Campaign Episode 3: WIN - Feedback thread ** SPOILER WARNING! **

[turin turambar 0]

Also, I will agree with people that this episode felt short, but that might be due to the lack of a hub area and the free-roaming missions present in Adapt. I think it actually has roughly the same number of "actual" missions as Adapt, from a rough headcount.

Adapt has 9 not counting scout missions, this one have only six.

Though I won't complain of the length. I think with the three campaigns together (and the showcases) the game had a good duration as a single player experience. But I will complain of the lack of vehicle based missions in the campaign. Just infantry, infantry, infantry, ugh, just like the user made missions.

edit: and yeah, the end is a joke, plot-wise. I hope the proper end won't come in a paid DLC...

[ravenholme 50]

The ending is very much a cliffhanger, which yeah, is pissing people off a lot. I wonder which ending BIS will consider Canon going forward. The NATO ending wraps things up, but in a completely unsatisfactory manner, the Miller ending just makes the global situation much worse because of the NATO black ops he was involved in. (I think, by the sounds of it, that I'm fairly lucky I did the Miller ending first, as it is a 'better' ending than the NATO one, which feels like a shoe-in)

[supercereal4 29]

edit: and yeah, the end is a joke, plot-wise. I hope the proper end won't come in a paid DLC...

this.

I don't want to pay to have some closure/questions answered.

[2nd ranger 282]

Many plot points were just underdeveloped and unresolved. The device, in particular. I guess if you do the 'good' ending you never even find out what it is? Also, you could have had some pretty cool and atmospheric set pieces if CSAT had actually used the thing to effect, rather than just have the ground shake a little bit.

[IndeedPete 1038]

this.

I don't want to pay to have some closure/questions answered.

Agreed. I'd be happy to support BIS with my money when they decide to release new content in the future - be it as DLC, or as I prefer - as full addon. But I already paid for Arma 3, for a full game. And I think after waiting additional six months for the campaign to be completed we deserved something extraordinary. I mean Arma is extraordinary; it beats most other games I know, mostly because of its unique editor, but also because of its gameplay. I really hope BIS won't do the same as Bioware/EA with Mass Effect 3; they also delivered a DLC because the ending sucked. :/

[st!gar 3]

Alright - I just completed "Resurgent West". Here's my reaction to it.

The mission was just really weird.

I'm standing around, guarding a portable toilet in the middle of the night. Suddenly, Kerry shouts in horror that enemies are approaching in boats, or something. I, the player, don't see jack-shit, so imagine my confusion.

In either case; I decide to do what the game tells me to - run for some point on the map. After an uneventful jog, I come across some manner of vehicle, with a few corpses around it and some fires far in the distance. Kerry's dialogue, as well as the nature of the radio-cues, seem to suggest that there's chaos going on everywhere, but I don't see or hear anything - by all appearances, it's just a quiet, peaceful night.

Later, I Link up with some insurgents, and am told to assist in the assault of something. This involves me flanking around a small town, which is also completely uneventful. The friendly squads assaulting the town directly are constantly engaged in firefights, but there is practically zero opposition along the route I'm traveling by, which is par for the instructions I received. Eventually, I reach a tiny hill with a some kind of armoured vehicle situated on top. My squad brushes away the few enemies milling aimlessly about the hilltop, and I am told the location is "Secured".

At this point, I am told to defend the location against a counterattack. Problem is; the game doesn't explain exactly what the "location" is. (The town? The little hill-thing? The coastline? Where the hell will the attack be coming from? No idea.)

Then, Kerry remarks that the "defenses appear to be intact". (What bloody defenses? The empty vehicle on the hill? Something inside the town? Again; no idea.)

I am also told to "look around the place" for crates of weapons and equipment. (Oh, wow. I'm supposed to find some crates. Just somewhere on the island. No-one thinks that's just a teensy bit vague, at all?)

On my first attempt, we were all wiped out completely. I stay around the hill I just "Secured" from the overwhelming hostile force of about three half-blind people, and are looking helplessly on, as a friendly tank ahead of me is obliterated utterly in a torrent of gunfire. The resulting radio-cues are seeming to suggest that this is a disastrous event. Two or three hostile tanks come bearing down upon us, and we are extremely killed.

