Arma 3: Multiplayer - is everyone running around in unrealistic super gear aswell ?

[pvt_ryan 10]

Maybe a tad slower on movement...

OMG COD much? Just kidding, but I think this feature would be nice. It doesn't even have to be that complicated.

[oxmox 73]

I really hope that these allegedly weight restriction in form of vests is going into this direction. Someone above did hit the nail on the head, without weight restriction a single infantry player has more surviveability than a tank and very high firepower. Part of it is true in reality but you dont meet such atg systems on every corner when you get contact with an enemy soldier.

Armored vehicles in ARMA 2/Arrowhead is the least developed part in my eyes when it comes to the gameplay and balance. They dont have any countermeasures like AIR has ingame. We players can accept that we have only a hitpoint system and no reactive armor, but at least balance the things which are possible. RPG´s ingame are already very powerfull itself how they are implemented and very easy to use in comparison to real life, but the massive numbers of these little high tech weapons is the grave for every serious player who are into vehicle combat. When entering combat in a armored vehicle and meeting any non AI player, you can assure that almost everyone has a high tech ATG weapon in his backpack.

Vehicles in ARMA are just a big part of the game but have it the hardest ingame currently due to certain issues.

A lot of players i met on servers did agree with this view, that it is even too simple to destroy tanks ingame for infantry units. I know that also in real life armored vehicles dont have it that easy, but in ARMA 2/OA they are just too easily destroyed due to not any restrictions of atg weapons, especially since no weight restrictions are implemented.

Adjusting this issue would lead to a more deep teamplay, a better ground vehicle combat and overall a better quality of the gameplay itself without hurting that much the infantry gameplay. Heck, this would even draw attention to more customer..those who are more into vehicle combat.

Edited April 3, 2012 by oxmox

[Beagle 684]

There are five main reasons why vehicles suck in ArmA II

1. lonewolfing...armoured vehicles are not supposed to go alone thats mainly the players fault

2. Overpowered and overranged AT Weapons, mainly SMAW, MAAWS and RPG with PG-7VL/VR the VR in game has fivefold the effective range compared to the real one.

3. Spawn...the easiest way to decimate a tank company at 2000 is by simply using spawn...just respawn with ATGM on your back so you can fire all 25 seconds

4. Autolock...all portablöe missile system in arma do autolock. the olny one that is FF is the javelin and it has at least a lock on time, but METIS Dragon etc. all autolock instantly making tham even more dangerous than Javelin

5. Tab lock and magic radar and full vehicle fire abnd targeting control from any seat is the last nail in the coffin.

[metalcraze 290]

Point 3 yeah - it's kinda funny to see some people playing Warfare and then complaining that whole ArmA has fragile BMPs facing neverending hordes of infantry with AT weapons when in a proper norespawn coop or pvp mission even a single BMP is a very deadly weapon and a ridiculously deadly weapon in experienced hands.

I agree with a point above though that series are missing some IRL countermeasures for many ground vehicles. Would be great to see them implemented in ArmA3.

[oxmox 73]

The weight change would be just possible to implement wheras countermeasure i.e. reactive armor is probably impossible right now and not every vehicle has countermeasures. The current main issue is that every player has a one hit kill against vehicles in his bags. Everyone of us is doing that.

You talk about Warfare server, well this is even more funny since the modder could have here adjust this but didnt at all, I would love to know why. They had a chance to adjust it.

On these servers you can buy high tech Javelin/RPG´s for very low money which can destroy most vehicles with just one hit. Wheras vehicles cost multiple times more. Warfare servers are even worse since you can spawn a whole AI squad with anti tank systems. With an armored vehicle you would avoid to get close to a spawn anyway, aswell from cities or towns without any infantry support.

Beagle mentioned more points, we all know that devs should rethink about them especially since they are that long around.

The weight change is just an idea to improve the game from some kind of super rambo to a more real soldier, to balance the big vehicle part of the game and a chance to bring in more new players who appreciate this but stayed away so far.

