Ragdolls = In .... Realistic wounds ???

[dmarkwick 261]

Variety in wounding is a good thing and even extreme wounding only adds to the visceral horror of war if done in moderation.

I still get a kick out of SLX's exploding bodies as they just don't happen that often and still catch me by surprise :)

I've used SLX since ever it was released, but it was only very recently that I shot a guy in the head and the top of it came off. It was a real shocker and caused me to pause :)

And I never really get used to seeing a squad member disappear into small parts when hit by something like a Shilka, always makes me go WTF :)

Just as it should.

[mr burns 132]

I've used SLX since ever it was released, but it was only very recently that I shot a guy in the head and the top of it came off. It was a real shocker and caused me to pause :)

And I never really get used to seeing a squad member disappear into small parts when hit by something like a Shilka, always makes me go WTF :)

Just as it should.

Some gore doesn´t hurt. I just played Men of War Red Tide (thx forum :D) and noticed that it doesn´t have the little men being shred to pieces feature i know from Soldiers Heroes of World War 2. Not only does it look off when you hit something with 88 Flak and it goes flying into the air virtually unharmed, it also cuts into gameplay. In S:HoWW2 you could only loot weapons and ammo from 'unexploded' corpses - with looting being a vital aspect in the game the absence of gore in MoW:RT does diminish the tactical challenge.

In ArmA3, you wouldn´t try to blame your bloodied unifrom on Mama Miracoli once confronted by enemy guards questioning your disguise?

[EDcase 87]

Gore should linked to blood effects level.

I don't really care about dismemberment but having bodies flying all over the place when hit by cannon, IED, satchel, shilka, ZSU etc is just plain ridiculous. Ragdoll will not help either.

At least have the body vanish in a red mist (if blood is on) or a brown/grey mist (if blood is off). Obviously no kit should remain either.

Edited November 8, 2011 by EDcase

[-Coulum- 35]

I've used SLX since ever it was released, but it was only very recently that I shot a guy in the head and the top of it came off. It was a real shocker and caused me to pause

When I used it I found it actually happened quite often but You couldn't see it if the target was masked or helmeted because the headgear stayed on.

At least have the body vanish in a red mist (if blood is on) or a brown/grey mist (if blood is off). Obviously no kit should remain either.

Yes kit should all be destroyed when a person takes to much damage.

[pvt_ryan 10]

Agreed. Like Carl Gustav already pointed out Dismemberment is pretty rare in reality and if not implemented properly in game it would actually kill immersion. I would rather have a more complex wounding system and have bullet wounds appear on bodies were they actually got shot. This was even in ghost recon 1.

-snip-

This may be true but from what I understand, most “amputations†are not complete on the battlefield. Often the limb is left hanging and cannot be sewn back on or is so mashed that It must be amputated. But this happens after the battle. During battle It is rare to actually severe an entire limb cleanly. And if there is a force large enough to blow off an entire limb Ie. a large ied, it would end up mashing the limb and body up so bad it is unrecognizable.

Basically dismemberment as people visualize it in games, is not realistic. If you want more realism concerning wounds in arma you should be asking for more detailed gore on dead bodies. Ie. If a man is killed by and ied his body is badly mutilated and burned instead of having bullet holes all over him. Realism does not mean a man gets hit by an ied and his limbs go flying all over the place.

-snip-

Yes, moderation is key. If evey time you shoot someone their head pops off it will be nothing special. If you shoot someone 100 times and once their head pops off it will be like "holy shit!!!!! I just blew that guys head off".

making excessive gore rare will be better than making it common place.

I agree.

[dragon01 902]

Indeed. Moderation is very important, as is correct representation of weapon effects on a body. In case of normal rifle and pistol calibers, dismemberment would be extremally rare. With .50 BMG and up, it'd be more common (for instance, shooting somebody in the head with M107 would make it turn into pink mist, or spraying fire from M2 would cause a few limbs to be ripped off). It would be common with direct hits with AP rounds for 20-50mm cannons, which would not warrant complete disintegration. Explosions in general would have potential to sometimes tear off a limb, but one would have to be just far enough to avoid being disintegrated and just close enough not to simply be peppered by shrapnel. Also, the mission editor should be able to place dead bodies with any number of limbs blown off, as well as blood splatter.

[froggyluv 2136]

I've used SLX since ever it was released, but it was only very recently that I shot a guy in the head and the top of it came off. It was a real shocker and caused me to pause :)

.

Ha! i've never seen that happen... only the charred body stuff. Thats what I mean, add maybe 10 things like that - that happen once in a 100 games and it means alot more. A fluid ragdoll sometimes reacting to shot placement would also serve just as well if not better -but I'd rather have a little of all of it. Solus also showed me the real Iraqi footage of his ' soldier getting stunned and knocked to his ass after shot' -it's pretty spot on and also doesn't happen too often.

Edited November 8, 2011 by froggyluv

[-Coulum- 35]

Ha! i've never seen that happen... only the charred body stuff. Thats what I mean, add maybe 10 things like that - that happen once in a 100 games and it means alot more.

yes, I think that your right that rarity is better, and adds to immersion immensely - but this is probably a reason why it is not going to be implemented. Why bother spend hours of coding this in when its only going to be seen every once in a while. might as well use that time for other features that are better realized.

