Suppression Effect missing in ARMA3

[scrim 1]

No, becoming practically blind is not realistic, nor is it what suppression causes.

[maturin 12]

Agreed, vision should not be obscured. There are lots of features that creative people can come up with.

Just to throw out one idea, what if when suppression effects are active, each sonic snap makes your head twitch or jolt slightly, throwing your sight picture out of alignment or removing you from scoped views?

[Chocolate 1]

Agreed, vision should not be obscured. There are lots of features that creative people can come up with.

Just to throw out one idea, what if when suppression effects are active, each sonic snap makes your head twitch or jolt slightly, throwing your sight picture out of alignment or removing you from scoped views?

Just add increased breathing. The exact same effect you get when you currently sprint and then try to sight in and hit a target from standing. I can't even fathom how anyone could say that is unreasonable or unrealistic. Simply adding a 'dash' of stress and uncertainty.

[metalcraze 290]

Going blurry like a drunk and shaking like a puppy while under duress I don't get.

No need for blur. Just aim shake. Maybe 'slightly' lighter gamma like in A2.

You get aim shake when hit in the hand for the rest of the game or until medic treatment, you still can keep fighting so I don't see a problem with a short 1 second long shake every time a bullet hits or passes really close to you.

Then we have posters crying out about realism while wanting an unreal condition effect added in, they cannot even comprehend the irony of their own requests.

Suppression is a real thing but in ArmA it's impossible to suppress players or AI unless you really start hitting close (players). Shoot to kill or don't give away your position.

That's why there has to be this effect.

[steele6 0]

I know this may be blasphemy, but OFP : Dragon Rising had a good supression system, you could actually see the AI drop to crouch and then to prone when under supression, they would spread out, returning fire would be less accurate, it was fantastic. please give the game a play again and go see it. I wish that was in Arma 3

[max power 21]

Do you want a simulator or not?

Are you implying it's possible to simulate the experience of being shot at on a computer?

[white 1]

so you guys want a bf3-esque supression on arma 3? is that what im reading?

btw, not playing in third person would make you unable to see where shots are coming from, if you want more realism, play without third person.

[kireta21 13]

Guys, I really recommend for you to download and try TPWCAS, at least to evaluate, since it's not just well made mod, but more importantly, is VERY relevant to this thread. Might not be perfect, but since it's best what have been done this far on that matter, ignoring it would be weird, no?

[lordprimate 159]

Guys, I really recommend for you to download and try TPWCAS, at least to evaluate, since it's not just well made mod, but more importantly, is VERY relevant to this thread. Might not be perfect, but since it's best what have been done this far on that matter, ignoring it would be weird, no?

I second that recommendation!! I have used TPWCAS for arma3 since Ollem released it.. LOVE IT. although the find cover part is broken due to different classnames(or something)

[maturin 12]

Could you post videos of player effects from TPWCAS?

[jgbtl292 0]

Do you want a simulator or not?

ohman fuck ...... go to army dude .... this suppression bf shit - is not real !!!! i give up ..... im with 34 jears to old .........

you hear lauder ... you see better .... you have a very low pain threshold .... this an on effect - It's a matter of life and death.

an not this blur bf shit --- sry .. im angy .... when i see this crap ....

bf is complete hollywood style. a movie to play ......... not more........

my comrades can agonizing in the basic training with this crap bf-cod-mfw game imagination from the people:j:

Edited April 3, 2013 by JgBtl292

[batto 17]

Suppression is a real thing but in ArmA it's impossible to suppress players or AI unless you really start hitting close (players). Shoot to kill or don't give away your position.

It's perfectly possible to do suppression (the real thing) on players in ArmA as in any game without respawns and with realistic bullet wounds.

[maturin 12]

It's perfectly possible to do suppression (the real thing) on players in ArmA as in any game without respawns and with realistic bullet wounds.

How can you actually believe that? Do you really think that every single one of thousands of players is going to ROLEPLAY? That a videogame preference for self-preservation is going to mimic behavior in real firefights?

