was never symetrically balanced. Even the main military branches were always made different. On one side you may have a multipurpose attack helicopter, capable to carry 6 soldiers, but it's counterpart is a small attack helicopter. The T-90 was generally weaker then its counterpart but in the cold war era the ratio was 3 T-90s against 2 Abrams. You will get the idea - the game-balance is made by the mission designers. The player must take advantage of its strengths. The player must find the weakness of the opponent and turn this to his advantage. Use your brain and build a strategy. The player have to communicate with other online players and work together. TOGETHER. In ArmA2 (and in reality) we often had asymmetric conflicts. But in Arma3, both of the new opponents have enough economy power to buy expensive systems, they have superior communications and so both fractions are equal equipped. One could say, balancing the game was never so easy.

It appears to some players --it may be dependent to the settings-- that the enemy will become even better visible with a higher distance. It is just impossible when someone wearing camouflage suddenly pops up with a increasing distance. It is the opposite to what happens in reality. I consider this both as a bug: 1. It shouldn't be dependent to the players settings. Because fairness. 2. I think that distance is a main factor for visibility. Because one have to watch at a higher amount of objects / shadows and backgrounds are melting together / even a silhouette becomes blurred / and mist, fog, smoke and flickering air are physical barriers for the light. When you look at the enemy from the distance, it used to be blurry, but when you zoom-in with a scope, the units have to be sharp. http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?132196-Firefight-Dynamics-in-ArmA-3&p=2132805&viewfull=1#post2132805 More links about this topic (wiresnsnakes): http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?154927-Any-real-solution-for-the-visibility-of-units-at-higher-distances-possible&p=2394847&viewfull=1#post2394847 http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?147538-Share-your-first-Arma3-Alpha-Impressions-(all-first-impression-type-posts-here-pls)&p=2358193&viewfull=1#post2358193

It was been said in the discussion about the artificial intelligence that the developers working with customized values for the equipment. In example a slower firerate for the Gepárd GM-6 Lynx rifle. They think that should help to achieve a better balance between the fractions / and players versus AI. In every thread about the AI is the suggestion given, to use mods to solve the problems with the AI. Let's say the players are doing this and getting a proper AI. What now? - Will the (now functioning) AI have conflicts/incompatibilities with the customized values of the equipment? - The players will still have the unrealistic values for the equipment. What's next? Using ANOTHER mod only for to bring the realistic values back to ArmA3? Besides that, I don't understand it why BIS isn't even creating a science-fiction rifle with the values they need - nobody would care about that and nobody could discuss a firerate of a non existing heavy sniper rifle out of the year 2035.

That Gepard anti-materiel rifle is *actually existing* equipment! From my experience with the beta-patches for ArmA2 I can say that nearly every patch will influence the artificial intelligence in any way. So how do you come to the conclusion that it's a good idea to balance a game that has a unknown level of AI with the changes to real existing machinery, equipment and devices? All you have to do is takeover the values for firerate, velocity and weight from the Wikipedia. When that is finished, one can even think about balancing.

Proposal: Use the mouse and a modifier key. Hide or show the AIs when you need. Icons for every unit. Mark and split multiply units when you want to create teams. Assign colors to the teams in this way. Rearrange the numbers of the units (or the teams) with drag and drop. Show empty slots (never more tank-crews with numbers like 2|9|12). Buttonbars with the width of the screen. Multiple Buttonbars in several rows underneath the other.

Don't tell me, tell that to Bohemia Interactive Studios: "Hey look, I have a line of code here, that..." ...problem solved in the next release!

In ArmA2 it was a order for the pilot like "Get out". So the pilot landed and disembarked (when it was not locked, then he flew away again). Under some circumstances it is the last thing the player wants that the pilot is getting out. Beside that, you have to waste time by giving another needless command to "Get in as pilot". Under some circumstances you see then a menu: - Chopper at 6 o'clock- - Chopper at 12 o'clock - Chopper at 12 o'clock :mad: We need a action command for landing helicopters on demand!

It seems as if ChrisB is the only player who is satisfied with the (heavily modified) AI. All other players just can't understand that. Also, a game can reach a limit where it becomes too complicated. Many customers expect it to work "out of the box". It should be the other way around: The AI in ArmA3 must function as described by ChrisB, and if the player finds this too heavy, it should be regulated down by the difficulty in the options.

That's right, the artificial enemy in ArmA3 is supposed to be a specialist (not a insurgent, rebell or so) and is educated to handle its equipment. So when it carries a rifle and can steer a vehicle, it is supposed to act ingame like you and me. But sometimes the AI is acting so unnatural stupid that it can destroy the gameplay. A scene from ArmA2: The AI-squad has already entered a unarmed vehicle and gets under fire. Not a single soldier jumps out and returns fire. I agree that the driver should drive zigzag, should use the landscape as a cover, and should plan an alternative route, dependent on how strong the attacker was.

