Do ArmA Firefights Exsist?

[maturin 12]

Saying that ACE mod improves on this by adding wind which extends firefights noticeably.

AI-fired rounds ignore wind. It's the accuracy config changes and engagement range extension in ACE (and ASR, and Zeus) that make firefights longer. Wind makes almost no difference until you're shooting at ranges beyond the maximum of vanilla AI anyway.

Anyway, tpwcas schould for sure help to increase your firefights duration.

Uh, won't giving the AI the aid of LoS checks make them more efficient fighters in CQB and shorten engagements?

Duration of a firefight isn't the only issue here, and relies more on the tactical layout of the battlefield than the excellent mod which makes things better and realistic across the board, rather than just dragging things out.

[metalcraze 290]

AI-fired rounds ignore wind. It's the accuracy config changes and engagement range extension in ACE (and ASR, and Zeus) that make firefights longer. Wind makes almost no difference until you're shooting at ranges beyond the maximum of vanilla AI anyway.

Yep I know. But you vs. the AI horde isn't the only scenario in the game. With ACE coop p. much stops being just a shooting range for humans like it's in vanilla where it's only AI that can't hit anything.

Uh, won't giving the AI the aid of LoS checks make them more efficient fighters in CQB and shorten engagements?

Most engagements aren't CQB anyway.

[NacroxNicke 11]

Also engagements are up to company or batallion levels, with a lot of suppressive fire going on. In ArmA at most we have platoon level engagements, since more means lag or overstacking.

Also ArmA2 world suffers of having less cover than real life counterparts (and an AI that can't use them effectively)

Edited January 12, 2013 by NacroxNicke

[eggbeast 3684]

this was a great firefight - 3 hours from beginning to end

it was so intense i could only film it during the quieter skirmishes

we were ambushed while moving into the AO (caught in the open) and had to pile into the enemy for a close quarters scramble - I had a shotgun in my truck so swapped weapon to that and it was very useful for suppression support to our marksman.

at one point the enemy kicked us so hard we were pushed back from our start line and had to broken arrow arty on our position then push back through all covered in blood and shaking...

close quarter knife kills, nades going back andforth, enemy choppers strafing us with MG's from above, etc etc it was great fun - happens a lot, but with the rug_dsai on arabic, the flalujah map and the torches on the AK's the constant awareness of enemy proximity and flanking etc made it exhausting.

couple of folks baled early on leaving 3 of us to see it through.

i think it shows a good example of firefights - we tend not to use NVG at night any more - makes the game much more interesting with flashlights added to many weapons (and we often call in lumes)

EvblsNS5JOs

[dmarkwick 261]

I guess some simple fixes would add up to better emergent behavior, e.g. like say having the AI's rate of fire related to his remaining ammo.

[THEBLITZ6794 10]

Microcover is also a MUST imo

[Recta DP 10]

Sometimes that type of firefight just pans out though it's almost like luck of the draw.

I remember a squad on squad firefight in Arma 1 using SLX mod in which literally had my squad fighting against an AI squad over a small ridge in the terrain outside Cayo that seemed to last for 30 minutes -all at under 200m. I have no idea how this happened as both of our teams stayed prone pretty much the whole time and when guys stood up to run they were injured but generally not killed. The longer the fight raged on, the more intense and utterly captivating it became with my team eventually winning but with heavy losses.

Funny how an experience like that burns into your memory in a way that most PC firefights never will as this must have been 6 years ago.

You are right. I played OFP, Arma 1 and Arma 2 but somehow the most memorable and "realistic" firefights took place in Arma 1. I can't figure out why Arma 1 provided a better experience, but there are a lot intense Arma 1 firefights that are "burned into my memory" and no Arma 2 firefight ever created this feeling of intensity and realism.

Somehow Arma 1 not only felt more realistic than Arma 2, also the graphics did a better job: The animations are pretty bad compared to Arma 2*. but the simulated world felt more stable; there was - for example - far less LOD-Switching. Constant LOD switching (imho) breaks the immersion...

* The only exeption: Arma 1 death animations are better than that the death animations in Arma 2. In Arma 1 a body falls fast and realistic, in Arma 2 a soldier gets hit and after a moment the death animation starts and looks more like a dancer performing a death scene on stage, than a real body falling to the ground...

[Shagulon 1]

Interesting thread. Three issues:

1) the AI isn't that great at finding good cover and staying in that good cover.

2) the AI is a little too accurate even on lower accuracy settings

3) this is the big one, YOU the player are too accurate and can easily be a huge deciding factor in any engagament.

Wish BIS could come up with more settings/configs to really create the experience you want in this regard.

[rye1 21]

Well, some possible solutions listed too.

If the AI isn't good at finding cover, give them it. Micro-terrain.

That was a great suggestion imo.

[domokun 515]

Interesting thread. Three issues:

1) the AI isn't that great at finding good cover and staying in that good cover.

2) the AI is a little too accurate even on lower accuracy settings

3) this is the big one, YOU the player are too accurate and can easily be a huge deciding factor in any engagament.

Wish BIS could come up with more settings/configs to really create the experience you want in this regard.

I couldn't agree more.

---------- Post added at 00:23 ---------- Previous post was at 00:22 ----------

I guess some simple fixes would add up to better emergent behavior, e.g. like say having the AI's rate of fire related to his remaining ammo.

I second this motion

[chrisb 196]

Interesting thread. Three issues:

1) the AI isn't that great at finding good cover and staying in that good cover.

