Fatigue Feedback (dev branch)

[13islucky 10]

Yea, as is in devbranch it's sort of at a decent middle ground. Easy enough not to offend people, but hard enough to not make 1000 metre shots when fatigued. I could use some more, but I won't die if it stays like this.

I wonder how all this is going to tie in with the inertia, and when it's coming.

[-Coulum- 35]

Yea, as is in devbranch it's sort of at a decent middle ground. Easy enough not to offend people, but hard enough to not make 1000 metre shots when fatigued. I could use some more, but I won't die if it stays like this.

I wonder how all this is going to tie in with the inertia, and when it's coming

Pretty much how I feel. I want it to be harder, but I guess it can't be "too" hardcore (leave that to the mods) and you do have to give people a break for lack of weapon resting. I think the current devbranch achieves that adequately enough in terms of difficulty.

[blackthorne556 10]

At present, using a realistic loadout for an infantryman, I find my soldier unable to sprint more than 150-200 meters. An infantry soldier is expected to sprint much greater distances in full battle-rattle. Helmet, rifle, HUNDREDS of rounds for same, grenades, smoke, vest (with plates, nowadays), boots, camelpack, and all associated gear. The slowdown is exceedingly unrealistic for men who do this for a living.

EVEN IF IT WASN'T, for those who have actually played ARMA, it is well known that now and again you will find yourself without a ride, 3km from your next target. This is a military sim, not a walking sim. I don't want to spend an hour walking to a firefight. As realistic as that would be, this is still a game, and I play it for enjoyment.

I know a lot of people are pro-fatigue effects, so I am not suggesting we set the same hard limit across the board. Why not add sliders/variable limits? We can adjust head bob and ambient occlusion (blur), these elements effect realism and difficulty. Why not have options for fatigue? It seems counter intuitive that we don't, considering how divisive this issue is.

[vegeta897 13]

EVEN IF IT WASN'T, for those who have actually played ARMA, it is well known that now and again you will find yourself without a ride, 3km from your next target. This is a military sim, not a walking sim. I don't want to spend an hour walking to a firefight. As realistic as that would be, this is still a game, and I play it for enjoyment.

The problem I have with this argument is that it implies people who do like the new fatigue system enjoy walking 3 kilometers. Sorry, but we don't like it anymore than you do. What we do like is how the fatigue system forces us to think tactically. If a mission forces me to walk 3 kilometers, I find a new mission. That's a poorly designed mission, and I'm not going to waste my time with it. Or, perhaps I made mistakes that lead me to be stranded 3km out without transport. That's called good gameplay. If you remove or soften the consequences in Arma, then you degrade the experience. There are plenty of missions out there that don't make me walk that distance, and I can enjoy the dynamic gameplay the fatigue system brings to Arma, where my loadout choices make a real difference. What if the mission made you walk 10km? Should we increase sprint speed and remove fatigue all together so that you don't have to get bored trekking that distance on foot? There's a line to be drawn here. Missions could put you in any sort of inconvenient situation, they don't make for valid reasons in an argument. Arma lets you get yourself into shit situations by design. You could end up facing a tank with zero AT or explosives to do anything about it. Arma is never going to be the forgiving game that gives you a second chance there. All of your actions have consequences that you are forced to deal with.

Edited July 30, 2014 by vegeta897

[Kerc Kasha 102]

The problem I have with this argument is that it implies people who do like the new fatigue system enjoy walking 3 kilometers. Sorry, but we don't like it anymore than you do. What we do like is how the fatigue system forces us to think tactically. If a mission forces me to walk 3 kilometers, I find a new mission. That's a poorly designed mission, and I'm not going to waste my time with it. Or, perhaps I made mistakes that lead me to be stranded 3km out without transport. That's called good gameplay. If you remove or soften the consequences in Arma, then you degrade the experience. There are plenty of missions out there that don't make me walk that distance, and I can enjoy the dynamic gameplay the fatigue system brings to Arma, where my loadout choices make a real difference. What if the mission made you walk 10km? Should we increase sprint speed and remove fatigue all together so that you don't have to get bored trekking that distance on foot? There's a line to be drawn here. Missions could put you in any sort of inconvenient situation, they don't make for valid reasons in an argument. Arma lets you get yourself into shit situations by design. You could end up facing a tank with zero AT or explosives to do anything about it. Arma is never going to be the forgiving game that gives you a second chance there. All of your actions have consequences that you are forced to deal with.