Edited April 3, 2012 by oxmox

[metalcraze 290]

Reactive armor is not hard to implement. It can just use an invisible weapon slot and corresponding graphics. When reactive armor blasts away incoming rocket - simply play an animation of it doing that with reactive armor graphics removed from a vehicle afterwards. It just needs proper automation.

The current main issue is that every player has a one hit kill against vehicles in his bags. Everyone of us is doing that.

Try playing a proper mission

If BIS is to nerf AT weapons for Warfare/Domi with their infinite respawn - it will effectively kill norespawn (or even respawn after a long break) objective-based missions simply because BMPs are very deadly when ArmA is played the way it's meant to be played. It's not uncommon for one BMP taking out almost a whole squad simply because we can't just come back and blast it away with ATs.

Encumberance of course may help, but it probably won't stop Warfare/Domi exploits, just make a life of everyone being AT dude harder.

[celery 8]

when ArmA is played the way it's meant to be played

How cute that someone still says that. :)

[Defunkt 431]

More authentic damage, detection and targeting is an absolute must-fix, probably the single most important thing. I haven't played ArmA in a long time for all sorts of reasons but decided to try PR 0.15 this weekend. I was pretty much done with it by the time our Warrior had exploded as the result of a single RPG hit fired from a treeline 600m away. Even BF3 includes a better abstraction of vehicle targeting and damage systems.

[sickboy 13]

More authentic damage, detection and targeting is an absolute must-fix, probably the single most important thing. I haven't played ArmA in a long time for all sorts of reasons but decided to try PR 0.15 this weekend. I was pretty much done with it by the time our Warrior had exploded as the result of a single RPG hit fired from a treeline 600m away. Even BF3 includes a better abstraction of vehicle targeting and damage systems.

Isn't that more a feedback on PR than on ArmA in general or other mods? (for instance, such behavior should be non existent in ACE).

Regardless, I do agree that improved behavior out of the box would be rather welcome!

---------- Post added at 15:16 ---------- Previous post was at 15:15 ----------

How cute that someone still says that. :)

:D Yea, how is it meant to be played again?? :D

[Defunkt 431]

I know this sort of thing is a lot better with ACE but it's hard enough keeping a co-op community on the same page (cue plug for Six Updater), ACE never gets used in public P-v-P. Sure PR could eventually evolve some improved systems but really it should be able to rely on ArmA's core for a better quality simulation than it presently offers.

[metalcraze 290]

Well if BIS says that they will now implement encumberance and advanced medical system and are thinking on weapon resting - maybe they will get some other ideas from ACE (also known as 'stuff that always should've been there'), hopefully for vehicles too. Since complaints about tab-targeting for example are quite numerous.

Now I don't know much about systems in Hinds DLC for Take On - but so far to me it looks like BIS is trying out proper targeting systems there. This can easily mean that they are trying to do away with tab-targeting.

[sickboy 13]

I know this sort of thing is a lot better with ACE but it's hard enough keeping a co-op community on the same page (cue plug for Six Updater).

With fear for the off-topic hammer, "cue plug for Six Updater" - what do you mean with this - as a matter of fact it has never been easier to keep your community on the same page with Six Updater no matter how many mods (10, 20, 50, 100, you name it) :)

If you wanna know how, I propose we move to the SU thread, support section, or skype chat ;-)

[Defunkt 431]

Yep, have used SU, it works great. I just know you never miss a chance to pimp it. :)

[sickboy 13]

Yep, have used SU, it works great. I just know you never miss a chance to pimp it. :)

oO ... I see what you did there, and I played right into it! :P Bravo!

[oxmox 73]

Reactive armor is not hard to implement. It can just use an invisible weapon slot and corresponding graphics. When reactive armor blasts away incoming rocket - simply play an animation of it doing that with reactive armor graphics removed from a vehicle afterwards. It just needs proper automation.

