Cover system for Arma3?

[P.Denton 10]

You know Full Spectrum Warrior?

A RTS style fireteam based 3rd person game.

Each fireteam consists of 4 men and you can normally control Alpha and Bravo team.

You can move 1 team by selecting a team.

Move multiple teams and set one for an attracting attention from enemies

and one for engaging enemies from back or flank.

All movement are done with a whole team moving to cover to cover, not separetely and individually.

On the contray, you can't even select one guy. What you can do is to select a fireteam.

You can order a team to supress the enemy or direction you are pointing at.

Of course all AI in the game use cover system and you can't even kill an enemy facing directly to you.

So you have to use at least one team as a decoy and send one fireteam to the place the team can hit the enemy easily.

The entire team working system is really tactical, realistic in army and reasonable.

I hope BIS to take this concept into A3.

[hellfire257 3]

The cover system in Brother in Arms: Hell's Highway was pretty good I think. Something similar would be welcome.

[_sherlock_ 12]

I find myself undecided between the faction that is in favour of the suggestion and the one against it.

But it seems that the opponents fail to realise that almost no one in favour of the suggestion to improve the way one takes cover in Arma ever suggested a system like in Rainbow six. All agree that there shouldn't be a limitation of manoeuvrability or anything like a mechanism that attaches the player to the wall.

A common problem in Arma 2 is that taking cover behind for instance the hood of a Humvee isn't possible in a satisfactory way: kneeling is to low and standing exposes too much of the torso, further more you're not able to rest the weapon on the hood.

I think what most including me are looking for (was pointed out already) is the possibilty to take cover behind objects that are too high for crouch but too low for the standing stance and the option to rest the weapon on the surface.

These suggestions/wishes shouldn't be too difficult to implement and noone can argue that they would be in any way, shape or form unrealistic or too arcady.

Edited June 2, 2011 by _sherlock_

[demonized 20]

For the AI most definetly yes. for the players i think we have it almost as we want it.

having a auto cover button would kill the realism imo.

but having a peek up, down and sideways button would fix any current issues.

peek should be used anywere, not just in cover.

Edited June 2, 2011 by Demonized

[arokfridr 10]

I too enjoyed Vietcong's cover system!

[Rocklobster 10]

WEll, I think ARMA is fine w/o a cover system; I doubt it would add much to the game except make it more arcade-y unless it was done really well IMO. For the most part, there isn't any cover around when you're playing anyway, at least not anything that would be easy to bind to.

I'd imagine getting it right with all the oddly shaped rocks would be hard to do, and would probably end up frustrating the player. There's nothing more annoying than being in cover and still getting hit because your character isn't smart enough to get their ENTIRE body behind the object.

Edited June 2, 2011 by Rocklobster
slight rewording

[_sherlock_ 12]

Please do read the other posts. I took the time to read through 127 posts because I find the topic interesting and I tried to summerise some points in my last post. The discussion shouldn't be about a cover system like most opponents of the idea imagine and therefore believe it to be too arcad-y. It should just be more flexible in certain situation like the example I made with the humvee.

A common problem in Arma 2 is that taking cover behind for instance the hood of a Humvee isn't possible in a satisfactory way: kneeling is to low and standing exposes too much of the torso, further more you're not able to rest the weapon on the hood.

I think what most including me are looking for (was pointed out already) is the possibilty to take cover behind objects that are too high for crouch but too low for the standing stance and the option to rest the weapon on the surface.

[zooloo75 833]

I already said this, but I guess people missed it...

If we don't get a cover system, then atleast have the crouch stance adapt to nearby objects. For example, if you were crouched behind a humvee, then your character would either raise up a bit or lower depending on the height of the humvee or anything he is near.

[demonized 20]

a simple peek system would fix all issues and not being arcady.

hold a button down, move mouse sideways or up or down, release button and that is your lean/stance. tap button again and go back to default of what stance you had before peeking, or hold and adjust peek again.

No need for adapting cover to any objects or anything.

Ofc this would only apply to human players, for AI they need more improvement, but thats a whole other issue.

[Richey79 10]

The cover system in Brother in Arms: Hell's Highway was pretty good I think. Something similar would be welcome.

WTF?

Go and play Gears of War instead of Arma 3 - it'll be more to your taste.

It would be good to see something like the community PVP animation system implemented, although I'm not a big fan of getting locked to a wall or blind fire.

[50.cal 10]

I wouldn't mind a 'stick-to-wall' cover system, but I'd prefer this, what they call 'Fluid Posture' in Raven Shield. I think you just held the shift key and moved the mouse, and you could incrementally lean or raise/lower your stance as much as you wanted. I think the AI should use a 'sticky' cover system because it would make them harder to hit and have the added benefit of making them look more human.

Since we're talking about a PC title I think the "Fluid Posture" would perfectly suits.

What bothers me more is the fact that I can't hit what I see without exposing myself too much or shoot at a wall instead of my target while I have a clear line of sight on it.

