Akibuua-FIN-

I don't think it is bug, it is a feature. Check Settings - Gameplay - Mouse control aircraft. If that is set to yes your mouse movements control the helicopter's cyclic controls (joystick). Set that to No, and the controls should work as in ground vehicles (haven't tested that recently though). If the mouse control is on, it is necessary to use free look to look around in the chopper.

The first issue yes on confirmation, well the center itself is not a problem for me, I can set it as I like. The problem is small movement near the center which does not work correctly. It is most clear when using optics, either sniper sight or binoculars. (As a sidenote, the fact that moving your head while in binocular view moves what you see in general feels odd.) When you start to move your head slowly from the center it is obvious that there is a forced dead zone in the game (even if TrackIR is set for example 1:1 profile) and when the threshold is reached the view jumps to the value that TrackIR is at that moment instead of starting smoothly from zero like it does in every other game I played. This is most noticeable when using any sort of magnified view, especially binoculars. I don't have your second issue if I understand you correctly. It might be the fact that only yaw and pitch are modeled and you are used to the fact that in most games the changes in x-, y- and z- axis are incorporated into the head turning. I have noticed a small issue with the movement range when trying to change from a gunner seat of the HMMWV to other seats with TrackIR vs. the free look, when it seems that the free look has more range, but I suspect that is related to the x-y-z point.

Considering that Arma series has always attempted to be at least a semi realistic simulation of all things military, this demonstrates very well the bigger problems in the thinking of the developers, namely inertia and stamina. Inertia means that as the mass of the object increases, it makes changing the direction of movement more difficult. This is easy to test for everyone. Compare yourself how easy it is to 1. spin around on a single position standing up and change direction every other rotation and 2. move two meters front and back and side to side as fast as you can. Then try the same test while carrying a backpack weighing 10 to 20 kg (20 to 40 lbs for imperial unit users). If that is not convincing enough then 3. add slung launcher or other weapon to the back. So strafing speed should not immediately start at maximum, it should build up slowly and the acceleration at the start and deceleration at the end should be dependent on the load the person is carrying. Stamina refers to what movements are actually hard and how exhaustion increases under load and eases of in rest. Especially the 2nd example test that I used before is about 2 times more exhausting than running. And in general games seem to indicate that sprinting would be the hardest thing for stamina, when in real life a lot of things are harder than running, for example crouch walking, jumping over obstacles, crawling prone, building fortifications (filling, moving and stacking sandbags). And the load you carry (the heavy backpack again) has a huge impact on how the exhaustion increases especially when doing things when your back is not constantly upright. And when trying to recover everyone would of course take the heavy back pack of to catch their breath easier. So the effects of stamina should take more things in to the calculations to force players to really think about the load they are carrying. Ok, I'm not blind to the fact that if we try to add everything that happens in real life it would never end. I mean it would not take that long when we would overtake stuff like eating and drinking and start talking about tying the shoe laces or unzipping jackets to cool of. But there is also no reason to limit this game (or at least Arma 4) to the same stuff that most other fps games do.

There has been and still is a fundamental problem with how Arma series games have handled hiding in tall grass (or more precisely how they haven't handled it), and it is high time that this is corrected. If not now, then there is no reason to expect that anything would change if ... sorry, when Arma 4 comes along. Why have Arma Reforger at all if it is not used to iron out mistakes. ... oh boy that sentence could be added to so many posts and issues. This is how it is now. If you have grass set to pretty much anything other than the absolute minimum (and usually even then), it is a lot harder to see past the grass that is right in front of you, than the grass that a distant (>50 m) enemy is hiding in. Try hiding in knee high grass by going prone and both human and ai enemies that are for example 300 meters away will shoot you with accurate shots because the grass you are hiding in is NOT rendered for them, but you can't even see them even since you can't see out of the grass because it blocks your view. In real life, even in full daylight if you hide in a prone position (with a rifle) in the edge of a tall grass field in a way that your rifle muzzle is just inside the grass and your body is further inside the field you are completely hidden from anyone who is more than 30 meters away. But you can see clearly out of the field through and over your weapon sights, because the weapon moves the blades of grass away from your eye line and keeps the close grass from swaying into your view. I can remember one game from early 2000s that managed at least a partial solution for this, and that was Joint Ops: Typhoon rising. Their solution was to add something like another layer of the same color as the ground to the mid ranges that was placed just over the ground where there was grass and that covered standing mans legs from the knees down. At longer ranges all the characters just appeared to have been sunk the same amount in to the ground (or the visual ground was raised) so again standing man had his lower legs covered. As I recall if that man went prone his helmet or backpack might have been just visible. Something similar is desperately needed to make grass at distance a more realistic feature. The same can be said to certain degree about bushes and fir trees, especially spruce trees. Again in the real world when you are hiding close behind a bush or maybe under the low branches of a spruce tree, you are basically invisible to anyone on the other side that is 30 meters or more away, but you can see through to the other side, main reason being that you are using two eyes and rarely those leaves and sticks close to you block both your eyes at the same time. The game does render the hiding part of that a little better, but what it is still lacking is that it is actually a lot easier to see through both bushes and tree branches when you are close to them. Due to the detail limits to the tree/bush models they block out too much visibility. Without making the tree models much more detailed, one solution would be to make the branches somewhat see-through at very close distances. That was long winded. Here are just the solutions again. - Instead of having long distance targets in a grass field too exposed because grass is not rendered at all, add a visual layer to ground model that would be placed appropriate amount above the ground covering the lower parts of long distance targets. - Make it easier and closer to real life to see through close bushes and tree branches by making them see-through(ish) from very close ranges. I would rather see hiding in grass being too easy than impossible. And now just to pre-emptively answer to the people who scream that rendering that grass ruins their fps. Well are the people who have computers that can handle it supposed be at an disadvantage? And why would developers spend time making the grass model if everyone has to turn it off to be able to fight and survive?

