phoboss

Wasteland is by far the most unstable mission I've come across during the alpha test. I can play ANY other gamemode hours at a time without a singe crash, but wasteland usually crashes within 30 - 45 minutes of playing (sometimes even faster). I went back to playing A2 wasteland, because its just to frustrating.

I'd be very interested in this, but as of right now, I don't think the game is there yet... to many crashes that would give one or the other team an unfair advantage...

As do I. At least 4 People have bought it already :D Great post! Nail on the head I might say.

Yep I agree as well. I mean I can grab something out of my backpack while running, but I don't have 30kg of gear on me :D

But its true, I'm pretty sure a trained soldier should be able to switch to his sidearm while on the move.

jesus what the hell is your problem? again with the condescending bullshit?! yes we know you're the greatest arma player of all time, you've been playing for 20 years now, you know everything, the game is perfect the way it is, no need for changes, everybody else is wrong... you don't see everything you see in real life. this is a game dude, when will you realize that? In real life, if I'm sitting behind a rock or a tree, even if I'm aiming down sight, I can see if my muzzle is blocked by that same rock. I can open an eye, or leave it open in the first place, but I can see that my muzzle is actual behind the cover and not beside or above it. In game, I can't. And for that an indicator would be nice, just like the crosshair behaves now, only also available while aiming down sight.

Also I'd like an indicator while I'm aiming down sight. In real life I'd see that my muzzle is behind an object as well.

Where are you from mate?

Jesus... when will people learn that they did not buy a final game here... You Pre-Ordered a game and through that got access to an early alpha build. Stuff like this is totally normal in an alpha. In fact, things could be A LOT worse and it would still be considered a normal alpha build... So calm the F down! When this is till the case in the final release, THEN and ONLY THEN are you allowed to complain about stuff like this. Until then, this is a WIP and bugs, crashes and all sorts of weird behavior is to be expected.

If anyone has seen the newest DayZ SA devblog, they implemented something I'd like to see ported over to arma 3. Sure you wont be doing Michael Jordan like jumps in full battlegear, but you can certainly jump 2 feet across a small gap. I like the idea that pressing 'V' while sprinting you can vault over small gaps and obstacles.

Sounds great, keep it up! You guys have really outdone yourselfs! Great game so far!

any news on when we might see the first patch to the "regular" version?

I'd like to see VAC as the new anticheat system, simply because it allows for global bans of your entire steam account, which might make some people think twice before they cheat or hack in MP. ---------- Post added at 09:37 ---------- Previous post was at 09:33 ---------- honestly you have no idea what you're talking about... You basically pre ordered the game, and because of that you got early alpha access to said game. And because this game is an early alpha, things like the bugs (or hacks or whatever else might happen), are perfectly normal and are expected. Afaik there isn't even an anti cheat engine in place at the moment. So chill out! If you don't know what to expect from an alpha build, you might be better off coming back once the game is in late beta or after the release.

agreed! Please don't go down that dark dark path where statskiddies go to die... But we definitely need a better server browser. But I'm pretty sure that will come sometime down the road. It's still early.

Yes, patch notes would be awsome! Makes alpha testing really hard without them.

That's why I was so confused at first, because I instantly went "AWSOME!" when I saw it. It just didn't make any sense to me why you wouldn't like the new crosshair behavior. Because when you're used to not having a regular crosshair (like in Arma 2) and you had said moments a lot where you thought you had a clear shot, just to realize your bullets are hitting that rock you're sitting behind, than there is just no way, you wouldn't love the new crosshair. But I guess not everyone sees it that way, so a setting to disable said behavior is of course always welcome. :)

It's a bug. And it's a not even week old alpha give it time. I'm hoping that they will start using steams vac protection at some point. Maybe it's not better, but it has global bans :D

I read the thread and I know you acknowledged that your first impression was wrong, but you still called a autoaim a few posts back... anyhow, I kinda get what your saying now. I myself don't play the way I explained it either, it was just exemplify what I meant. Point is, I get what your saying now, I simply don't need the crosshair to tell me where the center of the screen is. I usually play all FPS that allow for it, without any crosshair at all, so I'm pretty used to not having that kind of "help". So since its kinda hard finding a CH:0 server at the moment, I kinda like the way the crosshair shows me, that I couldn't shot at my target at a given time. I'd describe my playstyle as pretty tactical, so I move from cover to cover a lot, thus making the "indicator" pretty handy. Long story short, and as I mentioned before, I of course, support the idea of an option to disable said "indicator". Or color change, which is even better.

I still don't get why this would bother anybody, because having the crosshair in the middle, when thats NOT where your bullets are gonna land, is no use to me, but that color option actually is a pretty good idea! I like it. And of course I'm not against the option to disable this feature. Why would I? I'm just trying to understand the problem people have with this feature.