Try playing a proper mission

If BIS is to nerf AT weapons for Warfare/Domi with their infinite respawn - it will effectively kill norespawn (or even respawn after a long break) objective-based missions simply because BMPs are very deadly when ArmA is played the way it's meant to be played. It's not uncommon for one BMP taking out almost a whole squad simply because we can't just come back and blast it away with ATs.

Encumberance of course may help, but it probably won't stop Warfare/Domi exploits, just make a life of everyone being AT dude harder.

What do you mean with playing a proper mission ?

I play on the pvp servers which are available out of 90% just coop servers and many of these are vanilla servers without any mods, except some of them have mods only on server side. The playerbase isnt that big that you can pick the cherries only and it wont grow bigger if the gameplay doesnt improve. All these houndreds of mods wont help here, they rather confuse new players.

A BMP can be dangerous like every other armored vehicle aswell, alot of players dont need to come back to blast them away with AT´s they have it in their backpack with their rifle, its a weak armored/hitpoints infantry support vehicle which you can kill with one shot. There are warfare servers with restrictions i.e. you cant take a javelin with an MG or sniper....but you can take a DMR + SMAAW with 3 rockets lol ...but this is at least a good direction.

Edited April 3, 2012 by oxmox

[Beagle 684]

What do you mean with playing a proper mission ?

I play on the pvp servers which are available out of 90% just coop servers and many of these are vanilla servers without any mods, except some of them have mods only on server side. The playerbase isnt that big that you can pick the cherries only and it wont grow bigger if the gameplay doesnt improve. All these houndreds of mods wont help here, they rather confuse new players.

You're are absolutely right. ArmA servers count is rapidly declining since last summer Whenever I set min player count to 20 I usually get only shown 3 CTI servers shown for moren than half a years now.

[metalcraze 290]

Boring Domination that you call "90% just coop" is not coop. It's just a bunch of dudes human-waving AIs in random places on the map.

By proper missions I mean the objective driven missions that seem like a dying breed these days. Where missions are created by people for every gameplay session and feature objectives, limited human and weapon resources - with a balance. Where dudes carry around 1 AT weapon per fireteam at best while other dudes have their own roles (commander, medic, auto rifleman, assistant rifleman, radioman etc etc) and have other stuff to carry. No respawn.

Coop or PvP too.

To me stuff like "hey guys wait here I'll go respawn and bring back some ATs on a BMP I'll quickly buy" is just ridiculous. It kills the whole point of ArmA series. No wonder we have people who are surprised why there's no bunnyhopping in yet - simply because they don't know the meaning of a tactical shooter anymore. When the game is overtaken by respawn-spamfest of soldiers and tanks - it doesn't end well.

Edited April 3, 2012 by metalcraze

[oxmox 73]

Boring Domination that you call "90% just coop" is not coop. It's just a bunch of dudes human-waving AIs in random places on the map.

By proper missions I mean the objective driven missions that seem like a dying breed these days. Where missions are created by people for every gameplay session and feature objectives, limited human and weapon resources - with a balance. Where dudes carry around 1 AT weapon per fireteam at best while other dudes have their own roles (commander, medic, auto rifleman, assistant rifleman, radioman etc etc) and have other stuff to carry. No respawn.

Coop or PvP too.

To me stuff like "hey guys wait here I'll go respawn and bring back some ATs on a BMP I'll quickly buy" is just ridiculous. It kills the whole point of ArmA series. No wonder we have people who are surprised why there's no bunnyhopping in yet - simply because they don't know the meaning of a tactical shooter anymore. When the game is overtaken by respawn-spamfest of soldiers and tanks - it doesn't end well.

Objective driven mission are for sure interesting , but refresh your server list and just watch that it is not that easy to find pure public pvp servers and the taste of every gamer is different, I dont like myself no respawn. Project Reality could be an success for a while there are almost 100 players online just for the beta currently, but it is a big modification and mods are often not long term ..but the core game is. 1 AT per fireteam seems for me reasonable, but I dont want to talk in numbers just saying that what we have currently needs to be improved with all the supermans in supergear. Without that a really big part of the game (vehicles) gets neglected !

