Balancing?

[lucable 10]

All weapons will make sense. And nobody will complain. Even CQB respawn TDM players will just have to switch to TRGs and MXC and that will be it. Zero sacrifice.

I agree, we just have to wait.

[blu3sman 11]

When going to town players will have to pick short weapons and outside they will use longer ones.

No, they won't use longer ones. Why would they, if we still don't account for effect of barrell lenght on muzzle velocity.

[Wolfstriked 11]

quoting the whole thing because it's good :P

awesome post!

i really hope the roles will be made more distinct. no offense BI but it looks really half assed at the moment (i do realize/hope it's due to alpha). make more defined gameplay. if it's too vague it won't create any good moments. this may sound silly but medic gameplay is important because it's makes people bond and goes beyond "shoot this, shoot that".

same goes for repair specialists. i remember one time on some server we were standing clueless next to our damaged chopper. then this guy came along saying "i might be able to fix this" in a workmanlike tone. this type of unforced roleplayish stuff really adds to the experience. but it only works, if these roles really work.

so +1000000 for making special equipment take up more room but making it more important and useful at the same time.

also:

FAKs should stop bleeding. that's it. the whole quake medkit thing we have right now is just silly. who needs a medic if every dude you kill has a magical medkit on him.

I agree. :)

This is better than what we have now: https://twitter.com/IvanBuchta/status/342286940072181760/photo/1

I agree its way better as you will see the weapons 3D model in the scope,the reflections on the scope itself and the front post moving around and that all adds to much better experience.Now I would love to see the outside blurred but I dont think they can do that effectively since the scope moves around the screen and so a simple overlay blurred mask would not work.

No, they won't use longer ones. Why would they, if we still don't account for effect of barrell lenght on muzzle velocity.

Rifles have better accuracy than the carbines in Arma3.I choose them over carbines all the time.Carbines NEED a reason to use them fleshed out.

[das attorney 858]

No need for clunky weapon collision even! Make MXC and TRG20/TRG21 not pointless by adding weapon auto-lowering. The shorter the weapon - the less often it will get auto-lowered. Or it won't get autolowered at all if you'll strafe through a door compared to MX and especially MXM - making MXC and TRG ultimate CQB weapons since even lowering weapon for 0.5 secs would make you vulnerable for those 0.5 secs. When going to town players will have to pick short weapons and outside they will use longer ones.

That's quite a nice idea. Not sure I'd like an auto-lower thing as the solution but there must be some sort of incentive to make short barrelled guns king in (their native) urban environments.

Edited June 7, 2013 by Das Attorney

[metalcraze 290]

SWAT4 is a game where weapon is a virtual object floating in the air together with the camera. SWAT4 also has hitscan. There was no need for Irrational to add autolowering but they did and it felt very natural and responsive.

If BIS took the stance system idea from SWAT's direct competitor - R6 Raven Shield why not take the best from SWAT4?

Can be just as smooth - weapon collides with something? Immediately lower it like ~45 degrees, don't break any movement animations, kinda like reloading and moving. Not colliding anymore at the point where it was? Auto-raise it immediately. Yes it may and probably will still clip a bit when lowered but to you and to other people it will look a lot better than what we have now or getting stuck in a doorway. There should only be a collision calculation needed for the engine, no the actual weapon collision that will make you stuck for 0.1 secs until it's lowered or something - so the movement will be perfectly smooth.

Kinda like 3D scopes with whole 3D space magnified. Not optimal solution but miles better than just 2D overlay.

[EDcase 87]

The auto-lowering was suggested somewhere else. I think even on the Feedback tracker somewhere. (I'll have a look)

Even though it may get annoying sometimes its got to be better than getting stuck in a doorway or between rocks :mad:

I wonder if it would be smooth/fast enough in ARMA

[bad benson 1733]

I agree its way better as you will see the weapons 3D model in the scope,the reflections on the scope itself and the front post moving around and that all adds to much better experience.Now I would love to see the outside blurred but I dont think they can do that effectively since the scope moves around the screen and so a simple overlay blurred mask would not work.

