Balancing?

[-Coulum- 35]

i mean are there really that few people who find it strange that now suddenly every single soldier can heal himself? i mean once, ok. but infinite amount of times? that's just weak design. and it also breaks immersion. at least for me.

I absolutely hate it. Its not much better than COD regeneration. I am hoping that BIS has something up their sleeve because honestly I simply won't play mission that have it. Its far too gamey.

Its embarrassing when I show the game to friend and all its awesome/realistic features and then they figure out how dumb the medical system is.

[Variable 322]

i was talking about the FAKs and not how "balanced" the sides are in this game. i couldn't care less about that. i'll fight you with a spoon, if i have to and have fun doing so:p.

i mean are there really that few people who find it strange that now suddenly every single soldier can heal himself? i mean once, ok. but infinite amount of times? that's just weak design. and it also breaks immersion. at least for me.

I can say that there are a lot of players that see the current arcadey medical system as one of the biggest flaws of Arma 3. Many of them don't want to hear about Arma 3 until this particular design flaw is fixed. Unfortunately, they are not vocal, or no active at all on the BI forums.

No doubt however, the broken medical system is the most glaring flaw in Arma 3 at the moment.

[Sniperwolf572 758]

I only disagree on this point, they do crouch, but here's how it works:

Default: Standing, joggging.

Takes contact: Stands still and looks at enemy, NEVER EVER SPRINTS WHEN CROUCHED

Shooting at enemy: Fires a few shots whilst standing, Turns slightly to either side for no reason, crouches to keep firing or prones and starts slowly spinning to either side.

This is what the AI always do, it's fairly predictable and makes them easy targets. I'd rather see them sprint/crouch sprint to cover on first contact.

Yep, they often do the shuffle patterns like that as if to stay in formation when his "combat-buddy" or TL moves ever so slightly. If they're all stopped and engaging, it doesn't happen. In the last Infantry screenshot, you can see the first pair of "combat-buddies" and the other guy next to me is what I'm assuming my "combat-buddy". He was crouched and engaging, then I moved slightly and he went prone and turned to the side.

One thing I've observed they also stay crouched a lot more when in cover that provides more benefit when crouched than what I'm used to seeing, the binary "I'm prone and fully behind cover, now I'll stand up so I can get shot".

The point of my exercise above, is that I can't observe much "suicide" difference between A2 and A3 AI as metalcraze claimed, they seem, with negligible margin of difference, exactly the same amount of stupid, smart and insane in combat. You'll still get the insane 800m headshots in one run, but they'll still miss you 10 times standing 200 meters away from you in the other. They'll be really smart sometimes, and they'll be really dumb the other times.

[chrisb 196]

In my experience of A2 and A3, both AI’s are pretty poor, however, A3 AI look worse as there was so much depending on them. It was almost of no surprise that arma to arma 2 was little difference, but its just plain disappointing that the A3 AI is so bad, considering there have been mod’s that sorted all these problems out, years ago.

I don’t play using stock AI, haven’t done for many years now, but I don’t think the game is really aimed at SP now, more for the MP gamer market, pvp or mass coop shoot em up, where AI intelligence is of little concern. I know its gaming but its not gaming I and all of the players I know do, its what set the series apart and made it different, thats why the very talented mod makers made those AI mod/addons, they fully enhance the games potential, they saw it and players that use them see it too.

Great thanks to those mod/addon makers for making the game special.

Its not going to change that much over the next few years I don’t suppose, once it gets released proper and players pour in to play online MP, then the SP side is going to get more forgotten. Mod’s will have to save the day, but the mod’s I and all the players I know, plus those that contact me regards the mix I use, all use, or are starting to use, those mod’s just won’t be in A3, so we’re all, well, out on a limb really, those mod makers have all left it seems..

Its really just evolution of the brand if you like, it was inevitable that they went more towards the market they are moving toward, that’s where the business sense decides they should go. I know I get members saying I moan about AI too much, but that tends to come from the gamers side more than the regular (hobbyist) series players. Its o.k. talking about scopes and if a gun looks or sounds realistic or not, but what’s the point, if you play against AI to any degree, your not going to get a realistic game anyway, far from it, doesn’t matter what weapon your using. Its fine if your team/group are playing other groups, just if your team plays against AI or your playing SP, in-fact AI is needed in almost any situation in-game, either to fill in, make up numbers, or be the main enemy force.