I wonder myself why they didnt change the timer for respawn, of course it is bs to have the option or not even the option to avoid such situations like "hey i just respawn and the tank is dead ha ha"...this cheap, destroys immersion and drives away players who are into such games like ARMA but want quality gameplay. ARMA is still a niche game even it is a mix of simulation and shooter, it doesnt attract both fully but it is a good mix...it just needs minor adjustements. Take CTI for example, you can spawn big numbers of AI soldiers with the same weapons, take javelins for example...another issue where you could talk about it.

The game series wont raise up in customers or hold for longer after the first hype of the release if they just release a new ARMA title with improved graphics and new weapons or units , the gameplay itself needs fixes aswell. To rely just on the mod community is not enough and have its issues.

Iam comming from simulation games but played also army shooters, so I know what is or was available on the market.

Do you know what shocks me more comming back to ARMA after a while, to see that on certain evenings more people are playing city life roleplaying instead of pvp. :rolleyes:

Edited April 3, 2012 by oxmox

[NoRailgunner 0]

How will you enforce quality gameplay if many players on public servers can't communicate or don't like to play in a team as bloody squaddie? How to setup a working team with strangers that have their own thinking and expectations? Respawning at will and wherever you want is imo wrong, it should be only at HQ/MOB + timed delay or somewhere far behind the own lines at "The Cemetery of Heroes". Something that make people think twice of their tactical actions or habits....

[antoineflemming 14]

Boring Domination that you call "90% just coop" is not coop. It's just a bunch of dudes human-waving AIs in random places on the map.

By proper missions I mean the objective driven missions that seem like a dying breed these days. Where missions are created by people for every gameplay session and feature objectives, limited human and weapon resources - with a balance. Where dudes carry around 1 AT weapon per fireteam at best while other dudes have their own roles (commander, medic, auto rifleman, assistant rifleman, radioman etc etc) and have other stuff to carry. No respawn.

Coop or PvP too.

To me stuff like "hey guys wait here I'll go respawn and bring back some ATs on a BMP I'll quickly buy" is just ridiculous. It kills the whole point of ArmA series. No wonder we have people who are surprised why there's no bunnyhopping in yet - simply because they don't know the meaning of a tactical shooter anymore. When the game is overtaken by respawn-spamfest of soldiers and tanks - it doesn't end well.

But I didn't think ArmA was a tactical shooter? I mean, that's basically a whole different genre of games. Games like Rainbow 6, the original Ghost Recon games, those are tactical shooters. They aren't meant to be perfectly realistic. But, it would be good if ArmA were more of a tactical simulator (as in taking the tactical aspect of tactical shooters and applying it to ArmA's simulator gameplay). AA3 had squad roles and yet it isn't a tactical shooter or a simulator. But, that's what I suggested in another thread. Actual squad roles. And actual platoon, squad, or fireteam unit structure in game, and the unit levels dependent on the number of player slots. I agree. And, I mean, it could be like a Domination game mode, as in different Areas of Operation. But it wouldn't be just destroy a tower, clear out enemy armor kinda thing. It'd be different AOs with different objectives/missions. Respawn would have to be dependent on the server. Otherwise, you might as well just have a COD-like Spec Ops kinda deal, where there's a lobby and, people who die spectate, and when the mission is completed or all players are dead, they return to the lobby. It's either that, or a Domination-like game mode like I described, and when you die you can't respawn until either the mission is completed or all players die. THEN you respawn at your base, or whatever, and then you take on the next randomly selected mission (in a different area of the island). So a tactical mission-based Domination game mode. So then you have the whole island to operate on, you have multiple Areas of Operation like Domination, and you have actual objective-based missions like tactical shooters.

[b00ce 160]

when ArmA is played the way it's meant to be played.