Well put, if any mission makes you walk 3km on foot with a heavy loadout it's a badly designed mission

[blackthorne556 10]

the fatigue system forces us to think tactically

I don't think limiting the sprint distance of a trained infantryman to that of a 50 year old full time smoker is tactical. As you have pointed out, there are NUMEROUS elements of the game that make the player think about his actions without making him asthmatic. And there are many more options to increase the challenge with the active modding community (see bCombat, TWP, etc).

I'm not asking for the ability to influence how you play, but there is no reason why I shouldn't be able to toggle the severity of this effect in a single player game.

The ability to run at a sprint for more than a few hundred meters does not make the bullets less deadly, it does not let me fly, or blow up tanks with my eyes. It allows me to act as a soldier would in real life. I'm not looking to remove the effects of fatigue, my ONLY qualm is with the distance a soldier can move at top speed while carrying realistic loadouts. He should still be out of breath while trying to aim after a 1k run, sure, but an infantryman who stops running after a few hundred meters would earn some pretty bad nicknames from his squadmates. I don't want to get rid of weapon sway, I don't want to hold my breath for 10 minutes. I want my soldiers to quit smoking, and run to their destinations.

[vegeta897 13]

I'd like to note that I quoted only part of your post on purpose. I don't necessarily disagree with you about how far a soldier can sprint with X kilograms of gear. I'm not really arguing that point. I specifically was talking about the example you posed, because it had an implication that I wanted to dispel.

On the note of sprinting though, I think you're using it wrong. It is not to be used for travelling. It is used for dashing between cover or to safety, and small scale flanking. You should be jogging with your rifle lowered if you're just moving from point A to point B, if you want the most efficiency.

[call_911 10]

I just get the feeling that ArmA3 is moving backwords, not forwards, an moving very very far from it's roots. Hence why I have shelved it for the time being.

[blackthorne556 10]

Well, thank you for clarifying. And I apologize for my confrontational tone.

Yes, I do, admittedly, sprint at top speed when I want to get somewhere. Which, yes, is unrealistic. And while, no, it shouldn't be possible to sprint for 10km, it is silly that a soldier should not be physically capable of pushing himself more than a few hundred meters.

I would honestly be fine with increasing the "stamina bar" by a multiplier of 2 or 3. Weapon sway should still be an issue at lower ends, but the extreme of forcing me to a slower pace should happen MUCH further down the line.

[Imperator[TFD] 444]

Well, thank you for clarifying. And I apologize for my confrontational tone.

Yes, I do, admittedly, sprint at top speed when I want to get somewhere. Which, yes, is unrealistic. And while, no, it shouldn't be possible to sprint for 10km, it is silly that a soldier should not be physically capable of pushing himself more than a few hundred meters.

I would honestly be fine with increasing the "stamina bar" by a multiplier of 2 or 3. Weapon sway should still be an issue at lower ends, but the extreme of forcing me to a slower pace should happen MUCH further down the line.

You have a very weird interpretation of what sprinting actually is. Bohemia clearly sees sprinting as an activity that is maximum exertion at full pace for short durations used to move quickly when exposed under fire or moving from cover to cover etc. Add a large gear loadout ontop of that and you will quickly run out of stamina and with good reason.

What you appear to be describing is a fast paced squad movement that is used to quickly go from area A to area B in less time than if the group walked. The game caters for this by having four different speeds; walking - tactical pace - running - sprinting.

Using a Carrier plate + 10 magazines + 2 HE grenades + pistol + 2 smoke will allow a player to move at run pace for quite a significant distance while still allowing a reasonable amount of sprinting. Once you start adding extra equipment on top of this you will quickly see your run travel distance shrink and rightfully so.

What I love the most about these changes it that EVERY bit of kit you select and take will determine how well you perform in a mission now. It's no longer just about what gun you carry but how much ammo, what type of protection, whether you're a sepecialist or not etc etc. Hopefully decent mission makers will take into account these changes and associated requirements by adjusting loadouts or mission profiles to accomodate the new changes.

People playing Invade and Annex style missions where all kit is available for player choice have no one but themselves to blame if they're running out of stamina. It's like placing a big cake infront of someone and then they complain they feel sick after eating it all.

Edited July 30, 2014 by Imperator_Pete

[-Coulum- 35]

You have a very weird interpretation of what sprinting actually is. Bohemia clearly sees sprinting as an activity that is maximum exertion at full pace for short durations used to move quickly when exposed under fire or moving from cover to cover etc. Add a large gear loadout ontop of that and you will quickly run out of stamina and with good reason.

