MP thoughts

[twisted 128]

Arma series has been a mostly SP with occasional MP fun for me. but after playing tons of BF3 (sacrilege but damn fun.) i've wondered what ideas arma3 can learn from without losing the realism and essence that makes the arma3 series so unique.

some of the best action i've played has been on BF3 just because fighting humans can be so intense and so frustrating. dig to have so much action in the arma-verse.

i do not want bf3 v2. i would like bis weapons and immersion with more accessible and well thought through MP. it's not easy but these things i think can help...

1. official maps developed with a mp focus and a game play THEME in mind. they must be official at the start. this seems so essential but is something BIS havent done AFAIK. Maps with natural choke points, thought through unit balance, and themes like CQC or combined ops or island defence against invasion. These maps should not replace the usual awesome big map from BIS. 1st prize would be custom made maps (see wake island for an example). 2nd prize would be specially made parts of the big map customised for specific mp themes.

2. player movement system. bf3 has it down, armaverse has a long way to go based on current engine. Enough said as i am sure bis know about this, but it is good to feel like your unit does what you want most of the time and fluidly. makes mp pay more about what you want to do and not what you are frustrated in trying to do.

3. unlockable weapons. no thanks! just put it here to give arma purists a heart attack.

4. easy to get into game modes, that are well thought through and easy to understand quickly. so often in arma series MP i'd run around lost trying to figure out where the fuck to go. sure hardcore mode can remove crutches but things like easy to interpret glowing icons on objectives/flags can make getting into a game much easier, find the action and get to a place where they can make a difference to the match.

5. rather than have roles like engineer, recon, etc I'd like to see an intelligent weight system that prevents everyone taking a sniper rifle and javelin. or applies a appropriate speed penalty to such.

6. squad advantages. now this may be in defiance of the spirit of arma series. but promoting team play leads to much better games. things like ability to set up squad respawn point, only squad leaders being able to call in air support or air drops for ammo, etc.

7. better MP interface. make finding and joining a game child's play with easier interpretation of the options available at a glance. make it easy.

[rye1 21]

Now this is a good thought process.

[antoineflemming 14]

Inb4flamefest

This IS a good thought process. But to actually be appropriate and tailored to ArmA there have to be some changes:

1. Not "maps". ArmA WILL be one island (maybe one other island with it), Limnos. What needs to happen is that select AREAS of the island need to be almost like their own map. So a certain area of the map, maybe some town, would be tailored for CQC. Localized CQC areas of the map without losing that island feel.

EDIT: Now that I think about it, little maps wouldn't be a bad idea for ArmA. No, not as small as COD maps, but BF3 conquest sized maps wouldn't be bad at all. Kinda like little islands really. Basically the whole area would be playable all at once, not limited to one part of that island at a time like in BF3.

2. Spot on. Of course ArmA purists will argue that there's absolutely NOTHING wrong with the current animation system, but I agree, BF3, and even COD, has fluid animation and transitions between animations that BIS could look at and learn from. But it's really only two things that are seriously lacking in ArmA's current animations: 1) no real transitional animations needed for fluid movement and 2) no way to stop a current animation. By the second one, this is what I mean: if I'm going right and stop and go left, my character keeps running right for about 2 secs after I stop and press "A". That shouldn't happen. My pressing "D" is my equivalent of moving right. So when I stop, I'm actually stopping in real life. It's not like my brain is slow where there is some delay between the brain's signal to stop and my legs reaction to that signal, which is what seems to be the case in ArmA (this shouldn't apply to running/sprinting and then stopping, which would take about a sec to stop).

4) Hmmm. That would kinda take away from the ArmA experience. It's supposed to be almost like real ops. The most heavily populated ArmA servers (unless I've just got a filter not showing all of them) run a Domination game mode (NOT like COD's Domination), where players tackle objectives across the island. It's not meant for arcade-style gameplay which is what standard FPSs have. Now, this isn't a bad thing in general. It's just counter to what ArmA is. And, as such, there is no need for a hardcore mode in ArmA. Join a well-populated tactical realism server, and you'll know what to do.