This is due to the fire geometry (I think) which makes the bullets come out of the barrel instead of the head.

Although this is perfect for AI since they can use sophisticated cover systems, I think it would be better to have this as an option for players not using track IR.

This or force the player to automatically adapt its stance as soon as the barrel hits a lod when he hold the weapon in ready position.

Also the option to deploy your weapon over any cover would be a must ;-)

Edited June 2, 2011 by 50.cal

[trips 10]

This kind of feature would be a deal breaker for me. If infantry combat isn't given a real upgrade i'm not interested.

[Pyronick 21]

The Raven Shield system was nice, but cumbersome. I prefer the automatic snap-to-height functionality in Vietcong. It works, it's realistic and it improves on the gameplay aswell.

All first-person, no gimmicks, no cheating. It's more or less the real deal, only virtual.

The Red Orchestra system with blind fire is also very nice. Reminds me of MINIMI training.

[4 IN 1 0]

Automatic height adjustmeny is the way to go.

[lugiahua 26]

have to remind us that this game is set in near future where advanced weapon systems like Land Warrior or FCS developed.

It would be very important (at least to me) that players who carried such systems are able to use weapon cameras to peak around the corner without exposing themselves.

[schmambuman 10]

Perhaps there could just be something really simple, like being able to hold a button down to control how high you "peek" when you are crouching. Double tap to "lock" the position or something. Doesn't have to be anything amazingly complicated. Don't want the gears of war style cover though. And no blindfiring. It's kind of dumb to have in a game where you rarely face anyone in close enough combat for blindfiring to be effective.

[SPC.Spets 21]

There is a mod PvP Animation that uses some cover animations, we have it in our server and when we play coop and tvt, guess what... NOBODY uses it. The only thing we use, is the "F" taunt animation o.O

[heroes maker 10]

i would says yes to the cover system, but if you do it ... PLEASE NO FORCED 3RD PERSON CAMERA, it's not like i don't like to use it, it's just maybe for some people it'll be weird ( see the people who reject the idea of the TPS ), and for me, well sometimes i like doing some "super-realistic" trip

[LJF 0]

There is a mod PvP Animation that uses some cover animations, we have it in our server and when we play coop and tvt, guess what... NOBODY uses it. The only thing we use, is the "F" taunt animation o.O

Blind fire is really useful though, and I love, love being able to jog and fire at the same time, default A2 is so unrealistic for that :(

I don't think a cover system would be a good thing, they always feel constrained and awkward, works great for a 360 or PS3, but on a keyboard you have enough controls to be able to do the same things but have more control. In a game like ArmA it only takes a centimeter of your knee poking out from behind a wall (or an enemy unit positioned in such a way they can see that 1cm of knee) and you're gone.

[smookie 11]

Please mind that my animation pack cover system was designed for specific purposes such as: peaking around the corner, delivering two-way grenade throwing system and more control over blindfire. The shooting is just "unrealistic" addition. I think, when you get used to it, it's pretty handy.

[r3volution 0]

@Smookie, I love the idea of your pack and think its a great addition to the arma2/arrowhead mod scene. I suppose the biggest limitation for me is whether the AI use the animations too and in an appropriate way. This is what I see as the only limitation with modding this stuff into the game vs having it there from outset.

I'm very heartened though to read back through this thread and see on the poll how many people affirm the idea of a 1st person cover/fluid posture system. I honestly would have thought I was part of a small minority before but apparently, at least according to the limited poll, I'm part of a small majority! :)

Its not that I want to see Arma turn into Gears of Brothers in Arma... to those who seem to think that.

All I want is to be able to more effectively emulate the way in which actual military personel utilise cover on the battlefield, and have my stance (and that of my AI team-mates and opponents) adapt to the cover itself rather than be limited to 3 fixed postures which have no bearing on the amount of cover you have in front of you. Given that no trained serving soldier anywhere in the world would kneel behind low cover exposing his entire upper torso/head to the world, I feel its stupid that I'm expected to in Arma, the most realistic military shooter there is around. There, I said it...

:)

[woore 10]

Cover system?Does it mean arkade with taking cover by pressing TAB?Please not!

Edited June 4, 2011 by woore

[r3volution 0]

@woore: That depends on whether you read more than the last page of the thread before posting. Nobody wants an arcade cover system. But given you have no problem hitting 'x' to crouch, or 'z' to lie down, I don't see why there'd be a problem with hitting 'x' to shift to a fluid posture adapting to cover (not any of this velcro to wall BS though).

[igneous01 19]

I voted yes for the cover system, if it is made similar to how RO2 is going to incorporate it, then yes Im all in.

I would also like to see the inclusion of peeking your head, not specifically taking up a firing position, but peeking over grass while prone, walls, etc. Then that would nullify the need for 3rd person when crawling through tall grass (where you cant see anything at all)

[Choki 10]

a simulation game without cover? a FPS without cover? a modern war without cover? if it had used dynamic coverage like in GTA 4 would be perfect