Please....Stop the intervention

[Pundaria 10]

In real world as well as arma 2, whenever USA has her troops standed out, it is just like divine intervention.

In next ARMA, can we have two ordinary countries fighting but without superpowers?

I just want a modern fight but not massacar

:p

[demonized 20]

In real world as well as arma 2, whenever USA has her troops standed out, it is just like divine intervention.

In next ARMA, can we have two ordinary countries fighting but without superpowers?

I just want a modern fight but not massacar

:p

Is this an intervention?

And what kind of fight is not a masacre? its about the one side trying to inflict as much pain and death on the other side so the fight stops... you know.

Unless you live in africa then its not a masacre, just tradition :j:

but yeah, ah-64 VS guerilla group in the dark is far from a fair fight, but then again, who wants a fair fight? thats just crasy!!:)

[mr_centipede 31]

I kinda like the idea... just another two fictional country without USA or RUSSIA or any real life country for that matter... kinda like CDF against Takistani or like RACS and SLA...

[Xerxes-17 10]

Yeah but the big issue is of course all of the kit that is available is still along the lines of NATO vs Warsaw Pact. So you'd either end up with two sides of 70's equipment from each of those sources or both with random mixes of the two. With that in mind, that limits the potential locations for such a conflict as being somewhere in Africa, the mid east, or Asia. None of which I would imagine having much of an appeal to a mostly white-european (USA, EU, Russia, et al) fan base as the antagonists in the conflict are non-relateable.

[hellfire257 3]

You may say this however there is nothing like Gucci kit!

[Daniel 0]

I'd love to see a game based around two fictional conventional opposing forces. True, you're still using NATO and Warsaw pact kit, but at least the politics and motives can be left to the designers. It beats yet another game played as the US, it avoids the stereotypical Russians-as-the-evil-commies, and it beats killing goat herders through FLIR equipped weapons platforms. And, I think it would probably better suit the Arma2 engine.

The current real world forces in the armaverse could make cameo appearances at the behest of the fictional nations, but the brunt of the fighting would be done by these fictional forces. It'd make a good dynamic campaign too: pick your side, affect the outcome of the war, gain rank as higher ranks get killed, etc.

Edited January 9, 2011 by Daniel

[Laqueesha 474]

Equatorial Guinea vs. Liechtenstein

[MissionCreep 12]

Yeah, it would be lots of fun fighting between 2 sides kitted out with Lee Enfields and sandals, communicating through birdcalls:j:. You are free to create such a scenario in Mission Editor. But why do you think our resident Arma2 game makers create missions/campaigns with exotic weapons and models and expansions of the latest battlefield technology?

Edit: The WWII expansions (Invasion 1944) are great if you want an 'ol-time fighting experience.

Edited January 9, 2011 by MissionCreep

[Daniel 0]

Yeah, it would be lots of fun fighting between 2 sides kitted out with Lee Enfields and sandals, communicating through birdcalls:j:. You are free to create such a scenario in Mission Editor. But why do you think our resident Arma2 game makers create missions/campaigns with exotic weapons and models and expansions of the latest battlefield technology?

Edit: The WWII expansions (Invasion 1944) are great if you want an 'ol-time fighting experience.

And what exactly do you want more than a good old fighting experience?

Plus plenty of other nations out there buy F-16s and T-72s, i'm still talking conventional modern warfare. Just not America or Russia with their same-old proxy-war agendas. Two nations, kitted out to the teeth, fighting for their own survival. That'd be interesting.

[Star Four One 10]

And what exactly do you want more than a good old fighting experience?

Plus plenty of other nations out there buy F-16s and T-72s, i'm still talking conventional modern warfare. Just not America or Russia with their same-old proxy-war agendas. Two nations, kitted out to the teeth, fighting for their own survival. That'd be interesting.

Although I think this idea would be alot of fun, and definently have a impact on the type of scenarios you can create - were still talking about replacing the entire vanilla ArmA units with 3rd to 4th Generation weapons and unit models. As much fun as I could have with this, I firmly believe in leaving this to DLC or mods.

To much rides on Russia and the US to have them removed. Many groups and players enjoy the HUMMWV convoy missions, and the pure "modern combat experience".

I know the current ArmA2/OA are much more appealling at the store then going into buy 2 fictional countries waging war with T series tanks, and Fishbeds.

S41

[[asa]oden 0]

Considering how few missions there are featuring Chedakis and CDF I'd say this would not be a good idea, from a sales dpmt. standpoint.

The extreme few that played my now disbanded Warfare-edit always ran for the "Cold Warfare" and I think I was the only one ever to play the "Civil Warfare" version (which I honestly preferred).

[Gunter Severloh 4067]

In next ARMA, can we have two ordinary countries fighting but without superpowers?

You can do this already with the other factions in the game, just dont play the campaigns and build your own missions.

Personally I dont really care about that, id prefer having the animations, AI, and anything else engine related, gameplay related more optimized, better gameplay.

Modders have always provided the rest OFP is a good example of this.

[Pundaria 10]

You can do this already with the other factions in the game, just dont play the campaigns and build your own missions.

