Wish List – ArmA: Armed Assault Talk

What should be here?

Ok I sorted this list somewhat. If I moved your entry into some place by mistake please fix it. If you notice your entry was removed, then it could be because it wasn't explained properly and was really useless or already possibly to do with scripting (like flocks of birds). hoz 20:49, 5 December 2006 (CET)

Wish list is really getting bombed with useless and overly ambitious wishes like:

"Realistic head-movement while driving/flying. Head-translation and shaking effect affected by force. (like in Flightsim. X) This would give ArmA a extra feel."

--Sniperwolf572 14:56, 9 December 2006 (CET)

I agree with Sniperwolf, there are some pretty useless or already possible suggestions. Sadly some idiots (truth is thruth heh :/) are ruining this possibility to help BI to bring this game forward. Although this is my subjective judgement, may i ask if i can help to keep this as a opportunity for serious players?

--Serclaes 17:02, 9 December 2006 (CET)

Someone should go through the list and clean it up some. I saw a lot of wishes that are more appropriate for addon makers and mods than for BIS to implement: flashbangs and mortars just to name a few. I'd much rather see more useful changes to the engine than stuff that can be done by the community ourselves. --Big Dawg KS 02:58, 12 December 2006 (CET)

I suggest we trim down this list to stuff that can be handled by regular patches. Otherwise this page will just become an endless depository for every idea any player ever had about what his dream game should look like. --Kronzky 17:38, 13 December 2006 (CET)

I'm going to suggest a similar setup as the list template maybe with 2 alternating colors for each topic(without the priority), this would cut down a bit on the oneliner wishes like "More Animals!". There are lots of good suggestions that will go unnoticed and if the list is made easy to read then BI is more likely to read it, instead of this insane list of wishes. If someone wants to take on this initiative feel free but be courteous to those that contribute. hoz

I have gone through the wishlist. But as i'm not an athority here i only removed some wishes that are already possible with a little bit of scripting, will be made possible with the release of the tools or have been made twice. But as you see they arent lost. hoz, i would like to apply that color code if i would know how. If somebody has a problem with that: kick --Serclaes 12:44, 2 January 2007 (CET)

Serclaes, just because some things are possible with scripts or addons does not mean that they couldn't be implemented officially. The official addons released in OFP patches quickly found a foothold in countless maps, whereas single user-made addons have rarely done so. I'd much rather see a priority based list than having wishes wiped from the main article, especially if the category suggests such wishes. --Celery

I understand your point. The reason why so many mission designers are integrating official addons to their missions, is that everybody has it. You are right with setting priorities, the problem is that BI has something else to do than integrating a OICW or a commanche, and i'm sure you will agree that the time is better invested if they bring the engine forward, not? For example the UAV. In ofp it was a lot of scripting, and if you look at the Aladin from Bwmod's Fennek, you see that it isnt perfectly steerable. Only through a interface. So wouldn't it be better to have a official UAV which is steerable with a joystick from a random position? With IR sights? Or simply a Littlebird firing from 2 miniguns simultaneously... --Serclaes 17:06, 2 January 2007 (CET)

"I want to see how King Joseph´s face looked like."

--Omar_90 16:40, 11 Juni 2008 (CET)

What shouldn't be here

• One line suggestions without any details.
• Unsigned wishes. (be diligent)
• Really unrealistic wishes.

Removed Items

"Would it be possible to slide down ladders quickly, rather than climbing down very slowly, even under fire?" Already present, you can drop from the ladder --SniperAndy

Command "SetMarkerText" to add the ability of modifiying the text of a marker would be usefull for MP mission makers Marshall 13:09, 12 December 2006.....This command already exists Planck 20:19, 12 December 2006 (CET)

If you see stuff like that, just remove it. You can send the author a note if you want, but anybody who sees inappropriate stuff should remove it right away. No discussion necessary... --Kronzky 17:38, 13 December 2006 (CET)

• Command "SetMarkerText" to add the ability of modifiying the text of a marker would be usefull for MP mission makers Marshall 13:09, 12 December 2006
  • removed hoz

• Beeing able to see what kind og game allready are in progress - right now you has to pick a guess
• Include Type-Parameter in the mission.sqm Intel Section which includes a 4-character string describing the mission type (e.g. Coop, CTI, CTF, A&D,..) which can be set in the Mission Editor's Intel section and is displayed in the MP Mission Browser below the missions name. --TeRp 16:53, 5 December 2006 (CET)
  • Already available, its up to the mission designer to do this via the header class, see Description.ext hoz

• Implement "Call CAS"(Close Air Support) by a command line like VBS1Boyscout
• Time deceleration would be nice for single player games. Now there is 1x, 2x and 4x, how about .5x - 1x? This would help when controlling large amounts of AI. --Ballistic 06:07, 7 December 2006 (CET)
• When crouching with walk mode on, the player moves forward in a crouch. Give the option to -walk- forward -upright-, like it was in Flashpoint. Sbsheep
• Further tweak the way helicopter control via mouse switches between controlling yaw and roll - maybe it should change more gradually and maybe mixed controls could be optional or even adjustableRune 17:32, 28 December 2006 (CET)
• Activating the "take ammo symbol" in 3rd view when near at ammobox is bad. It should be activated by distance, maybe 1,5 mtrs or so, and shown in action menue, no matter if i use first or 3rd view, and no matter if i crouch or walk or...what else.Crisis28.12.06
• Be able to hang on(collide) howitzers or trailers behind trucksBoyscout
• New weapons which are under development in real life, for example OICW --Alpha-kilo 15:43, 5 December 2006 (CET)

OICW is dead since 2005 Funnyguy1 14:27, 9 December 2006 (CET)

