ARMA 2: Operation Arrowhead / Combined Operations / Reinforcements update 1.62

[CHB68 10]

[Beagle 684]

@ Dwarden... I dont get it, I really don't get it, even after more than 7 months of waiting you still could not fix very important game functions broken since 1.59 ???

I really can't believe this.

See my Signature and read again what you wrote in CIT regarding the topic 7 months ago.

All I can see as progress that the target version is shifted another two numbers to 1.63 beta.

Edited July 27, 2012 by Beagle

[Tonci87 163]

Pistols were to weak before and now they made it worse? ACE help...

[Mr. Charles 22]

It's not only pistols, but AKs, Shotguns, SMGs and the Lee-Enfield too.

FPDR

[Beagle 684]

Pistols and small caliber assault rifles were much to strong after the change in balistics in 1.59 this is just a correction...and a 9mm or .45 pistol will be almost useless beyond 10m against a soldier in full body armour, thats just a fact, Sames goes for 5.56mm and 5.45mm beyond 200m range. That's a lesson learned at nauseum in the last 10 years of desert warfare on daily basis and it is nice to see ArmA adapt to the reality.

Since 1.59 you could drop someone much to easy at 800m range with a 7.62mm weapon. In this case ArmA is right and DayZ is the mod that has to adapt by stripping off the ridicoulous amounts of hitpoints for players and zombies.

Edited July 27, 2012 by Beagle

[Tonci87 163]

Ok seriously BIS, why?

[Mr. Charles 22]

/snip

So i need 5 shots to the heart to kill a civ with a PP19?

[Seitan 8]

could just make these tweaks within the mod insted of messing up the whole game for the sake of dayz.

gj bis. fuck this shit.

No one playing DayZ like's this. No one playing vanilla ArmAII like's this. So we are all in the same situation. Loooking like this -->:butbut:

Maybe it's just a fuckup. It's not in the changelog is it? Why change weapon damage so radically now when ArmAII lifespan is coming to it's end?

[Placebo 29]

Infraction handed out for abusive comments.

If people cannot discuss this like civilised adults the thread will be closed and people infracted/suspended/banned.

[kylania 568]

See my Signature and read again what you wrote in CIT regarding the topic 7 months ago.

All I can see as progress that the target version is shifted another two numbers to 1.63 beta.

The weapons and vehicles mentioned in your CIT tickets aren't in DayZ so don't need to be fixed. My friend told me when I complained about DayZ bugs being fixed after a few months of existing while years old ArmA2 bugs weren't being fixed that "obviously DayZ players are properly reporting their issues and ArmA2 players aren't". Well, obviously that's not the case.

With regards to the weapons nerfs, were other weapons nerfed as well? Mk16 for example? That's a 5.56 weapon that isn't in DayZ, was it's damage reduced to "match reality"?

If everything was nerfed, that's disappointing, but whatever. If only DayZ weapons were nerfed and the nerfs also apply to stock ArmA2 that's completely unacceptable.

No one in ArmA2 ever said "Hey, my Lee Enfield is too loud and that guy's M1911 is thee times more powerful than it should be!" BIS, please stop breaking my milsim because a few kids wanna fight zombies and gank newbs before the next CoD comes out in a few months.

[MavericK96 0]

Btw. I've just realized something - unless I'm completely mistaken, Arma2 OA now supports five different kinds of antialiasing:

• FSAA (standard antialiasing option up to very high)
  
• MSAA (standard antialiasing option, numbered values above very high)
  
• SSAA (3D resolution higher than interface resolution)
  
• FXAA
  
• SMAA (PPAA)
  

And up to three of them can even be combined, so you could use FSAA||MSAA + SSAA + FXAA||SMAA. :D

Correct, except "FSAA" is just the general name for anti-aliasing (stands for Full Scene Anti-Aliasing). Really when you use in-game AA you are using MSAA regardless of setting, just in varying qualities.

Technically, I believe all traditional methods can be called "FSAA".

[Beagle 684]

So does this mean 1.62 is mainly a DayZ patch? That's odd because DayZ was interesting for lets say 2-3 weeks but then it simply got boring because there nothing to do there except griefing.

A short test reveals...indeed thre Ak74 series got nerfed exclusively while the M16 remains as it was. A.I. will survive even headshots now.

Thats a catastrophy for every OPFOR player in PvP.

Edited July 27, 2012 by Beagle

[kotov12345 10]

what is problem with dayz ? thousand copies more sold, thousand more players play mp at same time need respect them :) so we got patch :)

[Beagle 684]

I revert back to 1.60 right now.

[MavericK96 0]

Shit, I thought those damage changes were a DayZ only thing and I was defending ArmA 2...now it sounds like it was a 1.62 patch thing (yet nothing in the changelog about it...?). That is kinda disappointing. I never noticed a problem with pistol damage or otherwise.