And the game does NOT have realistic wounds. With 5.56mm rounds at 500m and a medic in the squad, I have perhaps a 5% chance of dying from an unlucky headshot in many situations. Where a real person would have to worry about enormous pain, heavy bleeding, a dangerous med evac and months of painful recovery, the worst that's likely to happen to me is a quick medkit usage. Given this situation, the rational decision is to keep calm and line up my next shot.

Sure, suppression effects are not that necessary in a furious close-range engagement where we are likely to hit whatever we spray at. But this is not a CQB game. There are long distances and scopes everywhere. Not to mention all the respawn missions. If players want to game the system and take foolish risks, which they will, and you all know it, so cut the crap, suppression mechanics should be there to punish their bad tactics and reward the good tactics of the suppressing shooter.

[batto 17]

How can you actually believe that? Do you really think that every single one of thousands of players is going to ROLEPLAY? That a videogame preference for self-preservation is going to mimic behavior in real firefights?

It's not about roleplaying. It's about continuing playing game without respawns (or with something else that prevents you immediately hopping back into battlefield). If you feel like Rambo and try to hop from the cover and return fire when is machine gun firing at you and you die you die. If you don't die you were lucky or the MG man did very bad job.

And the game does NOT have realistic wounds. With 5.56mm rounds at 500m and a medic in the squad, I have perhaps a 5% chance of dying from an unlucky headshot in many situations. Where a real person would have to worry about enormous pain, heavy bleeding, a dangerous med evac and months of painful recovery, the worst that's likely to happen to me is a quick medkit usage. Given this situation, the rational decision is to keep calm and line up my next shot.

See? That's the REAL problem that needs to be fixed. You shouldn't survive headshot and medic help should be greatly limited. There's no need for a game to make decisions for a player indirectly.

Sure, suppression effects are not that necessary in a furious close-range engagement where we are likely to hit whatever we spray at. But this is not a CQB game. There are long distances and scopes everywhere. Not to mention all the respawn missions. If players want to game the system and take foolish risks, which they will, and you all know it, so cut the crap, suppression mechanics should be there to punish their bad tactics and reward the good tactics of the suppressing shooter.

The game doesn't indirectly warn you when you

• Hop into chopper and hit a mountain
  
• Hop into car and jump from cliff
  
• Kill a bunch of teammates
  
• Kill civilians
  
• Get out of cover when you know there are 10 snipers waiting for it (but not actually firing)
  
• Sit next to C4 that is going to explode in few seconds
  
• ...
  

You can make many foolish decisions ArmA. Why do you want artifical audovisual warnings that ruins your abilities only on bullets landing nearby?

[whisper 0]

How can you actually believe that? Do you really think that every single one of thousands of players is going to ROLEPLAY? That a videogame preference for self-preservation is going to mimic behavior in real firefights?

And the game does NOT have realistic wounds. With 5.56mm rounds at 500m and a medic in the squad, I have perhaps a 5% chance of dying from an unlucky headshot in many situations. Where a real person would have to worry about enormous pain, heavy bleeding, a dangerous med evac and months of painful recovery, the worst that's likely to happen to me is a quick medkit usage. Given this situation, the rational decision is to keep calm and line up my next shot.

Sure, suppression effects are not that necessary in a furious close-range engagement where we are likely to hit whatever we spray at. But this is not a CQB game. There are long distances and scopes everywhere. Not to mention all the respawn missions. If players want to game the system and take foolish risks, which they will, and you all know it, so cut the crap, suppression mechanics should be there to punish their bad tactics and reward the good tactics of the suppressing shooter.

It's all about the respawn option and how it is setup, and you want to force something into players throat to make up for an unrealistic option existing in the game.

It's about how wounded players can be insta healed. THAT is unrealistic in ArmA.

People will obviously act very differently depending on what they lose when they die. DayZ at least has shown us that.

Stop treating BI engine like the ultimate realism machine that it is not. It has always been more about the sandbox aspect of it and how it is open and adaptable. You are trying to force your own view of how people should play it. Next step is to remove the different respawn possibilities, I guess, because let's be real, they are far more killing to the realism aspect than lack of pseudo suppression system.