.

i was thinking about that and i think the best way would be to do the following.

since the scope will always be in the pilot lod there shouldn't be a problem adding a poly plane that only appears when the sights are up. so the mask would be applied to that plane as a texture. then they could experiment to find a texture that does the job best. and it would also leave room for experiments for the modders.

here's a quick and dirty mock up of what the end result could look like.

http://i.cubeupload.com/guBFMR.jpg

sort of like a mix between old and new.

[brynjard 2]

No. I have nothing against certain popular mission types, but going down that rabbit-hole to suit one sector of the player base is a fundamentally bad idea. Balance is something that should be left to the mission-maker.

Couldn`t be more agree.

If you could chose in the creating of a mission or host of a server it would be great for both.

[jgaz-uk 133]

This is better than what we have now: https://twitter.com/IvanBuchta/status/342286940072181760/photo/1

The Immage in your link looks right where is that from??

New A3 sniper; the magnification outside of the sight spoils the games realism way too much.

http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=151261520

http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=151261169

http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=151260971

Opinion expressed nothing further to add :cool:

Edited June 7, 2013 by jgaz-uk

[Smurf 12]

The Immage in your link looks right where is that from??

New A3 sniper; the magnification outside of the sight spoils the games realism way too much.

http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=151261520

http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=151261169

http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=151260971

Opinion expressed nothing further to add :cool:

Ivan Twitter. You can also see it in motion on the Pre-E3 Hangout. It has all screen zoom, hope to see it adressed somehow (darker borders, blur), but it is better;

[chortles 263]

jgaz-uk, none of the three Steam Community screenshot links work, and Smurf is correct, the new sight (what the ARCO will look like) was shown off during the 1 July livestream.

[Phantom Six 25]

No they can't

You haven't made many missions have you...

I made a mission where you snipe.... as a guerilla with a hunting rifle in ARMA 2... I would like to be able to do something where you get some measly weak piece of equipment against high tech again... If Green isn't some guerilla force all the time, then the feeling of OFP resistance is lost in ARMA 3? Playing the resistance and guerilla fighters are what some people who are looking for a challenge find the most fun at times. What a pity....

Overall, nothing should ever be balance since a good tactician would position himself where his men have the advantage while the enemy is in a disadvantage. If you're fighting an equal battle, then your tactics and strategies have failed you. If you want to balance things... just make a mission where you give both side the same guns...

[Wolfstriked 11]

i was thinking about that and i think the best way would be to do the following.

since the scope will always be in the pilot lod there shouldn't be a problem adding a poly plane that only appears when the sights are up. so the mask would be applied to that plane as a texture. then they could experiment to find a texture that does the job best. and it would also leave room for experiments for the modders.

here's a quick and dirty mock up of what the end result could look like.

http://i.cubeupload.com/guBFMR.jpg

sort of like a mix between old and new.

This seems more immerse than blur,I like it!But you have to see it all in motion to get true effect.

[EDcase 87]

...Overall, nothing should ever be balance since a good tactician would position himself where his men have the advantage while the enemy is in a disadvantage. If you're fighting an equal battle, then your tactics and strategies have failed you. If you want to balance things... just make a mission where you give both side the same guns...

Yes, you can do that for infantry weapons but not heavy stuff like tanks or choppers etc because you won't be able to tell who is who.

I don't know if I'm describing it well enough to convey the limitations of asymetric only battles.

Let me put it another way and then I'll shut up...

ARMA will ALWAYS allow for assymetric battle situations because the mission maker can give inferior equipment to one side. (ie Less ammo, no scopes, smaller fighting vehicles, unarmed choppers etc)

BUT

If you want a PvP game with 4 factions where each side has equal power then it will not be possible because you cant have them all using the same vehicles and aircraft.

Making all the equipment between factions very different will make it impossible to have balanced battles when you want them.

