Thoughts on using enemy uniforms

[Pyronick 21]

I guess we can all agree, that we simply need to be able to configure* this feature on a per unit basis with scripting. And all shall be fine and possible; for example only one "spy" per side during a multiplayer match, hehe.

*By this I mean not only allow/disallow switching of uniforms. But also the option to restrict the possible uniform-pool (to the uniforms of ones side for example).

Though I still wonder, how enemies should react to such a disguised intruder (not recognized as such yet). And how this could be customized in a sexy, yet powerful way. There are different "zones" of security and familiarity, we should be able to easily model: top security no access (only authorized) zones. Absolutely don't care zones. And at least something in between.

A "hang out" zone could be pretty low regarding security, yet units would absolutely tend to walk up to you and try to speak to you a lot more frequently...

Guess this really cries for a highly configurable module.

The thing is that this single feature opens the possibility for a whole ranges of other new features. Which would probably fall way out of the current scope of the game.

What you describe could be handled by perhaps a more simple solution. Using the current awareness state of the AI based on the return value of the "behavior" scripting command and/or waypoint types like GUARD or SENTRY.

That means you don't necessarily have zones, but you can mimick the effect of zones.

The problem is, will there be enough time and resources to research, develop and implement such a thing?

[rye1 21]

1:46, win.

"All warfare is based on deception." - Sun Tzu

Edited September 14, 2011 by Rye

[pathetic_berserker 4]

........ 1:46, win.

"All warfare is based on deception." - Sun Tzu

Carefull or you will be flamed for implying ArmA should have melee and takedowns ;)

As for the other sugestions. I don't think creating rules about when it can or can't be used as a feature are all that helpfull. A more effective way to do it is to make sure players have the same reasons to not use it as they would in real life.

1. They are open to hostile actions from freindlies.

2. Actually blending in with the enemy is still dangerous.

3. Swapping kit actually takes time and leaves you exposed.

If there are enough disencentives to use it, a price to pay or sufficient risk. It will be used only when the mission calls for it or by the extremely desperate

Edited September 17, 2011 by Pathetic_Berserker

[murmur 10]

An enemy encampment gets carpet bombed, all the buildings are leveled, and all the soldiers killed. Here comes a special forces guy and steals the uniform off of one of the dead guys who took a bomb directly in the face.

It's a perfect fit!

[EDcase 87]

Theoretically this will work with civy clothing so you could dress as a beggar ;)

[wolfbite 8]

Ass long as I can strangle a hooker and steal her clothes...

Captain T McCrossdresser at your service sah!!!

Keep your legs together captain... Pvt Emmerich just lost his rations!

Edited September 19, 2011 by wolfbite

[AstroMan 10]

No doubt theirs gonna be something to counter the water infiltration thing by opfor, with a radar of some sort that shows up as the shape of the thing.

I heard somewhere something about a whale. And the under-water infiltration vehicle. What if we could kill the whale, take out its insides put the under-water infiltration inside it. Butthen again, friendly fire is of course a danger.

[Tom1 10]

To all of those complaining that everyone will just steal uniforms online, that's the beatuy of arma....

If it works in real life, it will work in arma. If it doesn't work in real life, as long as the opposition are well trainined/ good then it wont work in arma either.

If you find a good, dedicated tactical clan and play with them in a public match with objectives, against a public bunch who just pick big sniper guns, ghilli suits, enemy uniforms and abrams tanks and try and exploit the game's weaknesses, you will still win if you play smart and don't break from using tactics just because the opposition isn't.

[dmarkwick 261]

To all of those complaining that everyone will just steal uniforms online, that's the beatuy of arma....

If it works in real life, it will work in arma. If it doesn't work in real life, as long as the opposition are well trainined/ good then it wont work in arma either.

If you find a good, dedicated tactical clan and play with them in a public match with objectives, against a public bunch who just pick big sniper guns, ghilli suits, enemy uniforms and abrams tanks and try and exploit the game's weaknesses, you will still win if you play smart and don't break from using tactics just because the opposition isn't.

At last, accounting for your dead has a real purpose :)

[Cripsis 10]

Personally I'd prefer BIS to concentrate on improving the AI instead of introducing improbable new features.

[Ish 11]

I like how he actually shot the guy in the demo. Probably putting some nice bloody holes in the uniform, and the ai don't even care. I mean, if me and 5 other guys were stationed somewhere, I think i'd know something was up if all of a sudden this new face shows up..

[liquidpinky 11]

I like how he actually shot the guy in the demo. Probably putting some nice bloody holes in the uniform, and the ai don't even care. I mean, if me and 5 other guys were stationed somewhere, I think i'd know something was up if all of a sudden this new face shows up..

Carrying a non standard issue weapon and covered in blood that hasn't even had time to dry up yet.

[Joseph Archer 10]

I think the idea is bad. Imagine warfare multiplayer with an enemy player wandering around your base with a silenced M9 and a bag full of satchels! Bin it BIS, you know it makes sense.

[dmarkwick 261]

Feel the fear of new features.

[Cripsis 10]

Feel the fear of new features.

It's not a feeling of fear, it's a feeling of embarrassment. Why does BIS insist on introducing a lame feature that even COD fans would find laughable.

[NoRailgunner 0]

Wait till its done! A3 release is 2012 not today or tomorrow! God'dam those impatient and pesky FPS kiddos.

[Daniel 0]

It's still a bad idea. :p

[mrcash2009 0]

I think the idea is bad. Imagine warfare multiplayer with an enemy player wandering around your base with a silenced M9 and a bag full of satchels! Bin it BIS, you know it makes sense.