Still there's modded Arma 2, life saver..

Another moan over..;):p

[metalcraze 290]

Also, plenty of crouching there, which you kinda mentioned is non-existent.

It's non-existent. Crouching at the cover spot that forces AI into crouch position doesn't count.

Crouching before going prone 2 seconds later also doesn't count. It's just a slow transition.

the doc gets shot while running to cover from the hill.

Here they are seconds after they defeated them all and annouced "clear" and moved off a bit.

As they start to move on to cover, one guy gets shot from the village.

Suddenly, two enemy AI appear way behind them and they're both dead.

Do you really find nothing wrong with this behavior? No pattern to this? Nothing wrong with them simply running into enemies?

If it was ArmA2 they would be sitting a lot tighter at the spot instead of "nobody is firing at us for 3 seconds it's clear let's move on OH SHI-!", wait for a lot longer to make sure it's 100% clear which would mean all those enemies that came at them from sides and the rear would be coming at them when they were still by the scripted medic event and thus would be at a disadvantage themselves.

What's worse is that the mission is very badly and heavily scripted PMC-style and there's no rush at all, yet AIs do rush.

[gossamersolid 155]

I can say that there are a lot of players that see the current arcadey medical system as one of the biggest flaws of Arma 3. Many of them don't want to hear about Arma 3 until this particular design flaw is fixed. Unfortunately, they are not vocal, or no active at all on the BI forums.

No doubt however, the broken medical system is the most glaring flaw in Arma 3 at the moment.

This problem can be bandaid'd with a simple scripting command BIS should implement:

unit canHeal boolean

Instead of the previous iterations of the engine where it was a hardcoded config value (annoying as ever for freedom in mission development).

This applies to the engineer ability as well.

The value would be defaulted to false unless you are a medic class that has the config value attendant=1, but mission developers could choose to allow other units to heal if they want.

[metalcraze 290]

This problem can be bandaid'd with a simple scripting command BIS should implement:

unit canHeal boolean

Instead of the previous iterations of the engine where it was a hardcoded config value (annoying as ever for freedom in mission development).

This applies to the engineer ability as well.

The value would be defaulted to false unless you are a medic class that has the config value attendant=1, but mission developers could choose to allow other units to heal if they want.

And how many will bother to do that?

And what about all other missions? That are balanced with FAKs in mind and that depboing each one to apply that command is PITA - it's not any bandaid at all.

The problem here is that the choice offered is either using a broken system with FAKs or breaking it further. Plus the heal still lasts for 4 seconds regardless. Some games have a lot slower health regen than that. And the soldier getting healed still can fight while medic just waves hands at him.

We got promised the improved medic system 2 years ago and instead we've gotten a dumbed down one for a casual player. And it's also dumbed down compared even to OFP's one from 12 years ago. This can't just be excused or ignored.

Edited June 25, 2013 by metalcraze

[metalcraze 290]

Quadbike - now for all factions

RPG-32 and NLAW should be of the same usability

...I don't know what to say

Sniper weapons have realistic ammo air friction and tweaked reload times

Except GM6 still has the exactly the same fire rate which is "balanced" to mirror bolt-action Cheytac

[dmarkwick 261]

And how many will bother to do that?

And what about all other missions? That are balanced with FAKs in mind and that depboing each one to apply that command is PITA - it's not any bandaid at all.

Really? ALL the alpha missions that are destined to be broken anyway?

The problem here is that the choice offered is either using a broken system with FAKs or breaking it further. Plus the heal still lasts for 4 seconds regardless. Some games have a lot slower health regen than that. And the soldier getting healed still can fight while medic just waves hands at him.

We got promised the improved medic system 2 years ago and instead we've gotten a dumbed down one for a casual player. And it's also dumbed down compared even to OFP's one from 12 years ago. This can't just be excused or ignored.