Of course there should be some variation between different factions equipment but their effectiveness should be virtually the same. eg lets say BluFor has a more powerful tank which moves and fires more slowly while OpFor have a slightly lighter tank fires and moves slightly faster but they are both still heavy tank class with weapon damage and armor about the same.

Edited June 8, 2013 by EDcase

[Fap 1]

All I can, and want to say, is this...

Is ArmA not a military simulator? Did it not strive for realism in the past?

Why is it turning into an unrealistic first person shooter, catering for the masses and the money?

I am disgusted, truly. The direction this is going we might aswell call it "Duty Calls 2".

[-Coulum- 35]

Sorry I have not read the last few pages so excuse me if I am missing something but I have to put this out there. If you want perfectly balanced PvP battles (and are willing to sacrifice realism for it) what is so bad about simply giving teams the same weapons. This will give you the perfect balance you want will it not? If you want both sides to have weapons with the same stats, what is the need to have them with different skins as well?

[2nd ranger 282]

This is funny because I remember an Arma 2 OA thread where a bunch of people were complaining about thing not being balanced.

[Cyper 18]

It isn't about balance.

It's about realism, and if you don't agree...

[jgaz-uk 133]

Ivan Twitter. You can also see it in motion on the Pre-E3 Hangout. It has all screen zoom, hope to see it adressed somehow (darker borders, blur), but it is better;

The ability to by pressing a key to shut the other eye would be very realistic

chant the mantra "keep it real" :)

[blu3sman 11]

The ability to by pressing a key to shut the other eye would be very realistic

chant the mantra "keep it real" :)

You have only one eye ingame - the camera (unless using stereo). Peripheral vision has nothing to do with both eyes open. It's normal to have clear vision around the scope using one eye.

This have been covered here on forums hundreds of times.

[jgaz-uk 133]

You have only one eye ingame - the camera (unless using stereo). Peripheral vision has nothing to do with both eyes open. It's normal to have clear vision around the scope using one eye.

This have been covered here on forums hundreds of times.

4x magnification yes but not the 20x serious stuff, what's on the outside of the scope when taking the shot is irrelevant. Use the rubber sir

http://img560.imageshack.us/img560/1520/sniper1p.png (895 kB)

will have to wait & see whats in the Beta, nuf said

[chortles 263]

Of course there should be some variation between different factions equipment but their effectiveness should be virtually the same. eg lets say BluFor has a more powerful tank which moves and fires more slowly while OpFor have a slightly lighter tank fires and moves slightly faster but they are both still heavy tank class with weapon damage and armor about the same.

Based on pettka's comments there is intended dissimilarity and that will increase as time goes on:

As for the sides, they seem more equal now, in Alpha, than they are going to be. Don't forget that Alpha is sort of test bed with some assets, coloured factions with generic equipment. Take a look at Zafir - 7.62mm MG for Red faction, do you think there's going to be a direct counterpart on Blue side? Or take a look at choppers, at least the known for Beta, there are dedicated transport, attack and light for Blue where Red have only semi-light and attack-transport one which is terrifying in both roles. I don't see any direct equation here and I hope you won't either :icon_twisted:

Make of that what you will, but as far as the intent... yeah, it isn't factional "mirroring" as far as vehicles go, there was smoke but no fire. :)

Sorry I have not read the last few pages so excuse me if I am missing something but I have to put this out there. If you want perfectly balanced PvP battles (and are willing to sacrifice realism for it) what is so bad about simply giving teams the same weapons. This will give you the perfect balance you want will it not? If you want both sides to have weapons with the same stats, what is the need to have them with different skins as well?

... yeah, you did miss a bunch; the dev comments seem to be a good summation of what was going on, but the above quote from pettka is more representative of what the official stance is on force structure, while he's said that "I have a feeling that most of you confuse our Task Force Balance with someone aiming to have the same sides. Balancing, as we use the term, it is mainly working on AI and making them in par with players :icon_twisted:"

Also, from another dev:

What we call balancing is inspecting AI and making it more "balanced" for the player. Balancing of the weapons is not done by setting similar weapons to same values or by equating sides to be the exact counter parts. However some of the decisions we made are hard and very unpleasant to do. But it must be for the sake of fluent and balanced gameplay we want to achieve.