ArmA is like Garry's Mod, there is no "right" or "wrong" way to play it. Rally racing a battlebus through a combat zone is just as "right" as "playing" ArmA as a "Tactical Realism Simulator" with an über hardcore realism unit. :)

[oxmox 73]

How will you enforce quality gameplay if many players on public servers can't communicate or don't like to play in a team as bloody squaddie? How to setup a working team with strangers that have their own thinking and expectations? Respawning at will and wherever you want is imo wrong, it should be only at HQ/MOB + timed delay or somewhere far behind the own lines at "The Cemetery of Heroes". Something that make people think twice of their tactical actions or habits....

We have to look for teams or just hide if we cant carry our swiss knife anymore to be ready for almost every situation like other units have to do aswell, and the whole vehicle gameplay actually would be not neglected. It is just simple. Besides that pvp is not only CTI we have other game types aswell. When is the last time someone saw a public server with CTF ?

Edited April 3, 2012 by oxmox

[metalcraze 290]

I always thought ArmA was a military simulator and from what I know from this silly thing called 'reality' after soldiers get killed they ride home in a box, not appear at a base and buy themselves M107, SMAW and LAV25 (cool sallaries)

And then complain that every soldier on the opposing side also has AT and an APC thus reality has to nerf itself.

I can see why people would dislike norespawn. Except why complain that in a respawn-spamfest missions everyone takes AT if one can't take responsibility for his actions himself?

Yes you can play ArmA in any way you want, but don't complain that bros on the same server also play in any way they want. While I agree that more realistic features are more than welcome in ArmA - don't try to put them there from a warfare-player perspective. Because the game is clearly balanced for realism as well. People will still run in Warfare with ATs in ArmA3 - don't doubt that.

[xeno 234]

ArmA is like Garry's Mod, there is no "right" or "wrong" way to play it. Rally racing a battlebus through a combat zone is just as "right" as "playing" ArmA as a "Tactical Realism Simulator" with an über hardcore realism unit. :)

Well said, tastes are different and I'm happy that there's nothing which limits you to play the game in just one way or just one mode, that would be utterly boring.

ArmA servers count is rapidly declining since last summer Whenever I set min player count to 20 I usually get only shown 3 CTI servers shown for moren than half a years now.

You must be playing another game or simply limiting yourself to just one mode. Player and server numbers have increased in the last half year:

http://stats.six-updater.net/history_half_year

Xeno

[sirscorpion 10]

I always thought ArmA was a military simulator and from what I know from this silly thing called 'reality' after soldiers get killed they ride home in a box, not appear at a base and buy themselves M107, SMAW and LAV25 (cool sallaries)

And then complain that every soldier on the opposing side also has AT and an APC thus reality has to nerf itself.

I can see why people would dislike norespawn. Except why complain that in a respawn-spamfest missions everyone takes AT if one can't take responsibility for his actions himself?

Yes you can play ArmA in any way you want, but don't complain that bros on the same server also play in any way they want. While I agree that more realistic features are more than welcome in ArmA - don't try to put them there from a warfare-player perspective. Because the game is clearly balanced for realism as well. People will still run in Warfare with ATs in ArmA3 - don't doubt that.

I think the major problem in warfare, AND any military sim is Scale, what scale do you want? realistic or realism does not mean that some one has to prema die if killed and no spawn. no is the mode of How warfare mechanics work. realism also does not generally mean that an m14 wight is this much and looks this way. what most people fouces on is the micro side of it, while in the end it needs to be a good entertaining game with no frustrations.

Example, in warfare = if lets say a tank costs 10 times what it is now, and AT weapon is 10%-15% of that cost, then you have some balance and realism just in that. sure u can take this much gear but if u die you will need to buy all that again, u dont have that much money so ull have to play more tactically, manage your gear properly. and so forth. we did that on our small little server had a 10v10 warfare match go for 3 days. with great great fun and balance. its how you scale all the tools and toys, to balance things out, in that you get realistic feel. other wise cough up 27mil USD and get ur self a level D simulator