As I see it the FAKs would be better utilised as a stop-the-bleeding measure, with maybe a small health improvement say 20%. As for proper medical system, I guess we wait & see. I might guess that it would be modular requiring a mission module presence.

[metalcraze 290]

Jay Crowe said nothing else will be added to medic system. This is all we will have.

QA lead said no new features will be added during beta.

Not only no new modules will be added but first aid is gone too. With a non-believable excuse of "we had trouble syncing it in MP" (man I guess in ArmA2 it got synced for 4 years just by a pure miracle)

Clearly we complain here just for the sake of it.

Edited June 25, 2013 by metalcraze

[-Coulum- 35]

Jay Crowe said nothing else will be added to medic system. This is all we will have.

QA lead said no new features will be added during beta.

Clearly we complain here just for the sake of it.

Where did you here that horrible news?

Edited June 25, 2013 by -Coulum-

[Smurf 12]

Gamespot E3 LiveCam, if I'm not mistaken.

[-Coulum- 35]

So then goodbye to any chance of bipods/weapon resting?

[purepassion 22]

QA lead said no new features will be added during beta.

Do you think that makes any sense with half of the content such as UAV's etc not even being there?

This was never said especially as it implies that the game is at the current stage feature complete. Which it's absolutely not :)

Regarding the bipods, the models were added seperately during the Alpha. I'd say that's a good sign.

[metalcraze 290]

It's obvious there will be more content. But we are talking gameplay here

http://www.arma3.com/news/report-in-miloslav-cinko-qa#.Ucm8_dj75DU

I would say that any new engine feature is unlikely at this stage – at least until the full game has been released. However, somewhat smaller, polishing changes are all still supported.

EDIT: ok checked configs for both NLAW and RPG32

Same max effective range, same dispersion, same optics zoom, same weapon lock delay, same settings for AI, same amount of light on firing even. And of course a trifle like exactly the same optics.

But wait - their rockets gotta be different, right?

Same air friction, same speed, same thrust etc. except RPG32 rocket deals whopping 5% more damage.

I guess AI isn't on par with the player yet and nature haven't balanced itself for now either so must make opfor and blufor launchers exactly the same weapon with a different 3d model.

Edited June 25, 2013 by metalcraze

[byku 13]

....

That's awesome! I love the realism... they create mi-48 and comanche which are nice that they are so different... and then this... with rpg-32 and NLAW. I have no idea why....

Edited June 25, 2013 by Byku

[Cykyrios 10]

Well of course new engines features are very unlikely, that would require a lot of work for not that noticeable a result (probably).

But games features do not necessarily require new engine features; and there are still lots (and I mean lots) of features the game lacks, that will hopefully be added/tweaked during the Beta.

[SimonSays 1]

We dont need NEW features! we just need the old ones improved here and there and bring them on Arma 3 level. if that happens im satisfied! but i got worrys they take more features out like the first aid system and the 3D Editor;-(

[strangere 2]

EDIT: ok checked configs for both NLAW and RPG32

Same max effective range, same dispersion, same optics zoom, same weapon lock delay, same settings for AI, same amount of light on firing even. And of course a trifle like exactly the same optics.

But wait - their rockets gotta be different, right?

Same air friction, same speed, same thrust etc. except RPG32 rocket deals whopping 5% more damage.

I guess AI isn't on par with the player yet and nature haven't balanced itself for now either so must make opfor and blufor launchers exactly the same weapon with a different 3d model.

Seriously BI bending realism because of broken AI is just wrong...

[metalcraze 290]

AI could always handle different kind of launchers quite well. It's arcade deathmatch players who couldn't.

Stuff like "we are doing this to make AI on par with the player" is really funny because this excuse is nothing but a dust in the eyes (especially considering that GM6 was not fixed). Yes making Blufor and Opfor having the same squad composition and exactly the same combat roles for each soldier is totally done because of AI being subpar. Or putting exactly the same weapons on MRAPs with the same control systems. Or giving both sides 6.5mm weapons with caseless ammo as primary assault rifles.

I guess in 2035 there's only one arms manufacturer having complete monopoly over the whole world and so the entire NATO and Iran are forced to buy their weapons there and that will be the plot twist lol

[Smurf 12]

Agreed. And I don't even see the point of it anyway, public TvT gaming (sadly) was never a big thing in Arma and even if it was, balancing things like this isn't the way to go. Deal with it and make do are.

