Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Medals

  • Medals

Posts posted by stormhawkv

  1. On 20.7.2016 at 1:32 PM, WolfenswanFA said:

    This isn#t directly APEX related but given that weapon mass is being tweaked:

    Is the Cyrus supposed to be so heavy? It has 360 mass compared to the 160-220 of most other DMRs.


    That makes it heavier than the SPMG .338 and almost as heavy as the Navid.

    The weight of many guns is extremely off since patch 1.54, especially when you compare them to their real world counterparts. I think it was done to support their new "stamina"-system, which got introduced with that update. As a result most players use the MX-SW or SPAR-16S when they have the choice because they are the most weight-efficient. You can lug around one of these + 900-1200 rounds instead of an SPMG and even more when compared to the Navid or GM6 Lynx.

    • Like 2

  2. "Mass" as calculated for the game is the weight of the object in question (in KG), multiplied by 22. At least, that is the long and the short of it. Did you revise a new formula for your suggestions, or is it just based on "this weapon is a 9mm pistol so as a baseline its 20, this is a .45 cal so its 30" i.e. "gamey logic"


    A "P07" (AKA Walther P99) weights approx. 630gram (or .63kg), as such "Mass" = 0.63x22 = 13.86I'm not sure what the actual ingame mass value for the P07 is

    - I just checked, it seems that BI used the same "gamey" logic as the P07 has a mass value of 20 lol, but so long as all weapons/items/gear etc. use the same formula, I don't really see an issue (apart from not having separate volume/weight values, but I doubt we'll ever see the two separated).


    I have already explained the reasons behind my suggestion. They are a combination of "A is heavier than B" and real world weight x10 for lb or x22 for kg. The problem is the non-existent proportion between the guns. However, the whole discussion is null and void after the latest changes as they are obviously not interested in improving the system. A 7,62mm rifle has now twice the mass of a 6,5mm rifle and an anti-material rifle is three times as heavy as an anti-tank missile launcher. If you don't believe me download the release candidate and compare the default classes with each other.

  3. I was thinking of alternatives to fulfill the design goals for the new stamina system by using better methods than those we have seen. Some time ago I noticed that rifles using larger cartridges than 6,5mm and belt-fed machineguns don't fit into backpacks even though their mass value would allow them to do so. This is just the type of exception that could be used to limit loadouts without making larger rifles so heavy that no sane person would choose them over one of the standard service rifles.


    For instance rifles that are heavier than 110 mass units (5 kg) could take up both weapon slots. The launcher slot then appears with a red overlay when you attempt to pick up a launcher and a tooltip is shown saying "Your current primary is too cumbersome to carry a launcher." or something alike. The same happens when you attempt to pick up a sniper rifle while carrying a launcher but with the primary slot turning red and a different tooltip of course. Combining ghillie suits with backpacks and/or helmets could be prevented the same way. However, the mass values of some rifles need to be adjusted for this to work because they are too inconsistent within the "classes". People wouldn't understand why they can use the TRG-21 EGLM but not the MX3GL, or the Rahim but not the Mk18 ABR. At this opportunity I would like to refer to this thread.


    But first and foremost there needs to be a connection between the stamina bar and sway (which is currently too much btw). If this critical requirement is not met, the system will be way less transparent than what we have now and you can just as well throw it down the drain together with the rest of the changes.

  4. Yeah, but it makes not sense, if my stamina is full, it should mean I am fully rested, otherwise they can remove that stupid stamina bar again.


    Exactly. They say the old system is too difficult to be understood by the majority of players but now they have a mechanic that is unrelated to the stamina bar which was supposed to get rid of the problem. This new stamina system doesn't achieve any of the design goals yet they intend to push it out.


    And why do they break the relation of mass values between guns? Who came up with the idea that the GM6 Lynx should take up half the max carry weight? I always thought the preset classes had reasonable loadouts and the new stamina system broke many of them. Did that not raise concerns in your project?

    • Like 1

  5. It almost sounds like BI is trying to balance gameplay by putting restrictions on "high value" weapons....


    I thought the same but this is something I don't want to see in Arma 3 and even if I would the "performance gap" between the 6,5mm and 7,62mm rifles isn't big enough for a difference of 120 mass units.