I don't see you crying after the unrealistic options put EVERYWHERE in the engine, but you try to force something onto player's throat for realism sake? Strange reaction.

[-Coulum- 35]

Are you implying it's possible to simulate the experience of being shot at on a computer?

Have someone hold a gun to you while you play. When you are killed, have him blow your brains out. That's probably the closest you'll get to simulating that fear. That would change the way I play... apparently for others here that wouldn't phase them though...

It's all about the respawn option and how it is setup, and you want to force something into players throat to make up for an unrealistic option existing in the game.

It's about how wounded players can be insta healed. THAT is unrealistic in ArmA.

People will obviously act very differently depending on what they lose when they die. DayZ at least has shown us that.

No, even no respawn, or DayZ system wouldn't make people react as they would in reality. Short of what I mentioned abouve, nothing can truly simulate the fear you would experience in any life and death situation.

Coulumn: So our "average grunt" would rather sit there behind the rock, waiting for the enemy to get so close they could stab him with a bayonet, or knock him uncocious and slit his throat live on al Jazeera? Nah, he'd be returning fire and tossing grenades like there was no tomorrow, because if he didn't there really would be no tomorrow for him.

Not exactly. He might rapidly peek up return inaccurate suppression of his own, duck back down and then re-position to repeat. But he certainly ain't going to sit back and coolly plinking away like in the video. And This is why teamwork, preparation and tactics are important. That grunt should have buddies not far away to help relive the incoming fire. It is not that unreasonable to just sit behind the rock and "wait it out". Remember, suppression works both ways and the enemies advance will be slowed by it. Maybe his buddies suppress the enemies. Maybe reinforcements will come. maybe the enemy will retreat. Plus there is a huge advantage to making a last stand at close range rather than at far range. Finally, survival instinct is worried about what is the best course of action to keep you alive at the moment. The guys three hundred metres away that will eventually get close, is not such a big deal compared to the bullets whizzing a metre from your head. If soldiers didn't hide, or return quick inaccurate return fire and rather returned precise aimed fire like in that vid, firefights would rarely require a side to advance to close range fighting, because all the enemies would have exposed themselves and been killed before the enemy got within a 100 metres.

Did you play much ArmA? People will hear bullets flying all around them, they will just calmly place an aimpoint over the enemy and press fire. Enemy's dead. Right now in ArmA games, especially PvP if you are not shooting to kill but to suppress you may as well consider yourself dead.

Yeah pretty much. Once two opponents know each others location, its not about suppressing or gaining fire superiority, its about landing a kill shot. Anything less and you might as well not even be shooting.

ohman fuck ...... go to army dude .... this suppression bf shit - is not real !!!! i give up ..... im with 34 jears to old .........

you hear lauder ... you see better .... you have a very low pain threshold .... this an on effect - It's a matter of life and death.

Do you also loose all care for your safety. Do you expose yourself because "meh, its not that accurate, and it hasn't hit yet"

Your right, the effects themselves are unrealistic, but its the results we are after. We want the player to react in a realistic way. See below:

This game is full of shortcuts and abstractions in order to arrive at realistic outcomes when the digital simulation is impossible.

The ends justify the means

Yes, exactly. For some reason tonnes of people refuse to acknowledge this.

Could you post videos of player effects from TPWCAS?

Its really not that spectacular. The colours chage a bit and the camera shakes (doesn't actually throw off your aim). When using magnification the optics jump ever so slightly. Its a step in the right direction but it could be much better if implemented by the devs.

an not this blur bf shit --- sry .. im angy .... when i see this crap ....

bf is complete hollywood style. a movie to play ......... not more........

my comrades can agonizing in the basic training with this crap bf-cod-mfw game imagination from the people

Suppression effects = BF3 unrealistic arcadey... Then why does VBS2 have it!

so you guys want a bf3-esque supression on arma 3? is that what im reading?