Personally I dont really care about that, id prefer having the animations, AI, and anything else engine related, gameplay related more optimized, better gameplay.

Modders have always provided the rest OFP is a good example of this.

But the map is chenerus, It is werid to have other troops on the soil.

And I guess it will be good if there are two maps of the two countries which allow two fronts to be modded:p.

[Sky999 10]

Actually what I loved so much about the Operation Arrowhead campaign was the fact it felt like you, along with the rest of the US Army, where an unstoppable technological force. It felt great having such an edge over the enemy, it really reminded me of Desert Storm. The night vision combined with the FLIR made it a slaughter and it really got you into the mindset of a soldier invading a country with a force that can just bulldoze it's way through what would otherwise be a long monthly/yearly campaign, in about a week due to superior technology and firepower.

[ffur2007slx2_5 11]

Oh my god! You even think that the OA campaign is very easy like a massca?

Why not adjust the enemies' skill bar to full and change friendly unit's into the lowest in Difficulity? You'll soon find that your team are being tricked by Takistan Army, not them.

[Star Four One 10]

Oh my god! You even think that the OA campaign is very easy like a massca?

Why not adjust the enemies' skill bar to full and change friendly unit's into the lowest in Difficulity? You'll soon find that your team are being tricked by Takistan Army, not them.

Looking for realism does not mean adjusting "AI skill" difficulty. Realism comes with authenticity and mission focused situations.

S41

[sick1 13]

If BI ever decides to make another game, its always going to feature the U.S. That's what sales the game. In my opinion, arma2 is more popular in other counties than the U.S., yet it always features the U.S. military. I'm sure these are just speculations. Fictional countries in conflict would be hard to market to U.S. buyers. I think?

[Muahaha 10]

All movies and games has always been involving the americans one way or another.... don't see much without them... even sci-fi games will somehow has them.

If you think it's overpowering by having the highly advanced West and East Superpowers, why not limit down the type of weaponry or military hardware each sides uses? Like no FLIR or NV etc...

How bout good old fistfight to the death? jk..:)

[metalcraze 290]

Americans are a must because they have the most interesting warfare tech.

[Baff1 0]

And me, I prefer the the Cold War tech.

I think it's fine to go down the historical path; and that it makes for a more enjoyable and balanced game. Plays to the strengths of the game engine so to speak.

What's more enjoyable?

Remotely controlling a drone helicopter to line up targets on a load of enemies that cannot see me and destroying them from my other helicopter 8 miles away one after another with un-erring accuracy.....

Or thundering through an enemy base with my mates in a line of tanks, prioritising and picking off the most dangerous targets first, bailing out before death, using cover and having to re-evaluate each of those decisions every second...

Fighting on after my war machine has been rendered inoperable. Going to loot weapons off dead enemies and fight tooth an claw for my victory, turning the tide, not by the superior strength of my technology, but by the strength of my will. By determination and grit.

Advanced tech? Save it for the modders please.

You'll find me on the battlefield with an AK and an RPG.

Edited January 11, 2011 by Baff1

[jakerod 254]

[...]You'll find me on the battlefield with an AK and an RPG.

...most likely dead.

[Daniel 0]

Better dead than bored! :p With Baff1 on this one 100%. Can't believe how gadget orientated people are becoming when it comes to Arma 2.

You can take a Vietmam M16A1 and the latest SOPMOD M4 with attachment-for-shooting-down-police-helicopters and lasers coming out of its arse; they both fire a 5.56 at the end of the day.

Edited January 11, 2011 by Daniel

[Cyteless 10]

Needs moar fictional countries. I'd love to have a Chernarussian game/expansion in either Takistan, Karzeghistan or Ardistan. Since we know nothing about the geography in these countries, they could be like Chernarus or Takistan.

[Jelliz 10]

And me, I prefer the the Cold War tech.

I think it's fine to go down the historical path; and that it makes for a more enjoyable and balanced game. Plays to the strengths of the game engine so to speak.

What's more enjoyable?

Remotely controlling a drone helicopter to line up targets on a load of enemies that cannot see me and destroying them from my other helicopter 8 miles away one after another with un-erring accuracy.....

Or thundering through an enemy base with my mates in a line of tanks, prioritising and picking off the most dangerous targets first, bailing out before death, using cover and having to re-evaluate each of those decisions every second...

Fighting on after my war machine has been rendered inoperable. Going to loot weapons off dead enemies and fight tooth an claw for my victory, turning the tide, not by the superior strength of my technology, but by the strength of my will. By determination and grit.

Advanced tech? Save it for the modders please.

You'll find me on the battlefield with an AK and an RPG.

Nice post!

If not going back in time, we need a new OPFOR with comparable tech, so it could be a fight to the death conventional war.

[johncage 30]

the 90s chechnya conflict is a good balance between new and old fashioned technology, and features asymmetric warfare against insurgents, including use of ieds. at the same time the chechnyans at various times also fielded vehicles comparable to their russian counterparts. the absence of americans might be a little off putting for some, but i think they can relate to themes like collateral damage and terrorism.