Exactly what I was going to say. When you sprint you are exerting maximum effort to go as fast as possible. Your going anearobic when you sprint. No matter how fit you are your muscles will fill with lactic acid and tire quickly. Smoker or non smoker. Expecting someone to be able to do it for more than a couple hundred metres with gear on is kind of unreasonable. Olympic athletes don't even sprint more than 400m (And even then not all of them can keep it up the whole race). And they are trained specifically for sprinting (last time I checked militaries were concerned about long distance endurance of its soldiers more than how well they can sprint). And they don't have gear on.

I think what you are referring to Blackthorne556 is running/jogging, and in arma you can do that much longer than a couple hundred metres.

The problem I have with this argument is that it implies people who do like the new fatigue system enjoy walking 3 kilometers. Sorry, but we don't like it anymore than you do. What we do like is how the fatigue system forces us to think tactically. If a mission forces me to walk 3 kilometers, I find a new mission. That's a poorly designed mission, and I'm not going to waste my time with it. Or, perhaps I made mistakes that lead me to be stranded 3km out without transport. That's called good gameplay. If you remove or soften the consequences in Arma, then you degrade the experience. There are plenty of missions out there that don't make me walk that distance, and I can enjoy the dynamic gameplay the fatigue system brings to Arma, where my loadout choices make a real difference. What if the mission made you walk 10km? Should we increase sprint speed and remove fatigue all together so that you don't have to get bored trekking that distance on foot? There's a line to be drawn here. Missions could put you in any sort of inconvenient situation, they don't make for valid reasons in an argument. Arma lets you get yourself into shit situations by design. You could end up facing a tank with zero AT or explosives to do anything about it. Arma is never going to be the forgiving game that gives you a second chance there. All of your actions have consequences that you are forced to deal with.

Well said, I agree completely.

Edited July 30, 2014 by -Coulum-

[mjolnir66 48]

At present, using a realistic loadout for an infantryman, I find my soldier unable to sprint more than 150-200 meters. An infantry soldier is expected to sprint much greater distances in full battle-rattle. Helmet, rifle, HUNDREDS of rounds for same, grenades, smoke, vest (with plates, nowadays), boots, camelpack, and all associated gear. The slowdown is exceedingly unrealistic for men who do this for a living.

What are you on, we're (mostly) fit, not superhuman. The idea of running more than 100m at full sprint cross country in full kit makes me want to cry. By the 200m point I'd definitely be on the point of collapse, and actually be moving at a walking pace. I can keep a slow jog on road for a few kms in full kit, but it is a slow jog. Cross country is more demanding.

[Bouben 3]

I don't think limiting the sprint distance of a trained infantryman to that of a 50 year old full time smoker is tactical. As you have pointed out, there are NUMEROUS elements of the game that make the player think about his actions without making him asthmatic. And there are many more options to increase the challenge with the active modding community (see bCombat, TWP, etc).

I'm not asking for the ability to influence how you play, but there is no reason why I shouldn't be able to toggle the severity of this effect in a single player game.

The ability to run at a sprint for more than a few hundred meters does not make the bullets less deadly, it does not let me fly, or blow up tanks with my eyes. It allows me to act as a soldier would in real life. I'm not looking to remove the effects of fatigue, my ONLY qualm is with the distance a soldier can move at top speed while carrying realistic loadouts. He should still be out of breath while trying to aim after a 1k run, sure, but an infantryman who stops running after a few hundred meters would earn some pretty bad nicknames from his squadmates. I don't want to get rid of weapon sway, I don't want to hold my breath for 10 minutes. I want my soldiers to quit smoking, and run to their destinations.

Seems to me that you don't see a difference between running full speed and running at whatever speed.

Look up some real combat footage that has minimum of cuts (editing) and you will see how incredibly slow the soldiers are IRL. Much slower than in the game.

It is impossible to sprint with a lot of gear for more than short distances. The rest of the distance is a much slower running (often very clunky).

I really have to wonder where is this myth of soldiers being able to sprint for long distances coming from (or the myth of combat being very fast paced and with a lot of action).

Edited July 30, 2014 by Bouben

[Greenfist 1863]

I really have to wonder where is this myth of soldiers being able to sprint for long distances coming from (or the myth of combat being very fast paced and with a lot of action).

I would have to say; Doom.