And from RiE:

To add to this, as I've said before, the number and types of weapons and vehicles in Arma ballooned over the years without necessarily careful thought about the values in the configs or how the AI might use them. This has a big impact on gameplay, the perception of the AI and the game as a whole. The work - which, as I've said before, should have started long ago - to get a hold of these values has begun under the guidance of devs like Luca and Pettka.

Hope that this summarizes. :)

Now, regarding the whole sniper scope thing:

4x magnification yes but not the 20x serious stuff, what's on the outside of the scope when taking the shot is irrelevant. Use the rubber sir

http://img560.imageshack.us/img560/1520/sniper1p.png (895 kB)

will have to wait & see whats in the Beta, nuf said

... you mean the "rubber" that's seemingly not on the SOS? Based on these two right-side screenshots and these two first-person screenshots, the SOS (I don't know what real-world optic it might be) doesn't have that... and in any case, if my first linked screenshot (and

right before the reload animation begins) is representative, the character model's eye seems to be a noticeable distance rear of the scope anyway!

[metalcraze 290]

Based on pettka's comments [...] Balancing, as we use the term, it is mainly working on AI and making them in par with players :icon_twisted:"

That seems strange they need a whole team to balance only AI, considering that the most glaring issues with it - like extremely slow reactions - aren't even looked into and for "balancing AI" you usually have beta testers playing missions vs AI over and over again.

Coupled with the job description clearly saying "Balancing parameters of AI, weapons, vehicles and other gameplay factors" - it sounds like some damage control is going on in this thread :D

And this is how AI is being worked on?

This step away from real data has been done on purpose for gameplay sake - AI snipers weren't able to shoot at distances longer than 800 meters reliably, they didn't take zeroing that far into account. This would make player extremely overpowered at distances around a kilometre, where player is safe and still deadly with the rifle thanks to better zeroing skills. And nobody wants AI just sitting like ducks and waiting to be shot

Sorry but it is not the right solution.

Wait what? Is this for real? So instead of fixing AI they just gimp weapons for players?

EDIT:

http://feedback.arma3.com/view.php?id=8656

This is by design different in game than in real life, because of balancing issues this works as intended.

They slowed down GM6 fire rate by 2.5 times

Semi-auto weapon that is that slow - this makes no sense at all. What are you doing with ArmA BIS? How is this "balancing AI to be on par with the player" by making OPFOR's GM6 mirror BLUFOR's M320?

Edited June 8, 2013 by metalcraze

[danil-ch 165]

This step away from real data has been done on purpose for gameplay sake - AI snipers weren't able to shoot at distances longer than 800 meters reliably, they didn't take zeroing that far into account. This would make player extremely overpowered at distances around a kilometre, where player is safe and still deadly with the rifle thanks to better zeroing skills. And nobody wants AI just sitting like ducks and waiting to be shot :icon_twisted:

This change is pointless. Even now AI is incapable to confront player at long distances. Devs should give AI ability to use smoke instead of making player less threatening to AI.

They slowed down GM6 fire rate by 2.5 times

Semi-auto weapon that is that slow - this makes no sense at all. What are you doing with ArmA BIS? How is this "balancing AI to be on par with the player" by making OPFOR's GM6 mirror BLUFOR's M320?

What worse that the is no point to keep GM6 in game now. They may just armed OPFOR with M320 and no one notice.

Edited June 8, 2013 by Danil-ch

[KingChubbles 1]

This step away from real data has been done on purpose for gameplay sake - AI snipers weren't able to shoot at distances longer than 800 meters reliably, they didn't take zeroing that far into account. This would make player extremely overpowered at distances around a kilometre, where player is safe and still deadly with the rifle thanks to better zeroing skills. And nobody wants AI just sitting like ducks and waiting to be shot

This terrifies me. I understand that AI is very difficult to program but I feel this is a step in the wrong direction.