2) the AI is a little too accurate even on lower accuracy settings

3) this is the big one, YOU the player are too accurate and can easily be a huge deciding factor in any engagament.

Wish BIS could come up with more settings/configs to really create the experience you want in this regard.

1/ This applies to Vanilla but not to modded. Lots of videos showing ai taking and using good cover in sig (modded version)..

2/ Again, set up right in the configs etc, and in a modded version of the game, this would not apply.

3/ I would definitely agree with that, although playing in first person all of the time, can help reduce that quite a lot.:).

[froggyluv 2136]

If the AI isn't good at finding cover, give them it. Micro-terrain.

OFP had that micro terrain when terrain was set to max IIRC although I don't think they understood it, it worked to help them nevertheless. Was wondering if the new LOS (line intersect) commands could be used to tell AI that current position breaks the enemy LOS and thereby is good cover when under fire? That would create a natural cover system over just walls and static landscape objects.

[BasileyOne 10]

you can enforce terrain grid resolution on both mission, server -levels.

but thats all about resources.

especially, memory consumption.

even in OFP:R you can easily hit 2Gb barrier[and thats 30x-100x smaller textures and terrain].

so, with 640bit binaries in Arma3[Arma4? Arma5 ?]thats issue vanish/disappear.

[Shagulon 1]

1/ This applies to Vanilla but not to modded. Lots of videos showing ai taking and using good cover in sig (modded version)..

2/ Again, set up right in the configs etc, and in a modded version of the game, this would not apply.

3/ I would definitely agree with that, although playing in first person all of the time, can help reduce that quite a lot.:).

Hi Chris, yes I've seen your videos before, and they have given me hope. I have spent time modding the game, with varying degrees of success. The problem is, I find I spend too long endlessly playing the same missions over and over, comparing behaviour/results. Before I know it I have spent 4 hours doing this, and find that I have actually not really spent much time playing for enjoyment and having fun.

I think these are the "rough edges" the devs are hoping to get around in Arma 3, or at least I hope they are. You shouldn't need a degree in Arma and a hell of a lot of spare time in order to get Arma to its maximum potential... and I really do think the game has huge huge potential.

Some extra, and clearer config settings, fully explained would really help. I dream of a time where you can just compare config settings on the forums, to tweak the game to whatever style you like, which I think would be entirely possible, the engine is flexible enough.

[iceman77 18]

The closest you're going to come to realistic firefights are in pure pvp maps. Which is ironic since good, pure pvp is nearly non existent nowadays. I haven't played PR in a while, but I imagine that's where it's at if you want realistic engagements & firefights.

[sv5000 127]

If in doubt, just set yourself up against overwhelming odds ;)

[Ambo0120 1]

interesting reading this

[iceman77 18]

If in doubt, just set yourself up against overwhelming odds ;)

LOL I guess. But, kind of defeats the whole point of having realistic firefights.

[Shagulon 1]

The closest you're going to come to realistic firefights are in pure pvp maps. Which is ironic since good, pure pvp is nearly non existent nowadays. I haven't played PR in a while, but I imagine that's where it's at if you want realistic engagements & firefights.

Project Reality is the only form of online game I play, well except dayz. Agreed it is the closest I feel I ever get to being satisfied and engaged.

[iceman77 18]

Project Reality is the only form of online game I play, well except dayz. Agreed it is the closest I feel I ever get to being satisfied and engaged.

You do realize I was talking about Arma2 PR & not BF PR?

[Shagulon 1]

why would i assume you meant battlefield in an arma 2 forum? what in my post prompted you to check? I'm baffled.

[delta99 34]

If in doubt, just set yourself up against overwhelming odds ;)

This doesn't help whatsoever.

[iceman77 18]

why would i assume you meant battlefield in an arma 2 forum? what in my post prompted you to check? I'm baffled.

Because alot of times BF PR is is what people think when you just say "PR". Even to alot of Arma players. In any case, no worries.

[Shagulon 1]

Oh I see. Don't play BF.

@ChrisB, if you come back in this thread, have you ever thought about making a mod pack for AI, your own compilation, and uploading it?

I know a whle bunch of people that would really benefit from your time spent experimenting :)

[JetlinerX 1]

Wow! I didnt expect the amount of suggestions, discussion, and so on over this topic! All in all, I really think firefights are turned into skirmishes for these reasons (compiling the other reasons by some on this post)

Cover. Or, microterrain/cover (I dont recall what you guys were calling it) You're all right here. There is far more concealment than cover in these games, and while the ratio, is bad, the fact that there is concealment is not. But I would take a ditch, or battered wall over a bush or some grass in a firefight, any day. :)

Life. In all honesty. Nobody keeps their head down as much as they do in real life. Sure, you definitely dont wana die when there is no re spawn, but that does mean you wont make a mad dash, and roll the dice. In real life however, this is not going to cross your mind as soon as it would in ArmA.

As you can see there, most the guys are suppressing, rather than looking for kill shots. And none of them stepped way out to try to take on the enemy in the middle of the open. Nobody WANTED to die, where as in ArmA... that doesnt cross our mind like it does with them. (Am I being too vague?)

Finally, Aim. Watch that video again. Out of how many of those gun shots, do you think actually hit, and killed their target? Not many, if any. Where as we can pop out of cover, see our target, bring up the sights, fire, and duck in, confirming the kill before they even know what hit em.

To tie all those together, we can aim well because we dont have to worry about our lives, and the AI isnt in very good cover. = Lack of longer combat.

MYTH BUSTED. >_<