That marine ran constantly around 70km/h with 50 rockets on his backpack. :icon_twisted:

[metralla 19]

Here is the perfect equipment to run 2km, never suffer more fatigue syndrome. :popup:

[devilslayersbane 28]

Here is the perfect equipment to run 2km, never suffer more fatigue syndrome. :popup:

http://i1376.photobucket.com/albums/ah11/_Metralla_/04706396-9763-4610-bfa2-beffa7683062_zps5a849880.jpghttp://i1376.photobucket.com/albums/ah11/_Metralla_/273f61e8-a2ab-40a8-ab63-d8d327603373_zps44f58d48.jpg

And never suffer living syndrome in a combat environment. I'll take my platecarrier back now...

[swiftn7 1]

My 2 cents:

From my own experience as a soldier I can say, whenever we were on patrol, we were NEVER jogging! And of course patrols are not like 500m, more like 3-5km. I understand and agree that doing such slow patrols in Arma would be more then boring and game-breaking, therefore I also like the in-game jogging, but it is not very realistical.

What I really do not understand is the capped stamina of pilots. These guys (especially fighter pilots) have to be fit like hell because of the extraordinary stress being put to their body during flight, and in the game they can sprint for, I don't know, 100m? That's ridiculous!

Edited July 31, 2014 by SwiftN7

[Greenfist 1863]

What I really do not understand is the capped stamina of pilots. These guys (especially fighter pilots) have to be fit like hell because of the extraordinary stress being put to their body during flight, and in the game they can sprint for, I don't know, 100m? That's ridiculous!

What do you mean by "the capped stamina"? I'm pretty sure the pilots have exactly the same stamina as everyone else in the game.

And why should a pilot in rifleman's gear be able to sprint more than a rifleman who's much more used to carrying his gear?

[swiftn7 1]

Uh-oh, thanks for the hint Greenfist. I was totally wrong with my statement above! The gear is the key there, just tried it in the editor with standard equipment.

Lesson learned!

[blackthorne556 10]

I recently rewatched the film Black Hawk Down. I had intended to return triumphant with reference to the "Mogadishu Mile", as portrayed at the end of the film. In the scene, the soldiers are left behind by the convoy, and forced to run back to the Pakistani Stadium (a safe zone in Mogadishu). However, upon further research, the film exercised liberal creative license. The distance was not a mile, nor did they retreat to the stadium. They "walked expediently, in a tactical formation" for approximately 800 meters, where the convoy awaited them at a defensible point. It should be noted of course that the men were suffering from sleep deprivation and dehydration.

I found one example worth noting, during the developmental testing of the LSAT light machine gun "Another test had the soldiers sprint 200 yards wearing body armor and a basic load of ammunition, then rapidly engage close-range targets" - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LSAT_light_machine_gun . And this was just a test in a weapons development program. These soldiers were not in combat, or in any life threatening danger.

I still maintain that in a life or death situation, with adrenaline flowing, a soldier running for his life would not slow down after 150m. Perhaps my problem lies with the speed and body movements of the in game "sprint". The character hardly seems to be moving at a "top speed", hence why I view the 2 higher speeds as a "jog" and a "run". I don't know... I'm not asking to be able to move at top speed eternally, or even for kilometers. I just think the "stamina cap" is too low as is for trained infantry.

Edited July 31, 2014 by Blackthorne556

[Bouben 3]

I recently rewatched the film Black Hawk Down. I had intended to return triumphant with reference to the "Mogadishu Mile", as portrayed at the end of the film. In the scene, the soldiers are left behind by the convoy, and forced to run back to the Pakistani Stadium (a safe zone in Mogadishu). However, upon further research, the film exercised liberal creative license. The distance was not a mile, nor did they retreat to the stadium. They "walked expediently, in a tactical formation" for approximately 800 meters, where the convoy awaited them at a defensible point. It should be noted of course that the men were suffering from sleep deprivation and dehydration.

My earlier comments may have been out of line with realism, but I still maintain that in a life or death situation, with adrenaline flowing, a soldier running for his life would not slow down after 150m. Perhaps my problem lies with the speed and body movements of the in game "sprint". The character hardly seems to be moving at a "top speed", hence why I view the 2 higher speeds as a "jog" and a "run".

I found one example worth noting, during the developmental testing of the LSAT light machine gun "Another test had the soldiers sprint 200 yards wearing body armor and a basic load of ammunition, then rapidly engage close-range targets" - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LSAT_light_machine_gun . And this was just a test in a weapons development program. These soldiers were not in combat, or in any life threatening danger.

I don't know... I'm not asking to be able to move at top speed eternally, or even for kilometers. I just think the "stamina cap" is too low as is for trained infantry.