I guess the wishlist is not the right place for a dicussion, but if you keep repeating this comment, I'd like to reply: I am aware of it, but please don't forget that ArmA is a game and such a weapon might be fun for some players! Those who don't like it just shouldn't use it. The extreme marksmanship of any AI with any type of weapon in any visual condition and the strange flight model seem to justify a little "advantage" of the human player. --Alpha-kilo 20:12, 9 December 2006 (CET)

This is something for a mod/addon, not for BIS to do. --Hellfish6

• New helicopter: Comanche, provided that the stealth features and a simplified flight model - which would simulate advanced controls - can be implemented.--Alpha-kilo 15:43, 5 December 2006 (CET)

RAH-66 Comanche is dead since 2004 Funnyguy1 14:27, 9 December 2006 (CET)

Please see the comment on OICW. --Alpha-kilo 20:12, 9 December 2006 (CET)

I do not think this and your OICW request belong here, these are requests for addons, not updates to the game. If BIS made them as official addons, that's another thing, but is still nothing that mods/addon makers cannot provide. --Big Dawg KS 01:50, 13 December 2006 (CET)

• Use weapons knives or baïllonnettes or even clubBoyscout
• m2a3 Bradley Infantry Fighting Vehicle!! Puffypuff 00:25, 20 December 2006 (CET)
• Possibility to lower / rise the helmet visor for blufor pilot,would be nice. Lujon
• Add bicycle as a new vehicle, and lots of handguns like revolver, Tokarev, Skorpion, Mac-10 and so on. -Celery
• Realistic helicopter flight-physics like in the Battlefield 1942 modification Desert Combat. The helicopter-physics in DC are faked with 2 thrust-vectors for main and tail rotor. Video (DivX ~15MB) PhunkMaZ
• Ability for .50 caliber machine gun to penetrate humvee armor/glassPuffypuff 23:37, 11 December 2006 (CET)
• More interaction and talking with the non-playing-charecters. This would include more interaction with the frindlies during missions, when in relaxed mode. This factor creates more immersion. buddhiraja73
• More animals, especially dangerous ones that can harm us. [[User:buddhiraja73|buddhiraja73]
• Ability to select between anti personnel rocket ammo, the OG-7V warhead, and anti tank rocket ammo which is the PG-7VR warhead (This ammo is only for the RPG-7). I'm not too sure about the different ammo that the AT4 uses (if it has more than one type of ammo) but this would be nice for the AT4 as well. Puffypuff 23:31, 12 December 2006 (CET)
• Automatic lights in towns. ON at 19:00 and if the electric lines are cut, lights switch OFF automatically. Boyscout
• Ability to shoot out Streetlamps. Also Streetlamps should be a bit brighter, they are too dark compared to their size. W0lle 17:54, 14 December 2006 (CET)

You can shoot out streetlamps. --Big Dawg KS

• PLEASE - this is very important. 1 or 2 a$$holes can ruin the fun for *many*. I just witnessed yesterday 2 guys walking at least 3 fully crowded servers to spawn-kill everyone....... this should be ruled out!

Which Wish List to use?

Right now we have three locations where wishes are submitted: this page, the BTS Armed Assault project, and the BTS Armed Assault Features project. We really need to trim that down a bit...

My first instinct was to keep wishes in the regular BTS Armed Assault project, and marking them as "feature", but considering the amount of wishes that have accumulated by now, perhaps it would be a better idea to keep them separate after all, to prevent them from totally cluttering the bug list.

Does the script that was used for importing the bugs also work on the wish list? In that case I would suggest to move everything over, and to close this page down.

--Kronzky 20:22, 27 February 2007 (CET)

We should keep it separated in the BTS, but it's easy to merge them.

the script used a regex for <Template:Bug_priority> to separate the issues and for my taste, there are way to much things in the Wish list.

Personally, I would like to have some voting feature, so you could see how much a certain feature is appreciated. This could be done by the notes in the BTS. --Boecko 21:41, 27 February 2007 (CET)

2 ways I suggest:

- keeping feature requests in the Armed Assault project where we trace the bugs - my preferred solution. The sex appeal of this solution is that a TT opened by someone describing a misbehavior and it turns out this functionality was never part of ArmA, this TT can be easily turned into a feature request by changing the severity to the lowest possible value = "feature". BI might go over those TTs tagged with severity "feature" and add in the field "Fixed in Version" the states "never(hard, but would tell the creator that he can not hope for Game2)" or "future release (means one of the next ArmA releases or Game2 but nevertheless considered as candidate)" or "Game2(clear)" or if we are lucky one of the next ArmA releases. (boecko, any problem to create those versions?).

or

- we keep those feature requests in a seperate Project. Not much difference, you can move TTs anyway between projects, it might be a way less confusing for some guys to have bug-TTs and feature requests rigid seperated. --INNOCENT&CLUELESS 22:24, 27 February 2007 (CET)

Because of the overwhelming amount I think it would be more practical to keep the wish list separate from the bug list. Since, as you say, it is possible to move bugs from one project to another if it's determined that something entered is not quite in the right list, those situations shouldn't really be a problem.

And while I agree that a lot of the wishes are probably way over the top and should probably be weeded out, I would think that that's a decision only the developers can make. So the concept of using the notes as a voting method seems to be the best solution. That way we can keep all the wishes, without having to make any filtering decisions, and they are still there for the developer to peruse, and on the other hand we can give them some sort of "democratic" priority by leaving notes with the most urgent ones. --Kronzky 05:13, 28 February 2007 (CET)

we should continue the discussion here ;) --Boecko 12:17, 28 February 2007 (CET)