5) In ArmA, there's no rpg spamming or everyone playing as sniper thing, so there's no need for preventing everyone taking sniper or javelin, as there really really needs to be in BF3. There aren't roles like the way BF3 has or classes like in COD. What needs to be a major MP focus on Platoon, Squad, and Fire Team role. Unit structure. I do wish that ArmA 3 would have a BF3 like "Squad" system (really a Fire Team). Mainly in respects to the UI and team/squad/platoon management. I know ArmA should maintain it's level of complexity to a degree, but unit management does not and should not be complex. A part of the UI should indicate the members in your fireteam (and whatever is comparable for the east faction), the team leader, the squad leader, and the platoon leader. Of course this would show up on your screen only if applicable.

6)Squad leaders shouldn't necessarily be able to do those things. However, there should be certain things that team, squad, and platoon leaders are able to do exclusively. BIS should determine this, but something like this should be present.

7) MP Interface is pretty intuitive and easy as is. I think as far as design goes, they should continue to keep a minimalist design. Shouldn't be too fancy or anything like some other games. Yeah, maybe the layout could be a little different. Maybe more user friendly. Like maybe it should be easier to favorite servers or something like that. Maybe be able to filter servers by one or more of the mods/addons that you have, so that you only see those servers.

A lot of your requests do seem like suggestions for a more BF3-like ArmA though. I'm sure someone is going to give you some crap over your suggestions. There are a couple people in this community who like to flame. I think they're good suggestions in general, though.

[katipo66 94]

Hey Twisted,

I only discovered BFBC2 this year and was like you, great action etc... Then I slowly came to hate it, especially with the vehicle gameplay and even the maps, in the end I didn't even get BF3 because of gameplay.

I disagree on the player movement, I like Armas player movement, sure it could be refined with more anims etc, but I like the so called clunkiness but realistic feel, I'd like it improved maybe but not made like BF2 etc, no glide?

I feel a bit funny always mentioning his mission but dragon zens advancing power is the best type of BF gameplay if you will in the armaverse ive ever played, it has all the action of Bf but without the stupid gameplay, and it's SP!

I usually play it on chernarus and the action can move from one end of the map to the other while the battlefield is contained in a reasonable area, in other words while i was playing BFBC2 i was wishing arma had something like this.

I would love BIS to look at it and implement it or something similar as an MP option.

Edited December 20, 2011 by Katipo66

[Egosa-U 10]

I always liked the idea of a "neverending mission"...but fail at mission scripting :mad:

Like factorys, airports, harbors, bases, FOBs and crutial points on the map for each side.

Tasks differ form the role you choose (each role should be somehow unique like supporting a base with ammo/fuel/repair-trucks or rebuilding destroyed factories to regain recources from that, and the task you are given..

completing a task, lets say ambush/destroy airport and its hangars could cause th enemy team to have nomore airplanes (next task would be like secure airport again/ support troops doing the rebuilding)..

would be a mix of warefare and domination somehow - without the commander doing the building of the base, he should have the option to assign tasks to teams, get reports about enemy presense and react accordingly.

[smookie 11]

2. Spot on. Of course ArmA purists will argue that there's absolutely NOTHING wrong with the current animation system, but I agree, BF3, and even COD, has fluid animation and transitions between animations that BIS could look at and learn from. But it's really only two things that are seriously lacking in ArmA's current animations: 1) no real transitional animations needed for fluid movement and 2) no way to stop a current animation. By the second one, this is what I mean: if I'm going right and stop and go left, my character keeps running right for about 2 secs after I stop and press "A". That shouldn't happen. My pressing "D" is my equivalent of moving right. So when I stop, I'm actually stopping in real life. It's not like my brain is slow where there is some delay between the brain's signal to stop and my legs reaction to that signal, which is what seems to be the case in ArmA (this shouldn't apply to running/sprinting and then stopping, which would take about a sec to stop).

If you are experiencing problems like these, i would consider checking your PC stats, since you may get some overheat. I have never had a problem with not being able to change directions when running (i mean, it doesnt take 2 seconds).

[Messiah 2]

Arma series has been a mostly SP with occasional MP fun for me. but after playing tons of BF3 (sacrilege but damn fun.) i've wondered what ideas arma3 can learn from without losing the realism and essence that makes the arma3 series so unique.

some of the best action i've played has been on BF3 just because fighting humans can be so intense and so frustrating. dig to have so much action in the arma-verse.

i do not want bf3 v2. i would like bis weapons and immersion with more accessible and well thought through MP. it's not easy but these things i think can help...