On my second attempt, I figured that the location the game wanted me to defend, was the town, itself. So I take my squad, and run down into the streets, looking randomly around this huge area in an attempt to randomly stumble across this supposed hidden stack of anti-vehicle weapons. The radio-cues inform me that the hostile attack is triggered. But then, less then a minute later, the game tells me that, apparently, we won the whole battle while I was running around the streets. "Good job, men! This area is secure.", the voice-over tells me. And I have no fucking idea of what just happened.

Edited March 14, 2014 by St!gar

[jinzor 31]

Tand I enjoyed the campaign - varied missions types encompassing all the aspects of warfare

I disagree; there wasn't a single armour, helicopter, jet, high-command, super-stealthy/incredibly difficult mission (like that mission in PMC, where you just had an anti-matter rifle and had to destroy lots of vehicles mostly by yourself) or many consequences from your actions in the campaign at all. You were always a grunt or a squad leader who couldn't really make many story affecting decisions. There was only one, ONE mission (in chapter 1) that made use of the underwater mechanics, and pretty much the only choice which had a big affect on the story was where chose either to try and save James or regroup with NATO at the end.

This campaign, compared to others (e.g. Operation Arrowhead), was so repetitive and almost the same thing happened every time; mission begins, follow path, listen to Kerry, shoot some AAF/CSAT soldiers, follow path, listen to Kerry some more, destroy a vehicle or two, follow path, hear Kerry shout "What the fuck!" for the hundredth time, the end. Also, no co-op (everyone I know who is at least vaguely interested in the campaign is itching to have that implemented, even if just one person gets to play as Kerry and the other three just tag along), so no way in hell will I be playing it for my own entertainment again; I'd rather play through one of ArmA II's while enduring the terrible voice acting, at least that had more variety and would play out differently almost every time.

I really liked the idea of the original campaign before A3's release and the futuristic aspect though, hope they continue with that in the expansion. I also hope that the expansion's campaign rectifies the lack of co-op. This campaign was changed completely and began sort-of well, but it ended badly. No doubt they got impatient and rushed this chapter so that they could get the campaign over and done with so that they could focus on the expected future expansion/DLC's (can't blame them for that though, I'd be impatient as well).

Edited March 15, 2014 by Jinzor

[ravenholme 50]

I disagree; there wasn't a single armour, helicopter, jet or high-command mission in the campaign at all. You were always a grunt or a squad leader. There was only one, ONE mission (in chapter 1) that made use of the underwater mechanics. This campaign, compared to others (e.g. Operation Arrowhead), was so repetitive and almost the same thing happened every time; mission begins, follow path, shoot some AAF/CSAT soldiers, follow path, destroy a vehicle or two, follow path, the end. Also, no co-op (everyone I know who is at least vaguely interested in the campaign is itching to have that implemented, even if just one person gets to play as Kerry and the other three just tag along), so no way in hell will I be playing it for my own entertainment again; I'd rather play through one of ArmA II's while enduring the terrible voice acting.

Hope the expansion's campaign (if there is one, it's likely) rectifies the campaign issue and lack of co-op. It began sort-of well, but it ended badly. No doubt they got impatient and rushed Win.

And I disagree with you again. They have always stated that the core of ArmA is the infantry experience, and everything else supports that. Secondarily, Kerry is an infantryman, and they decided to focus on him as a character, I'd guess for both story reasons ("Kerry, we know you're a groundpounder but we really need you to fly this blackfoot!" Yeah, no, not happening) and gameplay reasons (Flying Helicopters etc can be challenging so it wouldn't be fair to force someone to do it to complete the campaign). But for the Infantryman, the experience was very nicely varied, throughout Survive, Adapt and Win you jumped around the balance of power, got to participate in combined arms assaults (Or be on the receiving end of them), participate in and conduct sneak raids, spot for artillery, etc. The standout scene for me though is definitely the final mission of Adapt, the battle with the CSAT Recon Troops in the town was excellent and tense.