    • Like 1

  6. If I remember correctly, the ingame "mass" despite its name does not stand for weight alone. Instead it's more a function of weight and bulkyness. Therefor if a rifle has say 10 times the "mass" of a hand grenade weighing approximately 0.5 kg it does not mean the rifle has to have a weight of 5 kg.


    That said, I still agree that 1/3rd of your carrying capacity seems like way too much for a gun, even for something big like the MAR-10! In my eyes this is a sign of the new fatigue system being somewhat weak at achieving design goal #1 "Encourages players to consider their loadout". To compensate for this, powerful weapons have to be "nerfed" in some other ways. Don't like it. I'm okay with sniper rifles and machine guns being somewhat bulky, but this seems unreasonable to me. The new inferior stamina system starts to drag down other game systems :mellow:


    Yes, I'm aware of this and I don't have a problem with mass values not being 100% realistic.


    However, I do have a problem with mass value relations between different guns being completely blown out of proportion. The mass of standard service rifles has not been changed. Marksman rifles now weight more than twice as much as the MX and Katiba rifles. There is absolutely no point in using them any more. You could spend the saved mass on 360 (!) additional 6,5mm rounds. A sniper now carries more weight than an AT rifleman, his spotter has to carry the ammunition for his rifle and even then he's barely able to sprint 10 meters. It feels as if they are purposefully trying to break the game with these changes.

    • Like 3

  7. So the MAR-10 now takes up one third of your max carrying capacity. The 220 mass units of the Mk-1 EMR equal 10 kilos for a rifle that shouldn't weight more than 4,5 kilos. The closest real world counterpart of the MAR-10 weights around 6 kilos and you can't carry more than the mass equivalent of three MAR-10. You can look at this from two different points of view. Either Arma 3 soldiers can't carry more than 20 kilos or the new MAR-10 weights 14,5 kilos which is more than the real world M200 (M320 LRR in game). WTF?





    I can't believe these changes made it to release candidate. Do you even realise what they do to your preset classes? You had to take away the NATO Missile Specialist's Carrier Special Rig and Enhanced Combat Helmet so that he stays under 100% load and the CSAT Sniper from the Marksman DLC (full ghillie) is missing the ammo for his rifle because it would put him over 100% load.

    • Like 1

  8. I noticed you're changing the mass values of the heavier guns and their ammo types. While I appreciate the idea in general there is one thing I don't like at all: please stop giving items uneven mass values. So far nearly all items have had even mass values with the 11rnd .45 mag for the 4-five as the only exception. This just makes things more complicated. The 100rnd 6,5mm mag for the MX SW now has a mass value of 25 - make it 24 instead. It's much easier to memorize because that's two 20rnd 7,62mm mags or three 30rnd 5,56mm mags and so on.





    What have you done? 220 mass units for the Mk-1 EMR, 320 for the MAR-10 and 420 for the M320 LRR? Are you serious? I hope this is some kind of an accident or a bad joke. If not it will totally ruin the game. I don't think I have to explain this any further.

  9. How are you guys able to view the Marksmen DLC weapon statistics?  Are you looking at the config files somehow?  The files for them are encrypted as .ebo files, so I can't extract them.  Besides that, the config viewer in the editor shows missing/incorrect values.  For example, weapon mass isn't shown and the dispersion for all assault and sniper rifles are the same (0.00029).


    I wasn't able to extract them either. I determined the size of the trunk of a car and put the DLC guns into it one after the other. I have no raw data for dispersion values but I did some testing with the Mk-1 EMR and it's not outperforming other 7,62mm rifles any more. Its weight however remains unchanged - still 160 mass units.

  10. Why do you want to abandon a working system?


    I know it's not perfect, but you could improve it instead of heading full speed into the opposite direction, especially after you invested that much time and work into it. Having this new stamina system will not keep those who don't like the idea of movement restrictions from disabling it, but those who use the current fatigue system because they like it are then forced to use a mod that has to be made first? This makes absolutely no sense.


