Opfor

[Shomer 10]

Since WW2 US and Russia are the enemys in all of the games. Right now they have a common enemy. Taliban and the other terrorist organizations are growing. I suggest it's time for ARMA to evolve.... forget about cold war its over. New era is here and we going to lose if US and russians will fight with each others..... in OA u made the taliban as an enemy....nice...but what about Russia is it still the enemy for US by the devs opinion? Or it's only me that bored from this cold war paranoia.

[katipo66 94]

Im bored with blufor/opfor, would be nice to have more variation in factions, the ability to change who's friendly from the editor and let us make our own stories... but this game is just about promoting US and British forces, everything else comes second.

[TechnoTerrorist303 10]

I'm a bit confused as to whether this is a thread about the game, a political question or even a suggestion.

[max power 21]

Since WW2 US and Russia are the enemys in all of the games. Right now they have a common enemy. Taliban and the other terrorist organizations are growing. I suggest it's time for ARMA to evolve.... forget about cold war its over. New era is here and we going to lose if US and russians will fight with each others..... in OA u made the taliban as an enemy....nice...but what about Russia is it still the enemy for US by the devs opinion? Or it's only me that bored from this cold war paranoia.

I'm not sure what you're talking about. In ArmA, the opfor was the Sahrani Liberation Army (and depending on the version, the RACS were up to no good aswell). In ArmA 2, the opfor was the Chedaki. In OA, the opfor is the Takistani Militia (with the Takistan Army). The main antagonist has never been Russia in any ArmA game. In CWC and Res, the opfor was not Russia but a break-away military faction.

[5133p39 14]

I am allways for any DLC content, but when it comes to units, aren't there already some ADDONS you could use?

I realize 99% of those addons aren't too complex, most of them contain only few units, or maybe even only retextured units, but maybe you can find something there.

But hey, as i wrote, i would welcome any DLC with more complex units and factions, so YES.

btw. regarding the factions, i thought it's easy for addon makers to create new factions, is it not?

Maybe not many addonmakers use this feature, but it is possible.

[Devil Dogs SF 13]

I'm not sure what you're talking about. In ArmA, the opfor was the Sahrani Liberation Army (and depending on the version, the RACS were up to no good aswell). In ArmA 2, the opfor was the Chedaki. In OA, the opfor is the Takistani Militia (with the Takistan Army). The main antagonist has never been Russia in any ArmA game. In CWC and Res, the opfor was not Russia but a break-away military faction.

This is why I wish Russia was under independent in Arma 2...In the campaign they didn't really choose sides.

Edited October 25, 2010 by Devil Dogs SF

[CarlGustaffa 4]

As they was the main opfor (of comparable strength) in the game (irrelevant of the campaign), it makes more sense to me to have them as opfor.

[Baron von Beer 0]

Best solution would be allow assigning each "faction" to a side on a per mission basis. One mission, have US & Russian set to BLUFOR, Takistan as OPFOR. In another mission, you can make those same Takistan units seamlessly allied with US forces, against the same Russian set of units, all without the need of addons.

Just to head the suggestion off at the pass... While you can currently assign OPFOR units to a BLUFOR leader (and then delete him if desired), this isn't really workable as the unit will be spotted as it's parent classes first, which will still be OPFOR and thus seen as friendly by the true OPFOR units until recognized as the specific type.

Edited October 25, 2010 by Baron von Beer

[Ulanthorn 10]

You know that Russia is not allied in any way in the real world with NATO members? Such an Alliance is as probable as a US-China alliance. This nations simply dont want to fall under US hegemony as NATO members pratically do.

On the other hand...Considering multiplayer games liek warfare...Do you really want to challenge a US force with your Lee Enfields and Donkeys.

Thats why there is still US vs. Russia... you can make such missions because both have rough equivalents in military hardware and still run some kind weapons race.

Remeber the weekly Tu-95s over north sea...cold war is not really over as long as NATO fighters have to intercept russian nuclear bombers in on patrol once in a while and Russian Su-24s make low provoking flyovers over US Carriers in the japan sea.

Edited October 25, 2010 by Ulanthorn

[Shomer 10]

Why chalange Us forces with donkeys....Syria...it's a nice country that support terrorist's in Lebanon and Gaza and they have hace firepower =) Why make addons about British and Mercs- they have army that have more combat expiriense then Russian and US army together-IDF.I live 13 years in Holy Land, I am a russian and have seen 3 wars in 1 I was in active duty. Put the Hamas and Suria with many others on opfor....(i know that UN is still don't think some of them is not a terrorists only becouse they dont whant to be nex-but after us the whole wold is next) and other countries on blufor......but after game like this be prepare for gas prices rising up. I'm not agains the arabs and muslims....just some of them got crazy couse some of they leaders are money hungry madmans .....and the best way to make money in world- is war. If the BIS got the balls to make an addon like this i'll myself provide them with pictures and information (they need to know =) ) to make this happen.....i just don't have a team to create the addon missions and addons by myself.

[Pyronick 21]

The Russian Federation and the European Union would make sense though. Both economies are very dependant on each other.