I will agree that the Scuba stuff got severely under-used, I think Adapt was the perfect place to have some Underwater gameplay (Again, once Kerry was back in the NATO fold, he wouldn't be being ordered to stuff outside his rank and file purpose and slightly more nebulous role as FIA liason), but that opportunity was sadly passed up. Again, I think, because they really, really lack content for the Divers to interact with. (There is one Scouting mission where you go to an Underwater Wreck in Adapt, but that's it.) And, actually, another point of contention - CSAT had a large number of troop types and vehicles, etc, but they were also severely under-used in the campaign, with AAF being the primary antagonists.

Edited March 14, 2014 by Ravenholme

[jinzor 31]

And I disagree with you again. They have always stated that the core of ArmA is the infantry experience, and everything else supports that. Secondarily, Kerry is an infantryman, and they decided to focus on him as a character, I'd guess for both story reasons ("Kerry, we know you're a groundpounder but we really need you to fly this blackfoot!" Yeah, no, not happening) and gameplay reasons (Flying Helicopters etc can be challenging so it wouldn't be fair to force someone to do it to complete the campaign). But for the Infantryman, the experience was very nicely varied, throughout Survive, Adapt and Win you jumped around the balance of power, got to participate in combined arms assaults (Or be on the receiving end of them), participate in and conduct sneak raids, spot for artillery, etc. The standout scene for me though is definitely the final mission of Adapt, the battle with the CSAT Recon Troops in the town was excellent and tense.

Really? What you said reminds me of Sion Lenton in that interview where he was asked why there was no vehicle interaction in Red River; "we got rid of aircraft, tanks and all that... mainly because marines don't pilot aircraft or drive tanks in real life", bad reason. The campaign didn't need to focus entirely on Kerry for "Win", he was hardly an interesting character anyway. They could have done something similar to what BI allegedly planned from the beginning; play as multiple characters (not too many; like 2 - 3 other characters with one mission for each and not much narrative; one pilot, one tanker, one spec ops. We saw that in an early campaign video showcasing Altis and the interaction of the different planned characters. It's what the interactive campaign map, which you used in chapter 1, was originally designed for; select an optional mission of your choice from another character's perspective to help the main character's own mission) who represent different sides of the flashpoint with only one character being the one that changes the course of the story (in this case Kerry with the two endings, but back then it was Miller). BI did roughly the same thing with Operation Arrowhead, but in ArmA III they'd be going a little further.

They referred to one of Operation Arrowhead's campaign mission's as an example of what they were planning to do with the optional missions (the one where you were forced to pilot an Apache, where if you failed to pilot the helicopter, it would allow you to continue to the next mission (yet play differently) anyway). They were planning that if you failed one of the missions as the other minor characters, it would allow you to continue as the main character, yet it would just have a minor impact on your experience playing him (there may be less allied reinforcements, and a few more enemies to deal with).

That was the original plan for the confrontation between NATO and CSAT, but BI scrapped that idea in favour to pump the campaign out faster, just focusing on Kerry. However, in "Win", BI could have easily added in a couple of additional, shorter, optional missions focusing on a few different perspectives which would help Kerry's later mission in taking over the airport and/or Pyrgos, referring to the scrapped plans of the original campaign, possibly using that interactive map. The part just after Kerry takes out the AA vehicle on the hill would have been a perfect opportunity to start a separate, very short mission (maybe 10 minutes) and assume command as a pilot of a Blackfoot taking out retreating enemies near the airport, to make the invasion of Pyrgos easier for Kerry, optional of course. If you failed as the pilot, no harm done; not everyone is good at flying. But, really, these days a campaign is a tacked on thing which is usually used as a means to teach players what they can do in a game and refining their skills in those areas, and if a campaign fails to teach those things (e.g. flying, driving, using certain pieces of equipment), then the campaign has failed to teach the player in my opinion. Thank god we have those showcases (basically mini-tutorials), at least new players won't be totally confused with the game when they start.

Edited March 15, 2014 by Jinzor

[Wiki 1558]

I TOTALLY agree with Jinzor.

I just feel "all this for that?".

Really, really disappointed in ArmA 3.

-Not much improvement in AI - whereas there are plenty of mods that do better.

-Futuristic will (just my opinion, some people may like it)

-Not really interesting campaign, rather short, etc...