I understand you don't want an BF3 vs ArmA debate, and thats completely understandable, but you need to remember that BF3 is tailored to be what it is, a quick paced, tight and action pakced FPS. Choke points that force people to meet and fight, that limit tactical use of the map and equipment.

ArmA is tailored to encourage free thinking, to use the whole map, to engage the enemy on your terms, not the maps, to use tactics more refined than 'rushing' one particular point.

To discuss your points.

1. official maps developed with a mp focus and a game play THEME in mind. they must be official at the start. this seems so essential but is something BIS havent done AFAIK. Maps with natural choke points, thought through unit balance, and themes like CQC or combined ops or island defence against invasion. These maps should not replace the usual awesome big map from BIS. 1st prize would be custom made maps (see wake island for an example). 2nd prize would be specially made parts of the big map customised for specific mp themes.

As said, introducing choke points defies the reason games like ArmA exist. Yes, I'm a die-hard co-op fan when it comes to ArmA, because I personally believe that that is exactly what it does best and has been tailored towards. If I wanted a fast paced, close quarters FPS, I'd place COD or anything of that genre. Therefore please fo take some of the more cynical parts of my post with a pinch of salt

Missions have objectives, those are your natural 'choke points' or better said 'focus points' that should encourage opposite sides to meet and engage. Narrowing down the routes that people can take to those points goes against the sandbox and open essense of ArmA. The greatest strength of ArmA is that if one route is too heavily defended, you have an entire 360 degree scope around the objective from which to engage, rather than a COD/BF3 experience where after 20mins on a map I can accurately tell you where 90% of routes people will take, snipers will camp, ambushes will be laid, etc.

Restricting the area of operation is acceptable of course, good to be able to constrain a PvP game to a certain part of the island if its intended to be more up front and personal.

2. player movement system. bf3 has it down, armaverse has a long way to go based on current engine. Enough said as i am sure bis know about this, but it is good to feel like your unit does what you want most of the time and fluidly. makes mp pay more about what you want to do and not what you are frustrated in trying to do.

I agree ArmA is more clunky than the fast paced FPS shooters, but then I guess it gets away with it in some respects because of the scale of the world you play in, not that I'm using that to defend the less than commendable animations.

3. unlockable weapons. no thanks! just put it here to give arma purists a heart attack.

hehehe

4. easy to get into game modes, that are well thought through and easy to understand quickly. so often in arma series MP i'd run around lost trying to figure out where the fuck to go. sure hardcore mode can remove crutches but things like easy to interpret glowing icons on objectives/flags can make getting into a game much easier, find the action and get to a place where they can make a difference to the match.

MP already uses waypoints/objectives which are visible on your screen. The issue you describe issue is more than likely a server admin's decision to turn 'veteran' on and remove waypoints, forcing people to use maps, compasses and the what-not.

5. rather than have roles like engineer, recon, etc I'd like to see an intelligent weight system that prevents everyone taking a sniper rifle and javelin. or applies a appropriate speed penalty to such.

Being implemented I do believe, the weight system that is. The problem being that if it can be done in real life, then ArmA allows it. I see no reason, besides SOPs, that a soldier cannot carry an AT weapon and a marksman rifle at the same time. Javelins are damn heavy though, would be nice to see them manportable by two people (sighting uni and launcher tube), which would work nicely with your wish for more team play.

6. squad advantages. now this may be in defiance of the spirit of arma series. but promoting team play leads to much better games. things like ability to set up squad respawn point, only squad leaders being able to call in air support or air drops for ammo, etc.

Did you ever play Return to Castle Wolfenstein MP? They had classes down to a T with this respect, with the medic being the only one who could heal, and the Officer the only one who could give out ammo or call in artillery. In terms of ArmA, I'd rather see it be done along the lines of a radio weapon - which then exludes the ability to take AT weapons (although this solution has always been possible in all of the series actually) and grants you the options to call in support. Calling in replens and casevacs adds to MP realism and immersion in my eyes, would just have to ensure it can't be spammed, and be punished for calling it in to idiotic locations.

7. better MP interface. make finding and joining a game child's play with easier interpretation of the options available at a glance. make it easy.

Agreed, and additionally a more streamlined method for people to be able to grab the addons required by a server.