[PreedSwe 18]

So does this mean 1.62 is mainly a DayZ patch? That's odd because DayZ was interesting for lets say 2-3 weeks but then it simply got boring because there nothing to do there except griefing.

A short test reveals...indeed thre Ak74 series got nerfed exclusively while the M16 remains as it was. A.I. will survive even headshots now.

Thats a catastrophy for every OPFOR player in PvP.

If this is true, then I agree that it will upset game balance in non-DayZ games.

[LeeManatee 4]

So does this mean 1.62 is mainly a DayZ patch? That's odd because DayZ was interesting for lets say 2-3 weeks but then it simply got boring because there nothing to do there except griefing.

A short test reveals...indeed thre Ak74 series got nerfed exclusively while the M16 remains as it was. A.I. will survive even headshots now.

seems like a split in the face. why i was so fucking dumb to think that buying every arma game year after year is a good idea to support bis? only new features i ever seen in arma2 and oa were implemented way back in ace same goes for weapons and vehicles.

old bugs stay for years and no single dev give a dam about it.

really sad that bis go all the way to please dayz crowd over actual arma players, and such words like "lack of resources" while arma 2 co now give a good profit to make arma 3 great, but no, let's favourite hype guided crowd that join and leave with every new hype.

[MavericK96 0]

I'm not going to get too worked up over this, but I really would like an explanation from BIS. If this was done purely for DayZ then it could have been done in the mod itself, not in 1.62.

[Beagle 684]

I don't think the "DayZ crowd" is pleased by any of the changes. It is definately not the "Dayz crowd's" fault

. Nobody asked for such changes like we see in 1.62 as far as I can see in the DayZ forums.

[zonekiller 174]

other issues i have seen while running BattleZone Mission on 1.62

1/

is that some vehicle types dont seem to target other vehicle types any more

not 100% on this , but BMP v Jackel just seem to just look at each other and will not fire , needs more testing.

2/

the script ive been using for the last year or more to delete empty or damaged vehicles "it never has failed before" is now failing to complete the script 1 out of 30 times roughly

if the vehicle is destroyed it ok , but if !canmove or empty it now fails sometimes

the script does not stop working as if i destroy the vehicle it then deletes after the alloted time,

this has been in from the last few betas, i was hoping it would not be in the patch but it is.

i have tested every thing i can , it just seems the script is on pause.

3/

AI dont seem to target other AI or playes as well and seem to run away more - still testing and will have more detailed info soon.

[Make Love Not War 10]

...really sad that bis go all the way to please dayz crowd over actual arma players, and such words like "lack of resources" while arma 2 co now give a good profit to make arma 3 great...

Whoa, back the truck up for just a second. Did somebody at BIS really say something about a "lack of resources" when refering to recent ARMA development? I find it very, very hard to believe that such a statement was made considering the sales over the last couple of months. Got a source or link, because that would blow my mind (not in a good way)? Thanks.

Also, the new weapon damage values are ridiculous. The only way they would make sense is if, as Beagle had suggested initially, they assume an armored opponent. But, that can't be the case, as they apply across the board to civilians, insurgents and other militias who are clearly not wearing any protection whatsoever. So, this is all very mystifying. Can we get an official explanation from BIS please? Well, worst comes to worst, I guess we'll can mod things back to a realistic state.

[CHB68 10]

I don't think the "DayZ crowd" is pleased by any of the changes. It is definately not the "Dayz crowd's" fault

. Nobody asked for such changes like we see in 1.62 as far as I can see in the DayZ forums.

And it wasn't worth a single word in the changelog. How knows what else has been changed, requested or not.

[PuFu 4600]

And it wasn't worth a single word in the changelog. How knows what else has been changed, requested or not.

Indeed it would have been great if those sort of changes would actually be listed in a comprehensive and extended changelog (including all the data changes that are never released with the betas).

[derakoren 12]

When you Guys (BIS) released 1.62 LINUX Server, why you release only windows version? You Can't prepare all version before release full patch? :(

It's not normal work in your team!

[MavericK96 0]

Whoa, back the truck up for just a second. Did somebody at BIS really say something about a "lack of resources" when refering to recent ARMA development? I find it very, very hard to believe that such a statement was made considering the sales over the last couple of months. Got a source or link, because that would blow my mind (not in a good way)? Thanks.

Yeah, that was more or less a direct quote from an interview about ArmA 3, I think. Something about how they had to cut out some features they initially wanted due to "lack of resources". I'll see if I can find the quote, it's somewhere in one of the ArmA 3 subforum stickies.

I don't think it was related to ArmA 2, though.