I saw several combat footages where soldiers were running in combat gear and they were quite slow even under fire. Simple as that. The body has its limits and you can try as much as you want - it won't let you over the bar. You cannot change the laws of physics even in those situations, unfortunately.

And Arma is not even simulating the huge clunkiness of real-life movement (soldiers often stumble, loose balance, their gear is often going in their way etc.). So Arma is still so much forgiving in this area.

EDIT: If you want a good movie reference of an actual movement under fire with a gear on you on a problematic terrain then watch the Omaha landing in Save private Ryan. Very slow and tiring and very accurately portrayed in my opinion compared to the footages I saw.

Edited July 31, 2014 by Bouben

[-Coulum- 35]

I recently rewatched the film Black Hawk Down. I had intended to return triumphant with reference to the "Mogadishu Mile", as portrayed at the end of the film. In the scene, the soldiers are left behind by the convoy, and forced to run back to the Pakistani Stadium (a safe zone in Mogadishu). However, upon further research, the film exercised liberal creative license. The distance was not a mile, nor did they retreat to the stadium. They "walked expediently, in a tactical formation" for approximately 800 meters, where the convoy awaited them at a defensible point. It should be noted of course that the men were suffering from sleep deprivation and dehydration.

My earlier comments may have been out of line with realism, but I still maintain that in a life or death situation, with adrenaline flowing, a soldier running for his life would not slow down after 150m. Perhaps my problem lies with the speed and body movements of the in game "sprint". The character hardly seems to be moving at a "top speed", hence why I view the 2 higher speeds as a "jog" and a "run".

I found one example worth noting, during the developmental testing of the LSAT light machine gun "Another test had the soldiers sprint 200 yards wearing body armor and a basic load of ammunition, then rapidly engage close-range targets" - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LSAT_light_machine_gun . And this was just a test in a weapons development program. These soldiers were not in combat, or in any life threatening danger.

I don't know... I'm not asking to be able to move at top speed eternally, or even for kilometers. I just think the "stamina cap" is too low as is for trained infantry.

Even in those LSAT tests "sprint 200 yards" simply means full out for 200 yards. I doubt they were still moving at top speed by the end of those 200 yards. And in arma a rifle man with full gear on can make it the 200 yards without slowing. A player armed with just a lmg could sprint even further. Test it for yourself

Sprint speeds are reasonable for someone loaded with gear. However they are slow for someone not loaded with gear. its about an 18 second 100m dash. Without gear even the lower than average grunt should be able to break 15 seconds with consistency. But since when does one not have gear? Even a rifle in you hands would add a couple seconds. Having body armour on and ammo... I think 18 seconds is more than reasonable.

That does bring up an area for improvement. Immediate effects of encumbrance. Being overly loaded should have downfalls even when you are 100% rested. Its clunkier and it not possible to be move as fast or precisely. But I have a feeling that might be asking too much. What we have now punishes players for heavy loadouts pretty well enough.

[blackthorne556 10]

I will concede that point, but to tell me that my soldier is so tired after top speed movement for 150m, that he slows to a jog for a few moments then has to walk, is a farce. Soldiers routinely participate in the 40km Boston marathon carrying full ruck (40lbs).

http://www.motherjones.com/files/tough-ruck-finish-line425.jpg

---------- Post added at 20:04 ---------- Previous post was at 20:02 ----------

Even in those LSAT tests "sprint 200 yards" simply means full out for 200 yards. I doubt they were still moving at top speed by the end of those 200 yards. And in arma a rifle man with full gear on can make it the 200 yards without slowing. A player armed with just a lmg could sprint even further. Test it for yourself

The article specifically states that they are in full gear.

[Greenfist 1863]

I will concede that point, but to tell me that my soldier is so tired after top speed movement for 150m, that he slows to a jog for a few moments then has to walk, is a farce. Soldiers routinely participate in the 40km Boston marathon carrying full ruck (40lbs).

http://www.motherjones.com/files/tough-ruck-finish-line425.jpg

But they walk. Not run. And it takes them 8 hours. That's 5 km/h, which is the walking speed in Arma.

[blackthorne556 10]

But they walk. Not run.

I understand that. I am making a comment on their endurance. I do not expect to sprint, run, or even jog for 40km. I am saying that if a soldier can walk 40km in full ruck that a sprint of 150m leading to a complete slowdown to walk is absurd.

While I do not agree with the distance at which it occurs, let's say I did. At that point the sprint, and the sprint alone should be locked out. I should not from that point progress so quickly to the point where I can't even jog.