Search the Community

Looking through the roadmap, there seems to be no mention of progression. I hope we will get some sort of way to track how we fare against others. The in-game progression at the moment is as basic as can be and is purely to allow for base building etc but with event milestones and achievements, the user experience and engagement would seriously pick up. I really hope they find a way or even consider implementing that works with longer servers, allows players to feel they are progressing, but doesn't detract away from team play. What's your thoughts on progression?

We always welcome development of Arma3. All this is very good. I ask not to take offense at my sarcasm in this review. I am disturbed by development of the solution of problems in Arma3 of Feedback. The last development of DLC Arma3Apex has caused a lot of controversy and discussions. The main problem of DLC Arma3Apex - lack of the solution of bug under tickets. As an example: Add the ability to adjust length of bipod legs. https://feedback.bistudio.com/T82167 Vehicles can not be destroyed on the water. https://feedback.bistudio.com/T119452 These are not all problems of this DLC, there is a lot of them. The result - the island widely isn't used. Many players have tried Tanoa and have returned on Altis. The statistics has stubborn character. Servers statistics: https://arma3.swec.se/server/list Write in Mission filter: Altis or Tanoa Compare the number of players on servers to these islands. Roadmap 2016-17 DLC: 1. JETS DLC. Good prospect on updating. But what us expects? When tickets are solved. Any filter on JETS DLC: https://feedback.bistudio.com/search/query/Y8VCgNxP6v35/#R 2.TAC-OPS DLC. Good prospect on updating. But what us expects? There are many not solved tickets which are confirmed (are considered) and don't decide. What I will see from new DLC in the light of unresolved problems. When tickets concerning lack of good control over UAVs are solved? https://feedback.bistudio.com/T82570 https://feedback.bistudio.com/T118532 https://feedback.bistudio.com/T120265 https://feedback.bistudio.com/T120280 https://feedback.bistudio.com/T119472 https://feedback.bistudio.com/T120263 Bad zones of the review in a sight from bipod. https://forums.bistudio.com/topic/192354-bipod-make-this-work/ https://youtu.be/vWnn1f2IPgg Lack of control over behavior or damage. https://feedback.bistudio.com/T83141 https://feedback.bistudio.com/T82241 https://feedback.bistudio.com/T120680 https://feedback.bistudio.com/T120511 Prblema stels https://feedback.bistudio.com/T83842 Any filter to a question of TAC-OPS DLC: -weapon: https://feedback.bistudio.com/search/query/iBNnmzkJMdoa/#R 3. TANKS DLC.Good prospect on updating. But what us expects? There are many not solved tickets which are confirmed (are considered) and don't decide. What I will see from new DLC in the light of unresolved problems. Lack of protection of the tank behind objects or from objects. https://feedback.bistudio.com/T83551 https://youtu.be/bSdBgvVs2FE https://feedback.bistudio.com/T120795 The flying tanks, and lack of control over it. https://feedback.bistudio.com/T82457 https://feedback.bistudio.com/T83573 https://feedback.bistudio.com/T117728 Common problems of Tanks https://feedback.bistudio.com/T83606 Lack of stabilization on optics of the commander and shooter, and other absent or underestimated characteristics of the modern tank. https://forums.bistudio.com/topic/189468-feature-request-correction-of-a-sight-in-heavy-battle-tank/ Any problem of TANKS DLC in the filter: -TANKS: https://feedback.bistudio.com/search/query/7kNh2FHVIRFH/ To unite people. Everything, different category of a problem, create new problems, separates people on players from DLC and players without DLC. https://feedback.bistudio.com/T120845 It wasn't after the first DLC. I can seem impudent now, you will tell that this guy has no patience. If to look at this branch of a forum, questions are solved much. https://forums.bistudio.com/topic/140837-development-branch-changelog/page-46 But unfortunately numbers of tickets increase, there is a practice of frequent repetitions of problems. Practice of infinite accumulation of problems, disturbs. All listed above tickets, small part of what waits for your attention and correction. In 1 hour of a game, I face each problem from this review, and not once, and is constant. Ask me - You will buy the following DLC? Yes I will buy the following DLC, this my respect for work of the BIS team. Not everything seems will be able to accept me position. I am strongly disturbed by the course of the solution of problems. We receive problems more often than we receive solutions of problems. What plans to change the relation in Roadmap 2016-17 Feedback to receive the expected realization of Arma 3 Roadmap 2016-17 DLC? I hope for understanding of this balance. I hope at you there will be enough strength and patience to solve this problem. The task is not simple.

Hello. So after yesterday update our server refused to let anybody join. It is not that it kicked everyone, anybody that try to join get to stay on that stripped black/gray screen and never get into lobby to select map etc. What is more strange is you always get that small server window named "Arma 3 server window version 1.18 port xxxx", after update we only get "Arma 3" name. What we discovered is that when we commented "verifySignatures = 2;" in server.cfgthen server started to behave normally. Window name is back to normal with version and port, everyone can join w/o problems. Then we uncommented verifySignatures = 2; and changed it to 0 - server started working. With 1 it doesn't work, with 2 it doesn't work. Yeah you say we can leave it as is but without verifySignatures = 2 almost everyone can join even with addons we don't use. We have strict policy of required addons so we cannot leave it on 0. Did someone found a way to fix that? Any help will be appreciated. Thanks in advance. EDIT: We tried running server from different location and what we discovered is: C:\TCAFiles\Users\admin\1\arma3server.exe -port=2303 -config=server.cfg -world=empty Above is line that is not working when we use verifySignatures = 2; It is used by TCAdmin to manage servers. With ArmA 2 above works w/o problems. "C:\Program Files (x86)\Steam\SteamApps\common\Arma 3 Server\arma3server.exe" -port=2303 -config=server.cfg -world=empty This is line we tried running from shortcut and looks like it works even with verifySignatures = 2; One difference is those " " marks on second shortcut. First line is generated by TCAdmin and it doesn't have that " " marks.

FULL BLOG POST Hello, all! Joris and myself, with the support of our team, have put together an Arma 3 'development roadmap' blog, which sketches out our medium and longer-term objectives. Our goal is to introduce a number of new developments, presenting a fairly high-level overview. Over the next few weeks and months, we aim to expand upon several aspects in further detail! Until then, we'd like to thank your for all your feedback and support which has truly helped to make Arma 3 splendid. Best, RiE