No, have you been reading? BF3 suppression is wonky. Something more along the lines of RO or that really arcadey game VBS2...

Edited April 3, 2013 by -Coulum-

[whisper 0]

So remove any healing system options currently available, remove any respawn option available, remove the stupid ability that any lambda soldier on the battlefield can pilot a chopper, and I can name DOZENS of realism failure in ArmA serie.

The best of this engine is that I can setup a no respawn mission, I can setup a non healing mission, I can restrict chopper access to pilots only, etc... I can approach the realism as much as I want it.

It's not that this engine is bilt for realism. It's that this engine is build for sandbox enough to end up doing more realistic things than any other.

Treat your frakking suppression effect the same way everything else is treated in the game.

Seriously, the Marek brother hesitated originally about what they could do with this engine between a FPS and RPG. This engine could very well have ended up being the current Skyrim. Realism is a side-effect of ArmA engine

We want the player to react in a realistic way.

No

YOU want

Edited April 3, 2013 by whisper

[Levinin 1]

This seems like an odd discussion to me. Suppression IRL doesn't happen as a result of the noise of the bullets/shells whatever itself. But from the real possibility that one of them is going to kill you if you stay where you are. So to avoid the "plink plink" people complain of just make AI accurate enough to punish that with player death and not allow this "plink plink" without being in cover.

If the AI isn't that accurate then it isn't suppression. E.g. if I stand 10 yards from you and fire a mag into the air way over your head it isn't suppression, it's firing into the air. If the AI can't shoot accurately enough to actually kill you then hey, it should be possible to stand in the open and pick them off. And the AI shouldn't be soldiers.

And if it happens in PvP because people are not good shots then again, should be fine to just stand and pick people off.

So rather than add crazy effects that mess with the screen improve the accuracies and force players to take cover and fight from cover or die. You know "pinned down" doesn't mean "I have bullets going 10 feet above my head" it means if I put my head up it will definitely get shot off. If that isn't the case I should be moving position to advance, flank or withdraw.

[-Coulum- 35]

No

YOU want

Yes I do. And so do several others (DMarkwick, maturin, metalcrze, twisted, ChrisB, Mr_Centipede, MAXZY et al) thus the we. I am well aware that a large portion of the community is against suppression effects. Thus why I think it should be an option or module in the editor. By "we" I don't mean "we the community".

What about you? Do you "want the player to react in a realistic way"?

So remove any healing system options currently available, remove any respawn option available,

It still wouldn't fix the problem. I don't play with respawns, and I have watched many videos of other player (Shactac) playing with no respawns and incoming fire still doesn't have the effects on players it does in reality.

If the AI isn't that accurate then it isn't suppression. E.g. if I stand 10 yards from you and fire a mag into the air way over your head it isn't suppression, it's firing into the air. If the AI can't shoot accurately enough to actually kill you then hey, it should be possible to stand in the open and pick them off. And the AI shouldn't be soldiers.

So basically what your saying is if it isn't super close or actually hitting we shouldn't be afraid of it. In reality, if a shot landed a metre away, it would take real lack of self preservation to just say, "meh that wasn't that close lets see where the next one goes while I try and spot/shoot the shooter." If someone shot you in reality, the moment you die in arma, would you really play it the same way you do now?

Edited April 3, 2013 by -Coulum-

[chrisb 196]

Its already set to my preference, but its all we need to satisfy everyone, well should be, simple device..:)

[sqb-sma 66]

My *personal opinion* is that because we can never simulate the fear of death felt in real life (in a game where dying means a 5 minute break from the mission) there should be an extra element that tells the player to keep their head down.

This should be non-invasive (In other words, NOT what BF3 does) but definitely noticeable. Firstly, bullet cracks and impacts should be made loud, currently in A3 I've been unaware I was even being engaged! Secondly there should be some sort of gameplay changing effect, bullets whizzing right by your face should make you cringe, and being hit should make it impossible to return fire. This would make players a bit more hesitant about popping their heads into oncoming fire to pop off one accurate shot.