Just a reminder to all. I started this thread because the developers asked for feedback in their dev report. Specifically, this one https://reforger.armaplatform.com/news/dev-report-13 in the part titled operations. So, I would assume that they already know about server side settings if they are actually possible, and the text actually does imply that. But ok, I guess my first post rambled on too much, so the point didn't come across, so let's try to summarize. 1. The use of enemy uniforms as camouflage and gaining unfair advantage. And committing a warcrime. Keep the option in the game, but in a way that the camouflage is not perfect. Options. - Wearing enemy uniform makes the uniform imperfect when viewed close up. Blood stains, holes, tears, burn marks or clearly wrong size. - Kills achieved while wearing enemy uniform don't add to the score (if that sort of scoring is used) and so on ... 2. The use of enemy radios or just finding enemy frequency on your own radio and listening in on the enemy. Not illegal and used in larger scale in warfare all the time, and besides radio waves are radio waves, anyone can use them. And encrypted radios (small personal ones) were NOT a common thing during cold war era. BUT, in tactical communication as a foot soldier one does not usually understand the enemy language anyway, so voice communication is somewhat secret anyhow. The solution. The game "encrypts" all local and radio voices from the enemy. When bluefor talks other bluefor and their allied units hear what is said both in local and over the radio, the opfor listener hears indistinguishable noice and vice versa to simulate the enemy speaking in a different language. If needed or wanted there could be a taunt option in which you would make your speech understandable to the enemy instead of your own side to simulate heckling or trying to deceive the enemy in their language, but you still would not be able to understand them when they talk in their "native tongue". Two final observations. If you want to use the suggested radio authentication chart, fine that can be done, but that is more of an advanced level of radio communications and requires radio discipline that is rare in games. And that only makes sure that the two parties talking are on the same side. It does not prevent anyone else from listening in. For a quick reference on unit identification, let's remember how it was done in real life in WWII Normandy by allied units when identifying unknown contacts. It was a simple voice query (challenge: Flash. answer: Thunder) or the use of clicker (challenge: click-clik answer: click-click-click). So set up that type of two-word challenge with a few semi-random word-pairs for each side. Or/and add the clicker device. And lastly. This is directed at the developers. It was over three weeks ago when you asked for feedback without telling where to send the said feedback. I haven't seen any other feedback on the matter, maybe it is on some social media site that I have no intention to join. But not acknowledging any and all feedback that you do receive, when you don't specify the preferred channel, gives the impression that you don't actually want or care about the feedback.