What holds both parties back is the fact that most EU nations are also NATO member.

The NATO is the arch enemy of the Russian Federation and vice versa, but that doesn't exclude cooperation in certain campaigns.

They share common threats like terrorism, environmental issues, economical threats.

Of course they will not integrate missions, both armed forces are likely to operate separately.

[Devil Dogs SF 13]

^ I don't know about that, I spoke to an Army Recruiter a while back and he said he worked with the Russians in Kosovo in peacekeeping missions and what not.

[CarlGustaffa 4]

Just yesterday I saw an image where US and Russians secured the same roadblock. No way I can find it now though.

[Ulanthorn 10]

^ I don't know about that, I spoke to an Army Recruiter a while back and he said he worked with the Russians in Kosovo in peacekeeping missions and what not.

Peacekeeping under UN mandate is another piece of cake. That's where you have pakistani and india forces doing a job next to each other.

But I can simply not think off a integrated cooperation beetween NATO and Russia...not in the next decade.

And regarding war in Palestina: BIS has a policy to not depict real conflicts, and that's a very good policy I think.

[[frl]myke 14]

Maybe regarding the side assignment ingame US as Blufor and Russia as Opfor we should stop to think in political ways.

As already has been said, US and Russia are the most common military forces that are comparable. So for Missions it is more than likely that those two armies are set against each other. But anyone is free to create missions where Russia is the noble part and US takes part of the evil. It's in the hand of mission creator.

[spooky lynx 73]

Best solution would be allow assigning each "faction" to a side on a per mission basis. One mission, have US & Russian set to BLUFOR, Takistan as OPFOR. In another mission, you can make those same Takistan units seamlessly allied with US forces, against the same Russian set of units, all without the need of addons.

Just to head the suggestion off at the pass... While you can currently assign OPFOR units to a BLUFOR leader (and then delete him if desired), this isn't really workable as the unit will be spotted as it's parent classes first, which will still be OPFOR and thus seen as friendly by the true OPFOR units until recognized as the specific type.

All this have been made in "Sudden Strike" mission editor some years ago. You may choose side ("player's", "friendly", "enemy", "neutral") for every unit no matter of the country of its origin. I wish the same would be in ArmA...

[Shomer 10]

And regarding war in Palestina: BIS has a policy to not depict real conflicts, and that's a very good policy I think.

BIS take the real conflict as a base....Takistan-Afganistan.. it's clear to everyone.Allmous every game is based on real events....How it war in Fallout? War...War never change's =) so BIS can take fake names and make a nice addon.... All VS Terrorism....they can imagine the terrorism has a good weapons....and they did =) no need to make the game on REAL conflict in middle east. Right now "infidels" like us is the enemy to the terrorist's the problem that Israel is closest to them =) we got all the pain and u got fake reports on the conflict. U know why? Ur goverment don't what suicide bombers so the LIE =) as the US LIED about conflict in OSETIA =).

[ProfTournesol 956]

BIS take the real conflict as a base....Takistan-Afganistan.. it's clear to everyone.Allmous every game is based on real events....How it war in Fallout? War...War never change's =) so BIS can take fake names and make a nice addon.... All VS Terrorism....they can imagine the terrorism has a good weapons....and they did =) no need to make the game on REAL conflict in middle east. Right now "infidels" like us is the enemy to the terrorist's the problem that Israel is closest to them =) we got all the pain and u got fake reports on the conflict. U know why? Ur goverment don't what suicide bombers so the LIE =) as the US LIED about conflict in OSETIA =).

Well, i don't understand everything that you wrote, but if you wanna talk about politics post into the OFFTOPIC section and not here.

[Banderas 0]

BIS has a policy to not depict real conflicts, and that's a very good policy I think.

Right, nobody can get mad because they get virtually kicked in the bottoms by NATO in the campaign :D.

Saw some suggestions about a North Korea mod. Maybe if not directly NK, but a fictional East-Asian themed army (with influences/equipment drawn from NK, China and Vietnam) complemented with a modern VC-like guerilla force might be an idea for a next OPFOR faction.

[wolfbite 8]

North Koneean with their dear leader Tim John Bill you mean?

[Banderas 0]

North Koneean with their dear leader Tim John Bill you mean?

Something like that :D Or more like Shadaloo ruled by Mr. Bison

[LeonAdi 10]

Arma needs more military powers like China, India, UK, France, Germany, Japan, Pakistan, Brazil, Turkey, and maybe Iran, Venezuela, Cuba and Nkoreea, what is a military simulation without powerfull countries who can make a serious war, not talibans and minor nation like chernarusia(georgia) and takistan( Irak/afganistan), wil be nice if they will make an expansion with ww3 like NATO vs SCO or bigger

[hellfire257 3]

A Coalition system would be good, where you could chose individual nations and factions to be on either a Red or Blue side. Im thinking something similar to LOMAC,DCS etc.

[amadieus 0]

Well it would be a very original idea to have North-Korea as the main enemy faction in Arma 3.

To battle the infamous Kim Jong Ill

[DaveP 66]

Gigantic robot Il gets my vote