This statement clearly shows me, that you do not understand the "feature". If you are standing perfectly still and are shooting at a target, you wont notice any kind of weird crosshair behavior. (if you do, than maybe you're experiencing some sort of bug). I'm not at home right now, so I can't make a video of it. How this feature works is, that by moving your crosshair it shows you where your bullets are going to hit. If the target moves behind some cover, the crosshair movement will reflect that by showing you, where on that said cover you're gonna hit. of what I mean. See how the crosshair jumps up and down when he ducks behind the cover? During ADS it looks as if he would shot over the target, but because the scope is on top of the gun, and you cant really see your muzzle, it actually still is behind the cover and you cant shot. I'm not entirely sure what you're trying to say here. If you move your mouse around the environment you will notice that the crosshair always jumps around a bit, when you "hit" an object that will stop your bullet (like rocks). What good is it if your crosshair is always on the center of your screen, when you ADS and try to shot and the bullets land in the nearest rock? And you're trying to say that you use the crosshair for actual shooting. Think of it like it was back in Arma 2, you can't use that for shooting, except at really REALLY close ranges. When I'm shooting, I only use ADS. The crosshair is just an indicator, where your weapon is pointed so you can find your target faster once you ADS. But what good is that if you'd shot at the rock in front of you, instead of your actual target? Well at first you thought it was some sort of autoaim, which shows me, you don't get the concept of this feature. And I really don't get what you're getting so defensive about.

See, thats an opinion I can accept and discuss about, but I can't work with comments like "you don't know what Arma is" or "you should've ended your post right there". Thats just condescending and rude. I'm a 30 year old male and for me its just about equality. Nothing else. My girlfriend likes to play video games as well, and she always hates it when there isn't a female option. Thats just how it is. And because I wouldn't want to play a female character (where male would be a viable option, not like in tomb raider or anything), I kinda feel the option should exist for the female player base as well. I read comments like "why would men ever want to play a female avatar". And even though I personally never would either, there are people out there who like to do just that. But thats not the point, if people ask, why men should play a female character, then you need to ask, why would women want to play a male character? If they do, or don't is not the point, IMHO the option should be there. Even if its just cosmetic.

Dude, I'm not saying its not OK to use the "muscle card", I'm simply saying that its a none issue. You are ignoring the fact that there are armed forces that allow women to follow any kind of military career they want, thus making the difference in strength and constitution irrelevant. Or at least ignoring it. And if the military leader of a country can ignore it, I think so can a game like Arma. I do know what Arma is, I've been playing the series since OFP so don't give me that condescending bullshit. Arma 3 has all sorts of soldier customization like ethnicity and so on, and because of that I believe the male/female option should be in there as well. And I would like to state my opinion here without you telling me when to end my posts and when I'm allowed to speak.

I ask myself the same thing. Why do you have such a strong opinion against female models? I believe there are more important issues to be addressed at the moment, BUT I also believe that in 2013 a Game that gives customization options of any kind, needs a male/female option period. This has nothing to do with muscle mass or anything. Women can serve in armed forced around the world, and please don't tell me that every man in the military has more strength or constitution than any woman. Because thats just rubbish. A well trained woman can serve just as good as the average male counterpart. Sure they'll probably not serve in Special Forces units like KSK or Navy Seals, but not every grunt is a navy seal. Because if that were the case, why would they be allowed to follow any military career they choose? (At least in my country they can, and like I said, the US isn't to far behind on this)

The amount of work they would have to put into implementing this is so low I really don't see why this should not be added to the game. There are a few armed forces around the world who actually allow female soldiers on the frontlines (US/NATO is probably going to by 2030), so why would anybody be against this? Every second post on this forum is about realism and this game being a war sim, so, if you want realism so much, I'd argue, there HAVE TO BE female models in the game, because female soldiers are real. And who cares if a male player wants to play a female soldier? There are white players, playing a black or asian char and vice versa.

To make people think before they shot, the punishment for Tking should be much higher IMHO. I'm not talking about intentional TKing, that ofcourse needs a more severe punishment as well, but what I mean is all that, "aaahh well, I'm not entirely sure if thats an enemy 300m away, so I'll just shot him anyway, if he was friendly, it wont matter because there is no punishment", Tking. Thats what pisses me off! If you come around a corner, and "spook" someone, and he accidentally shots you, thats fine, it happens. But not taking your time to asses the situation and make sure the target is in fact an enemy, really is annoying. Maybe something like distance to target should be taken into account as well. like if you shot someone without a scope at 500m away, and he's friendly, you get punished, because there was no way you could've been sure he was an enemy. just spitballing here ;)