Now I wait for a metalcraze comment on how the "new crowd" + Wasteland ruined everything and I'll have to partially agree.

[Variable 322]

What I don't get is why BIS is stating that "Balancing is made to make the AI on par with the player" while clearly a lot of equipment is just being mirrored between the factions.

What benefit does the game or players have with two identical launchers just with different model?

[chortles 263]

Yes making Blufor and Opfor having the same squad composition and exactly the same combat roles for each soldier is totally done because of AI being subpar.

Considering that the roles are seemingly just default loadouts without actual stats difference between the soldiers themselves, I had thought it was specifically so that either BLUFOR or OPFOR could be "the high tech conventional army" in an asymmetrical warfare scenario (Gaia did talk up the whole idea of reducing the tech parity last year at Gamescom 2013 back when the SP campaign was supposed to have shades of Resistance) and it never occurred to me that AI was even supposed to be a reason for that.

I guess in 2035 there's only one arms manufacturer having complete monopoly over the whole world and so the entire NATO and Iran are forced to buy their weapons there and that will be the plot twist lol

I will concede that this would entertain me just to see the subsequent complaints on the forums...

[Phantom Six 25]

What's the point of making mirroring factions on ARMA. I thought ARMA was never supposed to be "balance" and was about realism. This isn't battlefield or something where you go total PvP and got to have both sides completely balance. If someone wants to make a balance scenario for PvP, there's always just making guerillas vs guerillas with either scrapped up high tech guns or guerillas vs guerillas with some beaten down old tech guns. Now that everything is just a mirror image of each other, making diversed type of scenarios are going to be boring when everyone practically have the same kinds of stuff. It's more interesting playing as the low tech underdogs fighting as part of the resistance here and there as well.

RPG and NLaw functioning the same way, what's the point now. Back in ARMA 2 when western launchers and eastern launchers function differently, it serves more purpose, now it doesn't matter. For example, having the higher tech launcher at times, you have better optics and precision to hit a target sometimes, but you're more limited to ammo while when you have the lower tech launcher, you can salvage more from dead enemies, but its harder to hit, you can make more decisions on your approaches.

Honestly, focusing on balance on ARMA is totally pointless. The main thing to be focusing about would be actually fixing the flaws of the AI as much as possible. Where's the 3D Editor when it was already in ARMA 2, but incomplete.

So why are we using this FAK system for ARMA 3, ARMA 2's first aid modules was much more superior. The FAK system makes the medic pretty useless when you can just kill a person, salvage his FAK and then just use it over and over again to heal up. Break a leg? FAK and you're good and running again. What's embarassing is that, even Dragon Rising's first aid system was more superior (go ahead and crucify me for saying this, but its true). You use first aid dressing in DR only to stop the bleeding while you need an actual medic to heal. In ARMA 3, you can just use a FAK and you're healed enough to run and fight. In ARMA 2, the medic is actually important to heal you. In ARMA 3, well, if you lose your medic, just salvage FAKs.

Something I find quite embarassing about the AI would be that, if we already have supression against AI from mods and scripts, how come by default they aren't suppressable. If they already pop smoke with ASR AI or UPSMON, why can't they do it by default. If they take cover before in the past, why are they all rambos now.

[chortles 263]

I just verified one of the changelog items: on dev branch the GM6 Lynx rate of fire is noticeably faster than before and faster than the (current) M320 LRR rate of fire, and it's now distinctly not-a-mirror.

Also, for the thread that was locked re: the ACP-C2, both the Vermin SBR and ACP-C2 using 9 mm were marked as known issues, albeit ACP-C2 is marked as "should use .45 ACP" while Vermin SBR was marked as merely "wrong ammo description" -- that being 9 mm -- with the claim that it already does use .45 ACP, so I guess BI decided that in 2035 there was a thirty-round .45 ACP mag? (Since the longest I'm aware of in the real-world is the UMP 45's twenty-five-rounder.)

Edited June 26, 2013 by Chortles