[froggyluv 2136]

I would say it pays itself back in long term dividends and appreciation. Well placed violence ie..A Pans Labyrinth..as opposed to a Saw 9 - go a long way toward creating a different type of immersion. Maybe a hard sell in todays ADD climate, but I think there are still enough folks who really appreciate the artistic vision of the "unusual" to make it worthwhile.

Many here who have played SLX mod from the early OFP days on, I believe got hooked for this very reason. It's kind of like a video game magic when you see something for the first time after many sessions. For me personally it leaves a very pleasant, long term appreciation.

Another argument could be the trivial dance moves that obviously took time and cost money that were added to Arma. Although they were good for a few lulz-ies, resources spent on the occasional unusual wounding/death would have been time better spent.

[Fox '09 14]

couldn't care for it unless the corpsman/medic role has far more detail in it.

[-Coulum- 35]

I would say it pays itself back in long term dividends and appreciation. Well placed violence ie..A Pans Labyrinth..as opposed to a Saw 9 - go a long way toward creating a different type of immersion. Maybe a hard sell in todays ADD climate, but I think there are still enough folks who really appreciate the artistic vision of the "unusual" to make it worthwhile.

Yes it would be worth it to many including me.

Another argument could be the trivial dance moves that obviously took time and cost money that were added to Arma. Although they were good for a few lulz-ies, resources spent on the occasional unusual wounding/death would have been time better spent.

Ha! Never knew there were dance moves in arma! Bis releases arma 2 as a totally buggy piece of shit but manages to add in dances moves! I'll add this to the list of phenomena that I have given up trying to understand.

[PuFu 4600]

I'd, for one, would like to see that simulated (see my weather and fatigue thread).

Which is exactly how it looks like if you don't take a vehicle in some free roaming missions in AII campaign. And even then, you'll be driving around a lot (by yourself, of course, considering how AI drives...).

That's exactly how it is on highest difficulty, with only one save game slot (and if you want even more realism, nobody stops you from restarting the whole mission or even the campaign when you die). And the only reason why I'm not using this option is that I have a finicky computer which occasionally overheats and crashes when running big battles in AII on a hot day.

My advice is: before you argue that ArmA isn't a sim, try it on hardest difficulty, in a good SP campaign.

good god great advice! I don't know what I would do without you! wonder what I have been doing all these years...

[Cripsis 10]

Agreed. Like Carl Gustav already pointed out Dismemberment is pretty rare in reality

Dismemberment is on a rapid increase in Afghanistan and dismounted troops frequently have limbs completely torn off, I fail to understand how you guys can be unaware of this as there's an incredible amount of news articles and videos concerning this particular subject.

Here is a link to a video that you might find of interest -

Edited November 9, 2011 by Franze
Explicit content

[dysta 10]

Dismemberment is on a rapid increase in Afghanistan and dismounted troops frequently have limbs completely torn off, I fail to understand how you guys can be unaware of this as there's an incredible amount of news articles and videos concerning this particular subject.

Here is a link to a video that you might find of interest -

That's sounds extreme for a game when you can see a dismembered soldier/citizen bleeding and/or screaming alive. But in real war it's just like a child's play that they're expected to be happened, or worse than that.

[katipo66 94]

Dismemberment not needed in this game imo, target down move on... who cares if it happens at times in the real world, what benefit would it bring to this game? i wouldnt mind other wounding improvements though.

Im all for blowing things to bits, with limbs flying everywhere, but only in other games where its a main feature and part of the enjoyment of that particular game, just not this one.

[dragon01 902]

It doesn't need to be a main feature, just a part of the simulation. This happens IRL, so I don't see why it shouldn't be included.

Also, an improved wounding system would most likely mean that corpsmen and medics would have a much more important role. IMHO, ArmA III should put more emphasis on Medevac than previous games in the series. In AII, it's either "fully healable" or "dead". No other options. If dismemberment was an option, this would mean that after an IED explosion, you'd have to make sure your wounded comrades are evacuated safely, even if they're missing limbs and can't fight. Right now, a corpsman can "patch up" everybody who's not dead.

Also, AII usually had a bit unrealistic numbers of actual deaths (in direct combat or from explosions), since there was no "heavily wounded but alive" state (except for player's squad in AII campaign). For instance, a vehicle is hit, crew bails, then the vehicle explodes, killing them all. In reality, they would've been wounded, but most likely alive. A medic could be able to save them, though they wouldn't be able to return to fight.

First Aid Drill practice in AII lasted about a minute, while in reality, this is much more complex. If proper first aid, triage and other medical procedures were simulated, this would greatly help immersion. I've heard that America's Army had very good first aid, to the point that I've read somewhere that somebody actually saved somebody else's live basing on skills he learned there. I don't know if it's true, but in AII healing is about on par with car driving when it comes to realism, and thus could use improvement.

[dmarkwick 261]

If it happens at all, it should be a module. Gameplay first, reality optional.

[Cripsis 10]

If it happens at all, it should be a module. Gameplay first, reality optional.