Well, since you developers asked for opinions regarding wearing enemy uniforms or using enemy radios in the last dev report, (07.10.2022), here are my two cents worth. First an admission. I do not own reforger, yet, but I've played the game series ever since the Operation Flashpoint demo back in 2001, so I think I'm entitled. Let's talk about enemy uniforms first. First questions that popped into my mind were: How long should it take to change into an enemy uniform? Should all uniforms fit every player, are they really one size fits all? And the radios. Since most wars (or at least the one you depicting) are fought with people from different countries speaking different languages should they understand each other? If a member of your team dies do you leave the body where it is without taking his weapon and other gear with you or at least make sure enemy can't use it. Of course, if a whole team dies the enemy has the ability scavenge their equipment. And lastly, should all of the dead soldiers gear still be usable or could bullets or explosions break stuff? And concerning both categories, how differently would all that be handled between human players and ai units? So, a lot of questions, and I do not claim to have a lot of answers, and the technological challenges will be immense, but here are some ideas what I think should be possible and doable. - When inspecting a fallen soldier, it should take time even to make an inventory of what he had, since you really need to go through his uniform, vest pockets and backpack. I'd say 10 seconds minimum and searching enemies should take longer than friendlies. If you are striving for realism maybe even a minute for fully loaded man. And then add the time that it takes moving stuff to your own inventory. You could have a choice to check only what you need, like only check combat vest if you need ammo. Maybe add an option that when you do the checking, you will automatically take the stuff out of his pockets and put it around the body on the ground, so it is apparent that someone has checked that man already. (Even reloading your own weapon from your own inventory should take a different amount of time depending on your stance and the place from where you take the next magazine, but this really should have its own topic in the forum) - When wearing enemy uniform, considering the previous owner of the uniform is most likely dead there should be bullet holes or other damage or blood stains readily visible in the uniform indicating stolen uniform and thus allowing people (and AI) to notice the deception at certain distances. (Compare that to Arma 3 where if you steal an enemy vehicle the AI on both sides automatically knows who is driving.) - Equipment should break if hit by a bullet (or a knife or rock or when driven over by vehicle etc.). Or you could at least disable the radios from your fallen comrades so they can't be misused. - Enemies should not understand each other by default. It should be made in a way that when you hear an enemy talking (either locally or in a radio) you would not hear what is being said but just noise. I'm thinking along the lines of Peanuts cartoons where when adults are talking you hear a trombone sound. So, you know enemy is talking, you can locate the direction and guess distance, but not understand what is been said. (Search "Charlie Brown teacher talking" in youtube if you didn't understand) - Talking to a radio is still talking so it is heard locally too. And unless you are listening to the radio through an earpiece a receiving radio produces local sound too. I know that creates a lot of sound sources, but that is what happens in reality. And the operator's death does not turn off the radio, the radio has to be destroyed or turned off independently. (Do the radios have individual volume controls for their speakers?) - If the game has a global voice chat function that should not follow the same rules. So, no local sound and understandable for all. I could go on forever but let's try to keep this as simple as possible.

Ok. I guess I should have done more research before posting. Well I did check a few vehicles so consider this a non scientific and not complete test of conditions now on main branch. List shows ground vehicles with either reverse camera or rear view camera and type of image generated. Blufor Hunter rear view camera not mirrored IFV cheetah (aa) reverse camera not mirrored amv-7 marshall reverse camera mirrored ** crv-6e bobcat reverse camera not mirrored ifv-6c panther reverse camera not mirrored rhino mgs (and up) rear view camera not mirrored m4 scorcher rear view camera not mirrored m5 mlrs rear view camera not mirrored m2a1 and m2a4 slammers rear view camera not mirrored CSAT zsu-39 tigris reverse camera not mirrored btr-k kamysh reverse camera not mirrored mse-3 marid reverse camera not mirrored 2s9 sochor rear view camera mirrored ** t-100 varsuk rear view camera mirrored ** t-140 angara reverse camera not mirrored AAF awc nyx all models rear view camera not mirrored afv-4 gorgon reverse camera not mirrored fv-720 mora reverse camera not mirrored strider rear view camera not mirrored mbt-52 kuma rear view camera not mirrored civ hatchback 3 cameras Left rear view of cars left side camera not mirrored, Center rear view of roof camera not mirrored Right front bonnet camera suv rear view camera not mirrored all factions van reverse camera not mirrored Vehicles that have correctly working camera, in my opinion, are highlighted. And I probably need to make a clarification, that I consider a reverse camera and a rear view camera to be different things. Reverse camera is activated by selecting reverse gear and it only shows image when the reverse gear is selected. Rear view camera is active when car's power is on. That means rear view cameras are used also when car is moving forward and are used either instead of or in addition to mirrors to see for example cars in other lanes or you protecting your position against others in race situations. So if the camera shows different image than a mirrors is confusing to say the least. Easiest way to see this is to drive forward on a two lane road and look in to rear view camera and figure out on which side of the road you are driving on from that image. Since the screens for both of these types are always in front of you (less than 90 degrees of head turning to see image) the usual way in real life is to have the image mirrored. Otherwise you get the situation that your thinking of direction has to change depending on whether you are looking at a mirror or camera feed even in the same vehicle. Simple test for it. Set up a simple slalom course in a place that has plenty of room (runway is good) and test your time in reversing a car along it and compare the times (or even the ease and precision you can steer and whether you crash or not) between lets say a HEMTT that only has mirrors and a van that has mirrors and a not mirrored reverse camera. And since this thread is about reversing. How about those tracked vehicles. While reversing in any tracked vehicle press the control for vehicle left. Which way should the vehicle turn?

That's your problem with the issue? I had the feedback tracker ticket specified in my post. And in the changelog it is made in to link so that takes you directly there. But sure 4 removed comments, not deleted, ok I used the wrong term. And those comments were from 4 different users all posted within 3 hours from each other and less than 12 hours after the ticket was created. But yeah I admit. I do not know why those comments were removed. Now let's get back to the actual issue, shall we.

