ArmA 3 like Battlefield play 4 free.

[Daniel 0]

I don't really understand the knee-jerk reaction against PvP in a thread like this.

Clearly it's a touchy subject. If we're going to discuss this (support for different multiplayer game types), there needs to be no room for misinterpretation from the offset. There needs to be a clear and focused scope for the thread. In this thread, it was pretty clear from the first post that there would be drama (mention of BF in an Arma forum usually jerks those knees fairly sharpish).

My own reaction was to what I read as PvP play getting unfair treatment from BIS, when I personally do my fair share of both Co-op and PvP games without any issues, and see the low number of PvP servers as more of a community issue than a developer one.

It should also be clear it's not a simple case of "PvP vs Co-op". There are loads of player bases included here: casual, serious, tournament, and realism on both sides. Along with many players who like both co-op and adversarial games.

[nodunit 397]

deathmatch and the very rare flag fight.

I think I may be confused

Edited June 4, 2011 by NodUnit

[celery 8]

What term would you use to distinguish the two if the server were to search for game types?

Such a filter already exists, and it distinguishes between coop, ctf, team, hold, dm, ff and sector control.

[nodunit 397]

Right right..bad terminology, it was more of mission design thing IE having Arma vehicles behave like BF vehicles, tanks 1 person and so on. It's all possible but why do people detest it so.

Edited June 4, 2011 by NodUnit

[-Paladin- 10]

How about bis make a ArmA3 launcher where the main menu is your character, you press play now and instantly you find a hardcore PvP map like berserk 16vs16 with hold and secure mod, collect points and buy new weapons and uniforms. Somehow like battlefield play for free. I am playing this game for a while now and I was imaging ArmA be that way with its unique gameplay. It will be paradise.

P.S. : Before the narrowminded tell me to go to play BF or CoD just think that I am telling this for BIS to make the game more popular. In that way it will support tournament modes like ladders and cups.

Ohh this is a request thread for a Filter function and a favorite list in the Server Browser.

Why not comes in handy for every one.

The unlock thing is already in arma.

In Evo missions there was something similar,stats saving on server and weapons and cars.... unlock by points also saved on server.

You can make everything except the server browser by your self, arma is no coop or pvp tvt thing its a do it your self toolbox.

By the way you shod change what you have written because it sounds like erase all coop make only pvp games bis.

[tacticalnuggets 24]

I just don't understand how people can claim that PVP is bad for arma. No offense, but it just sounds totally crazy. I think there are a lot of groups that have found a common way to play arma2, and that want to keep it the way they have it. Please don't be afraid of arma2 becoming popular, it will only make the game better in the long run. I highly doubt arma 2 is small simply because of its tactical nature. MP is small in arma2 because of its inaccessibility, and I thank BIS every time they improve it.

ArmA2 has a strong disconnect between its editor and TvT/PVP. That lies the problem. Game modes like AAS had to be built from the ground up in many ways. Triggers are about as useful as the list of units they produce and thats it. Many MP coders in arma2 have to reach a new level of understanding in the scripting engine to make such game modes.

Between the outdated UI, old net code, and lack of tools to create robust pvp oriented systems, MP is simply in need of heavy work. They form my core argument as to why I wish BIS focus on that part of their game.

[jblackrupert 14]

I just don't understand how people can claim that PVP is bad for arma. No offense, but it just sounds totally crazy.

Because the Aspies are scared.

[igneous01 19]

Im all for some PvP servers, but I prefer these to be clan based, not open.

Open PvP and warfare servers are a disaster, if its not a hacker spamming 1000's of shells on a base, its a bunch of people just wandering around by themselves uncoordinated, with no communication.

The main emphasis of this game is teamwork, and its teamwork on a whole new level that requires time and patience, and trust between players.

In battlefield 2 teamwork was described as:

someone dies, medic does a 2 sec revive.

someone injured, medic throws a pack that insta heals them.

someone out of ammo, support throws a pack of ammo that insta rearms them.

in Arma now:

someone dies: there is no revive, but CASEVAC and MEDIVAC still apply, and that takes time.

someone is injured: takes a couple minutes to heal someone, and if its ace_wounds (like unconscious, lifeline) it takes close to 5 minutes healing someone, apply cpr, morphine, etc, etc

someone is out of ammo: You have to pull extra mags out of your inventory, drop them, and the player has to pick them up.

So as you can see, no open server, with players expecting a fast paced fight, are going to bother doing such things as helping other players, because its not instant. Just as in real life.

The last thing I want to see is a bunch of kids playing on a server, and acting like retards (which they do on xbox live).

This game is meant for the mature, the ones that have patience, the ones you can trust to cover you, while your injecting morphing and applying bandages to another buddy that got shot. Thats the beauty of this game.

So, no, I completely disagree with the idea, PvP should be between clans and units, because most of us here know how the open servers work.

[celery 8]

Im all for some PvP servers, but I prefer these to be clan based, not open.

Open PvP and warfare servers are a disaster, if its not a hacker spamming 1000's of shells on a base, its a bunch of people just wandering around by themselves uncoordinated, with no communication.