I'd be happy with that.

[katipo66 94]

@dragon01...

What your asking for is another game, for medics, like TOH is for helo pilots, take on combat medics!?

[-Coulum- 35]

What your asking for is another game, for medics, like TOH is for helo pilots, take on combat medics!?

Not really. Like he said, Americas army, and even ace have fairly good medic system and are not "take on combat medic".

I agree with dragon1 that arma 3 should represent casualties more realistically and the measures taken to stabilize and move them away from danger zones. Medivac, triage etc. Have huge impact on the flow of combat. Whole battles are fought to fend off attackers while medical aid and evacuation is provided. Therefore I think it would be a very good feature for arma 3 to implement. Will it happen? Probably not, but I'm hoping ace 3 will come out with more realistic medical procedures and the likes.

Edited November 11, 2011 by -Coulum-

[nkenny 1057]

For more elaborate medical options-- I think the ACE mod have pretty much got it nailed down with their (Æ)Wounding Module. The module offers a fair balance of realism, resource management, personal proficiency/stress, and above all fundementally fun gameplay.

While I have great hopes for the improved animations of A3, I think that the people wanting more laborious medicinal options need to spend more time actually playing the game (preferably in a multiplayer environment) and less time posting on these forums.

-k

[-Coulum- 35]

Yes ace is pretty good but it's a bit to... Forgiving. Maybe I'm haven't used it in the right places but it seems you can take quite a lot of hits and then be revived or morphine wit virtually no negatives after. It is better than vanilla but it still doesn't represent casualties realistically. Ie.looking at an incapacitated soldier and saying " This guys Fighting is done for the day but he's not dead yet so let's call in medivac and ship him off so he can get medical attention." I know these details seem pointless but would add an extra level of depth to gameplay.

[katipo66 94]

Not really. Like he said, Americas army, and even ace have fairly good medic system and are not "take on combat medic".

Think about it... Someone buys this game, plays the game and gets hit, what do you imagine should happen then and how much focus should be placed on this in gaming terms?

Currently if you are hit and survive you are reduced to crawling, explain what you would like to happen in this situation?

What does the player who's injured expected to do while proper medical procedures are being carried out etc etc

It's a whole different level off immersion/realism/whatever

Edited November 11, 2011 by Katipo66

[maddogx 13]

Yes ace is pretty good but it's a bit to... Forgiving. Maybe I'm haven't used it in the right places but it seems you can take quite a lot of hits and then be revived or morphine wit virtually no negatives after. It is better than vanilla but it still doesn't represent casualties realistically. Ie.looking at an incapacitated soldier and saying " This guys Fighting is done for the day but he's not dead yet so let's call in medivac and ship him off so he can get medical attention." I know these details seem pointless but would add an extra level of depth to gameplay.

Adding such depth is great in theory, but as you say it does seem pointless. There needs to be some kind of purpose behind something like that in order for it to make sense in a game. Unless the advantages of medivac'ing wounded soldiers are somehow woven into the mission (for example mission fails if wounded comrades are left behind), I don't see how this could be achieved. Therefore such a system would indeed be pretty pointless from a gameplay perspective, since making the effort to stabilize a non-fatal casualty and get him out of the combat zone would yield no reward.

On the other hand, the current system of "reviving" soldiers and getting them back into combat has immediate and obvious advantages, which motivates players to make the effort. Sure, it's not very realistic, but as far as gameplay is concerned, it's a lot more gratifying. :)

[-Coulum- 35]

Adding such depth is great in theory, but as you say it does seem pointless. There needs to be some kind of purpose behind something like that in order for it to make sense in a game. Unless the advantages of medivac'ing wounded soldiers are somehow woven into the mission (for example mission fails if wounded comrades are left behind), I don't see how this could be achieved. Therefore such a system would indeed be pretty pointless from a gameplay perspective, since making the effort to stabilize a non-fatal casualty and get him out of the combat zone would yield no reward.

The motivation would be as you say in mission design. Once someone goes down it becomes an objective to get them out. Other than that you don't get reward in gameplay terms. To me the reward is the experience and immersion I get having to complete these kind of goals. And if I were the casualty I would be perfectly fine with watching the rest of the mission until it's done or just leaving if I didn't have the time to. If you really wanted to have a second chance mission makers could integrate reinforcement points. When the team gets to a certain point in the mission casualties are revived as new reinforcements joining the team. This of course wouldn't make sense for some missions, but the whole revive thing... Well it's not for me. But when it comes down to it my way is not for most other people. You're opinions are perfectly reasonable and I understand the resononing behind them but I just have different preferences than you guys and probably most other gamers here. No worries, I am sure these things won't be implemented, but just watching one of the latest vbs2 video, showing the medivac features, made me realize how much more gameplay you couLd get out of a mission if you had to stabilize and medivac wounded troops or destroy or recover disabled vehicles etc. The battle of Mogadishu (black hawk down) would never have escalated to the heights it did if not for the "we leave no man behind" actions. And who hasn't wanted to depict this type of battle in arma but can't because pilots are instantly killed upon impact and you just leave the dead behind.