I'm fully against "buit up" suppression effects, like you got in Arma2, where the more you got shot at the worse you got at aiming. The problem was that if the enemy stopped to reload you'd suddenly be stuck with a shaky gun, unable to nail them. The only time your gun should be that shaky is when you're fully fatigued (and honestly, your fatigue level should go down when you get shot at, due to adrenaline) or injured.

I'm sure there are probably better ways to do suppression, but as somebody who worked on modding Red Orchestra (OstFront) this was the combination that seemed to work the best. Implementing it in Darkest Hour made firefights hugely better.

[Maxzy 12]

And why the hell people always mention that suppression=BF3? It already WAS in ArmA2 before BF3 was even announced.

[-Coulum- 35]

Its already set to my preference, but its all we need to satisfy everyone, well should be, simple device..

Yes that is ideal. and having it as a module in the editor, so mission editors can force it on or off would be nice.

I'm fully against "buit up" suppression effects, like you got in Arma2, where the more you got shot at the worse you got at aiming. The problem was that if the enemy stopped to reload you'd suddenly be stuck with a shaky gun, unable to nail them. The only time your gun should be that shaky is when you're fully fatigued (and honestly, your fatigue level should go down when you get shot at, due to adrenaline) or injured.

I don't mind the effects becoming more noticeable the more shots come near I just think the time it takes them to wear off was too long in arma 2. It wasn't that the severity of the effects building up was a problem, it was the fact that the time the effects lasted for also built up. Each shot should cause "the effects" for maybe 1 - 5 seconds max. So even if you have a machinegun fire a whole burst at you, 1 - 5 seconds after that last bullet you are fully effective again. This would prevent the "reload" problem, and make it so continuous fire is needed in order to suppress someone.

Also the effects shouldn't be triggered by only impacts but also shots that nearly pass near the player.

I'm sure there are probably better ways to do suppression, but as somebody who worked on modding Red Orchestra (OstFront) this was the combination that seemed to work the best. Implementing it in Darkest Hour made firefights hugely better.

What exactly were the suppression effects in the darkest hour mod?

And why the hell people always mention that suppression=BF3? It already WAS in ArmA2 before BF3 was even announced.

And it was and still is in VBS2 before BF3. I've asked many times why Suppression = BF3 = Arcadey = he doesn't want realism, and if so why VBS2 has them, but nobody seems to want to answer.

Edited April 4, 2013 by -Coulum-

[Iroquois Pliskin 0]

And why the hell people always mention that suppression=BF3? It already WAS in ArmA2 before BF3 was even announced.

There isn't any in ArmA II - only a slight hearbeat rate increase and hand shake, when bullets lands within a few meters of the player, and even this effect is capped. There is no blurring of vision, or no other schizo hallucinations that incapacitate the player.

It's more like an adrenalin rush, than anything else.

You see, the people here want to simulate the emotional/human psyche response to a firefight, and not any of the physiological dangers, such as ringing in the ears from a loud explosion, or knocking back of the player from, say, MBT cannon overpressure.

Good luck to them. LOL

Edited April 4, 2013 by Iroquois Pliskin

[-Coulum- 35]

There isn't any in ArmA II - only a slight hearbeat rate increase and hand shake, when bullets lands within a few meters of the player, and even this effect is capped. There is no blurring of vision, or no other schizo hallucinations that incapacitate the player.

In arma 2 your hands shake like crazy. Not much different than what is being suggested. The thing that really held back arma 2's system from being useable is the fact that nearby bullets that didn't impact didn't cause the shakiness. VBS2 has the same handshake, plus a quick darkening of the screen edges and some pretty crazy tunnel vision. Both are suppression systems imo.

You see, the people here want to simulate the emotional/human psyche response to a firefight, and not any of the physiological dangers, such as ringing in the ears from a loud explosion, or knocking back of the player from, say, MBT cannon overpressure.

Good luck to them. LOL

No not simulate, as that is obviously impossible. Instead we want to reproduce the human response to a firefight. I don't see whats so flawed about that. And who said they didn't want the physiological dangers properly simulated?