[Tonci87 163]

OMG when will some guys realize that NOT HAVING CHOKE POINTS ON THE DAMN MAP is a good thing! In arma you are not forced into some stupid Choke point were no sane soldier would go IRL. You can even choose to attack the enemy from behind if you don´t mind the extra walking. This is one of Armas big advantages over other FPS

[rye1 21]

The flame fest begins

[katipo66 94]

The flame fest begins

It doesnt have too though, its just a discussion on MP options... im not big on forced choke point type maps myself, but i understand what he means by

Maps with natural choke points,

in terms of PVP gameplay...

also he says

These maps should not replace the usual awesome big map from BIS.

Maybe just chill and discuss.. no need to go all drama queen on it!

Edited December 20, 2011 by Katipo66

[batto 17]

OMG when will some guys realize that NOT HAVING CHOKE POINTS ON THE DAMN MAP is a good thing! In arma you are not forced into some stupid Choke point were no sane soldier would go IRL. You can even choose to attack the enemy from behind if you don´t mind the extra walking. This is one of Armas big advantages over other FPS

Maybe you play ArmA too much.

And not, assault on Iranian embassy doesn't have to be like CoD, BF3.

[Tonci87 163]

Maybe you play ArmA too much.

http://img521.imageshack.us/img521/9100/sas1467122c.jpg

And not, assault on Iranian embassy doesn't have to be like CoD, BF3.

FPDR yeah as if Arma is about storming buildings...

[[evo] dan 79]

All buildings will be enterable in arma 3 which makes every building a chokepoint.

Everytown will have streets which are naturally going to turn at least some of them into chokepoints.

I am sure that Lemnos has natural choke points where the only way to avoid it would be to sail around of fly around that area.

[metalcraze 290]

And another monthly "BIS plz make another Battlefield!" thread

player movement system. bf3 has it down, armaverse has a long way to go based on current engine.

Are you sure it isn't the other way around? BF3 is nothing but a crappy floating camera. Even when lying down and crawling your ironsights float through the air and you are perfectly able to shoot - wtf?

No soldier body simulation at all. Just a bodyless camera with a weapon glued to it.

official maps developed with a mp focus and a game play THEME in mind.

And official maps of BIS are totally anti-mp and anti-gameplay.

I must've been suffering greatly while playing them in MP but I didn't know that.

so often in arma series MP i'd run around lost trying to figure out where the fuck to go.

How about you will start listening to your teamleader instead? That will make a game both for you and for other guys so much less frustrating and even prevent you from being banned from the server for stealing that only chopper available in the mission.

rather than have roles like engineer, recon, etc I'd like to see an intelligent weight system that prevents everyone taking a sniper rifle and javelin. or applies a appropriate speed penalty to such.

So you say that every soldier in the army is a perfect engineer and medic, all in one?

Even BF didn't know that.

squad advantages. now this may be in defiance of the spirit of arma series. but promoting team play leads to much better games. things like ability to set up squad respawn point, only squad leaders being able to call in air support or air drops for ammo, etc.

What? Are you joking?

ArmA is all about teamplay but what you suggest is ruining it with silly respawns and locking support only to squad leaders who may be dead? What?

You complain that there's not enough teamwork but you are the one who runs around randomly - are you sure you are not hating ArmA's realistic teamplay here actually?

Hopefully none of what you suggest will ever happen in ArmA. I don't want to see good series turned into yet another arcade crap like BF with zero teamwork.

FYI in reality soldiers are not floating cameras who turn around in 1 ms and make insta-headshots to ever respawning enemies.

Dat horrible teamwork-less MP of ArmA series: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X5C6fekQJa4

Edited December 20, 2011 by metalcraze

[rye1 21]

I told you the trolls would come.

[batto 17]

FPDR yeah as if Arma is about storming buildings...

as if war is only about fighting in [put your favourite non-urban environment here]

as if anyone cares what is ArmA about

[dmarkwick 261]

How about you will start listening to your teamleader instead? That will make a game both for you and for other guys so much less frustrating and even prevent you from being banned from the server for stealing that only chopper available in the mission.

...

You complain that there's not enough teamwork but you are the one who runs around randomly

What are you basing these comments on?

[metalcraze 290]

I told you the trolls would come.

Because when someone points out that a guy you agree with doesn't know what he's talking about or simply disagrees with his point of view he is a dirty troll.

What are you basing these comments on?