I was talking about this feature in the discussion about Low-Ready Position. It is implemented since OPF - when the rifle is in the lowered position, all you have to do is pull the trigger one time and it is raised immediately. It works so for me in ArmA3. One may forgive me my irony - it does not prevent BIS to change it. On the subject of balancing: It is new to me, that BIS thinks about the balance between player and AI - but the offense was highlighted by a devil smilie. :mad: PvP - Replay or use mod As far as I know, PvP matches will always be played with a side swap: Each side must also play once with a set of equipment of the opposite side. If you want to play PvP matches with no page breaks, you can solve the problem of balancing issues with a specific set of PvP-mod. The PvP-players will still find any reason to argue...because it's their motive. I agree about the fact that the difference between rifles with long barrel, short barrel and silencers, should be felt by different range, accuracy and weight. The enemy should recognize a larger object faster. The rate of fire should be based on realistic values that are possible for 2035. Under no circumstances it should be necessary again to change the values of impact (or firerate), just because a later extension (like DayZ) has made this necessary.

It was so good that they didn't have touched the animations for the last 12 years. :butbut: You have to have a brain damage to believe something like that.:confused: You repeat yourself constantly. :rolleyes: We have now readen your multiple statements.:p We want to discuss here.;) This thread is about Tank Interiors. My support for this request!

Is it connected to the USB? Not PS2 via adapter? Did you reboot your computer with the new mouse? Wikipedia: Mouse (Use in games) Your Mouse comes with a "burst fire button". Try to turn this mode off by holding the buttons a longer time, read the fooking documentations (sorry, I can't speak polish). Look for a switch/slider even on the downside or inside the device when the weights are removed. There isn't a driver available for your mouse yet. Other hardware vendors offers a online service where you can download optimized profiles for your games. I can guess that it is just to early for ArmA3 because of the alpha state. By any chance there are identically constructed mice from other vendors (just bigger names, only more expensive...) and you can use this driver software. Independent from this, you are free to use a 3rd party button remapping program. Please check your system for an mouse driver update.

When you really wants to "zoom" with the 2nd mousebutton and shoot with the first mousebutton, you would have to push the 2nd button, hold it, and fire with the first mousebutton. When you don't hold the second while firing with the first, it have to act like in your report - thats not an error. As far I know that zoom-function is inconsistent for soldiers or vehicles. So you will have unexpected effects with that setting. You can check the zoom-behaviour with (num+,num-) and double tapping those keys for a fixed zoom-in and zoom-out-view. Double tap one more time to switch the sight back to normal. Optics or Optics mode? I guess you don't want to zoom with your 2nd mouse button but you want to invoke the scope, which acts like a switch. In the options-dialog, bind the fast singleclick with the 2nd mousebutton to the optics-function. Do NOT use the slow click (*Hold 2nd mousebutton)! Sometimes it is reverted back to "Hold secondary Mousebutton" - it's tricky! "Optics" is the switch between standard sight/ironsights. Be aware that "Optics mode" just switches between aimpoint and optics, when a weapon has this feature (2 weapon sights). You can also have colliding settings for your 2nd mouse button (*like holding breath, revealing targets, even zooming), and that's no problem. You can still use zoom, together with aiming, on the 2nd mousebutton, too! Just check your settings again or post your Arma3 config file. Please make a backup of your old config-file. Please post more info about the used hardware and so on...

Welcome, aronusa :) It's been discussed here: Dynamically adjusting graphics settings while game is running? Unfortunately, we do not know whether it is an error that must be repaired. We still need more info about it. When you report a bug, it is always best to find a way to reproduce the error. We need all details of the used system, too. Please use the search function before starting new topics and post in the existing threads. It is better to gather all the information because one can see how many users are affected.

The same error has been discussed here: ArmA3 Alpha Video Setting Auto Downgrade! I believe that you can prevent this issue by creating a Application Profile for ArmA3. If there is a application profile in the Nvidia Control panel for ArmA3, the driver will override the specific program settings. Picture: Nvidia Control panel This picture gives you an idea how to create a own profile for ArmA3. This is not only for the SLI mode. 1.) When you say you had have a ATI graphics adapter, using now a Nvidia and both was dimmed down, gives me the suspicion that your central processor unit starts to overheat. 2.) Probably related to overclocking. Try to reproduce this error without overclocking. 3.) Could also be a single peak or a wrong measurement of high temperatures and the system is regulated down. 4.) You may check the thermal paste and the cooling. 5.) Wrong windows settings, for example in the Power Options or a necessary change in the BIOS of the computer. Edit: Quote for the lulz ;)