    You can please all people some of the time, or some people all of the time but you can't please all people at the same time. These changes won't do anyone any good. It won't make life of those who like to play KotH or Altis Life easier and it will severely hurt those who like to enjoy milsim-gameplay on non-modded servers. I already wrote that the current fatigue system is not perfect but it's producing a far superior milsim-experience compared to what we had before.


    Please consider this before releasing these changes to stable-branch.



    Are you doing this because you're looking for new features? Here are three much better suggestions:


    1. Bullet in the chamber > nice dose of realism + working bolt-action rifles *cough* M320 *cough* (many players want to see this)


    2. Collision boxes for rifles > to stop people from doing room-clearing with snipers and MMGs (gun is lowered/raised automatically upon colliding with a wall)


    3. Rifle hanging from the vest when switching to sidearm so it doesn't take as long as putting it on the back (and allow the player to move while doing so)

    • Like 1

  11. Updated values for my suggestion on more realistic weapon mass.



    P07 - 20

    4-five - 30

    Vermin - 50

    MXC - 70

    MX - 80

    MXM - 90

    MX SW - 100

    MX3GL - 110

    M320 LRR - 310



    Rook-40 - 20

    Zubr .45 - 30

    Sting - 50

    Katiba Carbine - 70

    Katiba - 80

    Rahim - 100

    Katiba GL - 110

    Zafir - 170

    GM6 Lynx - 250



    ACP-C2 - 20

    PDW2000 - 40

    Mk20C - 60

    Mk20 - 70

    Mk20 EGLM - 100

    Mk18 ABR - 110

    Mk200 - 120



    TRG-20 - 60

    TRG-21 - 70

    TRG-21 EGLM - 100



    Mk-1 EMR - 100

    MAR-10 - 140

    SPMG - 240

    ASP-1 Kir - 130

    Cyrus - 150

    Navid - 220

    Mk14 - 90

  12. First of all I don't buy the bs about it being against protocals.

    US special forces and most other countries DO use enemy uniforms in conflict and its been happening since ww1, ww2 and most other conflicts including Afghanistan, Iraq, and currently in the Ukraine by Russia. As far as people noticing faces, come on guys. In war you don't know everyone and like I said its proven fact they all do this, only uninformed and naive people don't know or believe this!

    Countries like Nazi Germany and Japan under Hirohito did and Russia may still do this and violated or violate the international laws of war. However, soldiers applying these tactics aren't protected by the laws they violate and therefore risk execution. US special forces in Afghanistan and Iraq can't use enemy uniforms because their enemy is an irregular armed force who do not use uniforms in the first place. If they did they were a regular army and easy to distinguish from the local civilian population.

    Strongest to weakest round chart









    Do you mean .338 instead of .308? 9,3mm is stronger than .338 but less precise. I made a list for vests and uniforms and put it on the steam forums but not everything is up to date. I'll wait for the next main branch update because it will most likely change a lot of mass values. You can find it here: http://steamcommunity.com/app/107410/discussions/19/617329150703398110/

  13. The effect of the 22 multiplier will depend on what real-world weapons you are using to compare Arma's weapons to, of course. I was trying to use real world examples that produced more consistent results across all weapons that came near the 29 mass units/1 kg ratio, based off of the Mk14/M14 ratio. Even going with your comparisons, I would be happier if BI implemented your suggested solution.

    Edit: To clarify, I tried using the weapons' real life inspirations as comparable weights first, but for the EMR in particular, I used the SIG716's weight as I felt it was more fitting.

    Yes, that's the main problem. More often than not you don't have a real world equivalent. From what I've seen I'd give the Cyrus 140 mass units and 150 mass units to the Kir.

    Also, with the higher accuracy, muzzle velocity and weight of the EMR, it seems to be more of a sniper rifle than a battle rifle. Some heavier semi-auto 7.62mm rifles seem to be classified as sniper rifles, if Wikipedia is to be believed: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_sniper_rifles

    I still think the high performance of the Mk-1 EMR is not intended. I don't see why it should outperform the other 7,62mm rifles by a mile. Looks like we have to wait for the next patch to learn about BIs position on this issue.