"so often in arma series MP i'd run around lost trying to figure out where the fuck to go. "

Last time I've checked there was Teamspeak 3. Then there's a, no matter how broken, but VoN - which everyone on your team will hear if you'd wish so. And finally there's a simple text chat where you can just ask where to go. Even if it's one of those pseudo-coops like Domination a mere text chat is there.

Alternatively OP can always play on a server with a proper teamwork.

Edited December 20, 2011 by metalcraze

[maddogx 13]

as if anyone cares what is ArmA about

In fact, too many people care a little too much about what they think Arma should "be about". That's why this thread (and threads like it) generally don't go anywhere productive.

[batto 17]

In fact, too many people care a little too much about what they think Arma should "be about". That's why this thread (and threads like it) generally don't go anywhere productive.

I think of ArmA as a game with endless possibilities. So while most of you will continue playing long coops on big maps in ArmA3, some of us newbies (me) would also like to play some CQB, let's say something similar to counter-strike with all of team intelligence you guys use to play your coops. And it doesn't have to end up like CoD, BF3. And I'm sure it would attract a lot of people and make good reviews. And most important thing is that you could just ignore it.

[metalcraze 290]

So what's stopping you from playing in some urban area and ignoring the rest of the map?

You'd be surprised but even long coops mostly take place in some localized areas unless it's one of those really really long multi-session operations.

And what makes people think that CQB IRL is closer to CS than it is to ArmA?

[batto 17]

So what's stopping you from playing in some urban area and ignoring the rest of the map?

You'd be surprised but even long coops mostly take place in some localized areas unless it's one of those really really long multi-session operations.

I'm just saying that BIS should put some effort into making some official "arcadish" MP mods/maps because it will attract more people. More people happy => more money/publicity for BIS => better games in future.

And what makes people think that CQB IRL is closer to CS than it is to ArmA?

I made link to CS to express the lack of CQB centric MP mod.

[metalcraze 290]

I'm just saying that BIS should put some effort into making some official "arcadish" MP mods/maps because it will attract more people.

So what you are saying that a team with a certain limit on resources should ditch focusing on improving what ArmA really is in favour of what it never meant to be?

And will it attract the right kind of people which is even more important?

BIS also tried to do what you ask with Shapur and Proving Grounds. And look - almost nobody plays on them.

More people happy => more money/publicity for BIS => better games in future.

I'm afraid reality doesn't work that way. The amount of people playing the game is often opposite to the quality of the game. See BF3/CS/CoD etc.

Because most people don't want to play the game as a team, they just want to get frags. That's why they need extremely simple games.

And ArmA isn't about getting frags and beeing leet which is something some people don't understand.

I made link to CS to express the lack of CQB centric MP mod.

You don't need any CQB centric mod. CQB is already in the game. CQB is close quarters battle. Weapons don't behave differently in long range battles and up close.

All one has to do is making a mere mission with a great possibility of CQB.

Edited December 20, 2011 by metalcraze

[batto 17]

So what you are saying that a team with a certain limit on resources should ditch focusing on improving what ArmA really is in favour of what it never meant to be?

The thing is making this stuff probably isn't that hard because you have the great RV engine under the hood which does the hard work. And how could you know what is ArmA meant to be? Are you working in BIS?

And will it attract the right kind of people which is even more important?

It'll attract the kind of people with money (at least I hope so). There could be special forum subsection for them if you're scared.

I'm afraid reality doesn't work that way. The amount of people playing the game is often opposite to the quality of the game. See BF3/CS/CoD etc.

Because most people don't want to play the game as a team, they just want to get frags. And ArmA isn't about getting frags and beeing leet which is something some people don't understand.

As I said it doesn't have to end up like BF3/CoD. Remember, it'll run on RV engine.

[NoRailgunner 0]

Imho BIS need to rework their mp browser/GUI to be more userfriendly eg:

+ general stuff about server/clan/group and contact info

+ overview window/screen of all addons/mods needed and allowed

+ which gamemode/mission and difficulty is currently set

+ which settings (3rd person on/off, crosshairs on/off...) are active

+ option to download required addons/mods

If one likes to play A3 with a bit more realism he just clicks + joins on "ArmaSim" servers and one who likes it more casual/shooterish he clicks + joins the "ArmArcade" servers. Or is my idea too simple and the A3 MP interface should be hard to use? :)

Guess that A3 will be released with some good SP, Coop and PvP missions just be patient. Meanwhile try + enjoy some more A2OA/CO missions or even try to make one or more. ;)