I doubt the feature will be a fixed thing on any mission, its common sense to think that it would be scripted out of a mission type such as that, like any feature you do or do not want in a mission that would ruin it or not be suited.

Hopefully its introduced as a module on/off type or in settings.

Edited September 29, 2011 by mrcash2009

[dmarkwick 261]

It's not a feeling of fear, it's a feeling of embarrassment. Why does BIS insist on introducing a lame feature that even COD fans would find laughable.

I think you're not thinking this through properly. Why would a feature be judged on whether or not CoD has it? Think of the possibilities this affords the general game engine - entering an enemy vehicle might flag you up as an enemy after the introduction of this feature. I would welcome this feature just for that possibility, even if it needs to be helped along with a script. The state of play right now is that it cannot be done to drive a vehicle from one side while appearing to be from another side. It opens up more possibilities than seems.

[instagoat 133]

I think outside of realism, gameplay wise, it´s a good feature. Games like Commandos had it, and there it worked.

As for the realism, I´d wait to judge the feature until it´s implemented. Picture the following.

A power substation has been attacked by rebels and the garrison is in the process of getting beefed up by the Iranians. You know that, you get a contact to fetch you a clean Uniform and Papers from one of the new arrivals (Possibly conscripts, formerly wounded soldiers or washouts from other units that don´t know each other very well), you sneak in (wearoing the appropriate Uniform, Rank and Unit tabs (feature?) and weapon, get assigned to guard duty, plant your satchels and blow the thing up, and escape (sans Uniform) in the confusion.

It all depends on how it is implemented. I agree that the "stealing the uniform from a dead guy" is a pretty ridiculous Idea, especially if you just turned him into swiss cheese.

[EDcase 87]

Any feature that adds new gameplay style/tactics/possibilities will be fun. (that is the point of a game even if its a realistic milsim)

It depends how well its implemented as to how long that fun will last...

Perhaps you have to get a headshot to have the option to steal the uniform. (or a foot shot ;))

Edited September 29, 2011 by EDcase

[rübe 127]

There were also reports that the fugitive was dressed as a woman [...]

(source: http://news.sky.com/home/world-news/article/16079781)

:D

[CarlGustaffa 4]

Perhaps you have to get a headshot to have the option to steal the uniform. (or a foot shot ;))

Hopefully left as mission makers choice and not built in on everything. Domination is bad enough with friendly fires caused by using enemy weapons and vehicles, wouldn't want to see enemy uniforms as well thrown into the mix. Xeno: Please don't do this :D :D

[BobcatBob 10]

I can imagine a SUPER COMPLICATED user made module to dictate EXACTLY how this new feature could work depending on wants/needs of a specific misssion/scenario. Like Maybe if you get too close to an enemy your disguise will ware off?

[batto 17]

All of this was already done in the hitman series years ago. It's stuff for hitmen and spys, not soldiers, not even SOF.

In early days of latest war in Afghanistan US and British forces was undercover:

I never realized that ArmA was so much about negelection of the articles of the geneve convention.

This is weak argument because you can neglect Geneve convention in other ways (like using anti-material rifle to cut-off legs just for fun). And there will be militias seeking revenge. I guess they didn't sign it. In the end this game (and any war) is about killing people (father of 3 kids?) so stop with your politics please.

---------- Post added at 08:01 AM ---------- Previous post was at 07:40 AM ----------

I totally like the idea. First of all, I would not add any suspicion indicator. For example if 3 enemies stop minding own business and stare at you something is wrong. Differences in face in closer ranges could be solved by just looking other way. If you look at enemies they'll notice different face. If you don't, you will not know how much suspicious they are and you'll raise suspicion. I'd also add the possibility of bringing your own undercover clothes. If you want it on battlefield you should kill enemy with single head-shot to not pollute enemy uniform with blood, holes, ... Also the clothes of enemy could not fit you so there could be different types of bodies. Also you should observe the activity of enemy before taking his uniform and perform it when higher-ranked enemy sees you.

I don't expect all this features in upcoming ArmA3, but I expect it in "ArmA3: Undercover" :). I'm totally for "1337 speshul forcas t0p s3cr3t" stuff.

I also associate myself with this view:

Perhaps there should be some limitation on the effectiveness of enemy uniform vs. civilian clothes, i.e. the former being of use for a short-term before you inevitably get found out but do allow you to get into restricted places vs. Civilian clothes, which allow you much longer unfettered movement around the island BUT don’t get you into restricted enemy places.

Perhaps have some method of logging time in enemy uniform & civilian clothes which over time and in proximity of the enemy increases the overall effectiveness of you using enemy uniform or civilian clothes types.

If there is a story going on in the background of A3 perhaps incorporate a “forger†who will make you civilian ID papers and at a later point enemy military ID papers, in the case of the former civilian ID papers it would get you past road block/checkpoints or pass an ID challenge from enemy solder which at lower levels in civilian clothes without ID you would have to avoid, with the latter military ID papers you would have to have ID of someone other than in the unit you will be attacking which early on has got to be “harvested†ware as later on you get a much better forged military ID of XYZ rank which is enough to fool lower ranks of enemy but less effective on equal or higher rank enemy.

Likewise, if you are a lower rank and are ordered to do something by a higher rank enemy then you have to be seen to do it to avoid being found out before/wile slipping out of there view.

Edited October 4, 2011 by batto