So, no, I completely disagree with the idea, PvP should be between clans and units, because most of us here know how the open servers work.

How would public PVP affect you if you'd only play with your clan anyway?

[metalcraze 290]

you mean with no multiplayer mode?

What's wrong with ArmA3 gameplay be popular?

ArmA series are already popular enough.

The more people you want to have in the game - the lower you have to go.

I don't want to see even more CS/BF/CoD frag-ho kidz playing ArmA.

I play it because it offers me a gameplay that is based around everything else but getting more frags and without any stuff locked unlike in aforementioned games where the kid unlocking it will feel more "leet"

[paragraphic l 2]

How would public PVP affect you if you'd only play with your clan anyway?

I believe what most people here mean is that some fundamental game mechanics have to be 'simplified' for the click&frag PvP to actually work for the people that they think want to use it.

It's not hard to create a mission where there is a limited set of gear in an ammo box, and I guess it's even possible to script it to only give you the option to choose the gear of your role in the mission.

But when you get injured there is no revive needle, medic pack you can pick up and insta heal. It is indeed possible for a medic to do such a thing but this requires more teamwork, hence a slower pace game with more focussed people.

To script a radio message for the lone-wolf medic might be an option, or as I see it happening in Brink, people start becoming 'social-moderators' trying to get everyone to play to their role. Difference with ArmA & Brink is that you can not easily switch roles and take over the medic role if the other player isn't doing his duties.

Last time I've played PvP was on Hexenkessel in OFP. Medics weren't needed cause it was fast paced and you just died anyhow and respawned pretty quickly. No one ran off either cause it was a closed lay-out. Nothing has to change in the core game for this type of missions though.

Now the problem becomes more how do you get the right people in the right missions/servers?

- When you click Multiplayer you first get a selection screen where you choose the gametype you want?

- BIS hosting their own servers as an example to the community? (Works only if these are the most popular servers)

- Integrating the whole MP experience; add-ons, forums, vids, hints & tips, guides, right into the game itself?

How about brainstorming about that? The current way MP works is you scan the list and hopefully know what to look for and are able to find it. *This is more of a guess as I only play on 1 private server since Armed Assault release*

How can we/they improve (public) MP for everyone?

[jblackrupert 14]

How can we/they improve (public) MP for everyone?

It's already been discussed to hell and back in the "Why isn't this game more popular" thread.

Part of the reason some people don't stick around is the shitty attitude they get when they do attempt to join in.

[SPC.Spets 21]

What are you guys talking about? TVT==PVP, with the exception that TVT excludes non-team game modes, which are pretty much deathmatch and the very rare flag fight.

Who was wanting Arma 3 to become like Counter-Strike or Battlefield to warrant an outcry like that from you?

just read the forum, all this newcomers asking for stuff like this. do this like this and this like this. NOooo! do it like ARMA!

[M9ACE 0]

Yes there are only infinite coop servs (which is not a problem) and no PvP servers.

There never was a time when there was not a pvp server running in ArmA2. However, there always seems to be a lack of people putting in a sufficient effort to find these servers.

[.kju 3239]

Well a handful of PvP servers (1-5) (not counting Warfare), is hardly a healthy level.

[PuFu 4591]

I ask again: what is the reason for that? a2 input system or what?

[M9ACE 0]

Well a handful of PvP servers (1-5) (not counting Warfare), is hardly a healthy level.

Nevertheless, they exist and the numbers are not always that low.

[.kju 3239]

PuFu it does not have to be repeated again and again.

See jblackrupert in the other current thread:

There is a "Why isn't this game more popular?" thread that has had tons of suggestions and the issues causing low MP counts.

http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?t=94503

Yes a handful exist; hardly a level to be happy with - not for the players nor for BI.

Numbers are up to 10-15 somewhat crowded servers, at best, on weekends for obvious reasons.

No healthy level for peek times either for a versatile game as arma

with DM, CTF, C&H, A&D, AAS and many more game modes.

Edited June 6, 2011 by .kju [PvPscene]

[PuFu 4591]

PuFu it does not have to be repeated again and again.

See jblackrupert in the other current thread.

That is a 150 pages thread, full of random opinions and reasons - most not related to pvp. PvP - or the lack of it - is not the only reason A2 is not more popular.

I don't need everyone's opinions, but ppl like yourself or celery or whoever else has a dent with the matter.You could have easily linked me to one specific post rather than the whole thread...

[.kju 3239]

Well get into the thread PuFu, hit ctrl+F, add the nickname(s) you are interested in. :)

Or you search (subforum + given thread name + post by user + show posts).

[PuFu 4591]

wonder why do you need to play the smartass role...i am sure you are aware that i know of how to use the vbulletin boards...

but, whatever floats your boat i guess

[.kju 3239]

You asked for it:

That is a 150 pages thread, full of random opinions and reasons

[zooloo75 833]

Why the sudden flood of CoD and BF'ers wanting to ruin the main concept of ArmA?

[celery 8]

Why the sudden flood of CoD and BF'ers wanting to ruin the main concept of ArmA?

Cos they hate you and your game.

[zooloo75 833]

Cos they hate you and your game.

Obviously.