Since this made into the development branch 15-06-2022. You changed this Tweaked: Rear view camera on AMV-7 - FT-T164530 You are "fixing" the only rear view camera that worked correctly to be wrong (as far as I can remember). In real life cars, trucks and any kind of vehicles (and in racing simulators too) driver's rear view camera feeds are mirrored, aka what's on the left side of the screen is on the left side of the vehicle and vice versa. So the camera view works the same way as an actual mirror. Don't believe me? Go to your local car dealership and see for your self. The reason why they work like that? The camera is there to help driver reverse the car and the important aspect in that case is to see what's behind you and on which side. (Easier to avoid objects). And the idea of the mirrored image is that image works the same way whether the driver looks into an actual mirror or reverse camera feed. So instead of tweaking AMV:s camera feed you should be tweaking almost everything else's reverse cameras. BTW I suspect that I'm not the first person to make this comment, because there are a enough deleted comments on the feedback tracker thread to think that I'm not first to notice that. Let's see how long this message stays here.

I knew it. Not one developer obviously reads these forums anymore. Not one named development branch anyway. Why would they, there wouldn't be anything useful about their game anyway, like stuff that players note about their coming updates. So now they have broken both Titan compacts and PCML missiles in main branch also so neither have their alternate fire modes available to the players. Why have development branches or forums pages dedicated to that branch if you don't read the feedback.

Mickeymen, there is a difference in the fire modes both visually and in actual missile flight profiles. I know you know this just from looking at the omissions list, which shows you have studied this way more than I have, and I agree with most of them. I did just check it again in main branch. I tested it from a hill just north of Anthrakia, Altis, and fired the missiles south to dirt road about 1000 meters away. Target was an unarmed Ifrit with a short move order to get engine running and thus tracking working. (If you played Warlords Pyrgos Gulf you probably know the place). It's probably the distance to target that makes the difference, since in my experience the closer you get to maximum lock distance of 2000 meters, the difference between the flight profiles gets more profound. I know both fire modes start in slight upward angle (indicated even how the launcher is modeled visually) but the difference in flight profile is most notable in end of the missile's flight. If further proof is needed you can enable bullet tracking with script and really see the difference. But the main point again was that in development and release candidate branches player does not have the choice to pick top down fire mode at all and the AI does. Well at least you can go prone immediately after launching a missile.

In both development branch and release candidate branch (as of 19/02/2022) you can fire the Titan Compact AT missile in only direct mode. None of the commands that changes to top down mode will work. I mean that there are at least two different commands that should change the fire mode, and none of those work. However when AI fires, they prefer (ok always use) top down mode according to missiles flight profile. This is the case with all factions and it doesn't matter if you use your own factions launchers or pick up one from other factions units or crates. And to all comments about writing a feedback tracker ticket: I'm lazy and have forgotten my password to feedback tracker, so there you go. Feel free to steal my thunder. And I know this is not big issue, but I'd rather not have this problem in stable version when they update it, so please check for that before uploading the stable version. P.S. In profiling branch the top down fire mode is still working

Seems to be fixed now. Unless there is something new I didn't think to check. Now waiting on main branch hot fix. That's still fast work. And the tank thing is probably too minor to care about.

Confirmed, well with a small caveat. I checked it and the infantry problem is gone, but I didn't check everything, like diving etc. Edit. And I can also confirm what threadstarter [VW]Wrath noticed. With weapon deployed head does not turn but moves when using TrackIR. And forgive me, but I need to vent a little. You could have let us know what kind of size the profiling branch was (ballpark). Thankfully it was only a few hundred MB, instead of, well half a game but it would have been nice to know beforehand. And it seems that you can join most servers from profiling branch, at least the official servers had the green dots next to them in browser. And the second thing. Why is it still impossible to move your head side to side in american tanks, at least with trackIR. (Main battle tanks and artillery pieces). In every other vehicle it's possible, even in panther IFV which has the same hull design as the tanks and even in csat tanks (Angaras?) which you can't even to see out of. It would make a difference in situational awareness so why not bring that back. It's possible to tilt your head so why take away the one axis that would be most helpful.

Confirmed. As far as I can figure out, the problem is NOT with TrackIR, so I wouldn't mess with it just yet. The problem seems to be in Arma and how it figures head movement with trackir, since there is huge difference in movement when compared to on foot and in any vehicle. In vehicles movement is like in the previous 2.04 build but on foot your head moves 360 degrees to any direction (left, right, up and down). I suspect it has something to do with the announcement that head movement is "Fixed: TrackIR head rotation not synchronizing over multiplayer", but that's just a guess.