Far, far away from OFP.

I think I'll return to ArmA 2 and CWR mod.

Only things that was good in ArmA 3 were graphics improvement (of course) and radio/voices protocol.

It's a real disappointement. It feels like I will have to go back to editing to make the campaign I want - or the one I would have liked to have for the game... again...

[artsi 11]

"Huge disappointment." That was the first thing that came to my mind after I saw "The End" popping up on my screen. I thought: "This is it? Really? There must be more! BIS has been building an exciting storyline over the episodes wich was continiously moving towards something big. Some twist in the end, some point where Kerry discovers everything, Miller's real identity and true goal gets discovered. And they're doing THIS?! Just hop on a chopper, get off the island, make tea and go to bed?! There must be something else, some decision I fucked up so I got to drop out earlier. Let's check the DevBranch thread..."

My words exactly. I chose the Miller path, and when the credits started rolling I was really disappointed. I expected a proper wrap up. Then I get a new mission, "Phew they were just fucking around with me, it was only the beginning".

Then a disappointment again. This conclusion wasn't what I waited for months and months.

[jinzor 31]

I've got a question regarding one of the new features coming with the next update (which is in the dev branch right now). These achievements; are there only going to be five when the patch comes out, or are there going to be more? If it is just five, then it does seem a little pointless to have them.

[twisted 127]

error when resuming the mission resurgent west (no mods excpet cba running) i get this error message repeated a ton on screen and in rpt.

B_APC_Tracked_01_AA_F: Recoil - unknown animation source recoil_source

O_Heli_Light_02_F: lever_pilot - unknown animation source collectiveRTD

SetFace error: class CfgFaces.Kerry.WhiteHead_02 not found

Error: Error during SetFace - class CfgFaces.Kerry.WhiteHead_02 not found

Error in expression <{!(triggerActivated _x)} count [bIS_defTrigSeized, BIS_defTr>

Error position: <_x)} count [bIS_defTrigSeized, BIS_defTr>

Error Undefined variable in expression: _x

Error in expression <{!(triggerActivated _x)} count [bIS_defTrigSeized, BIS_defTr>

Error position: <_x)} count [bIS_defTrigSeized, BIS_defTr>

Error Undefined variable in expression: _x

Error in expression <{!(triggerActivated _x)} count [bIS_defTrigSeized, BIS_defTrigDefeated] >

Error position: <BIS_defTrigSeized, BIS_defTrigDefeated] >

Error Undefined variable in expression: bis_deftrigseized

Error in expression <{!(triggerActivated _x)} count [bIS_defTrigSeized, BIS_defTr>

Error position: <_x)} count [bIS_defTrigSeized, BIS_defTr>

[Wiki 1558]

If you want an example of what kind of missions I expected, look at Soaring Tiger or Op Cold Rising part 1.

Those 2 missions are a blast!

[anthall 10]

I have played all of Bohemia interactive games campaigns, and this was a serious let down. The story is of good quality, but it is incomplete. It kinda ended with a whimper just as it was getting interesting. Push back the release date and finish the campaign properly.

[nerdwing 13]

The ending killed it for me :( Very disappointing, and felt totally rushed at the end. Any ending with a "But this is only the beginning!" or hint that something else happens right after is a pretty shoddy ending IMO. I chose to help NATO, for the record.

The insinuations throughout the campaign that people know each other, have worked together in the past etc (like the one guy you're driving for in Act 2, who gets out to talk to the AAF commander he "knows"), but the absolutely lack of elaboration on those points may be realistic, but I dont think that is the kind of realism people want in a mil-sim, if that makes sense :P

Win was definitely the weakest chapter for me. The last missions in particular just left me frowning. The story was good until Win (at which point it really seemed CSAT had run away, and had no real reason to have instigated AAF to begin with), and you end up just mopping up regulars, much like the often-forgotten ArmA1 campaign ending :(

[turin turambar 0]

The ending is very much a cliffhanger, which yeah, is pissing people off a lot. ...

I think it's one thing to have a end, with a cliffhanger in a facet of the story, and other have the story ending without explaining... nothing (who was Miller, what's was he doing, and who was his boss, what was the device, who built it, what were CSAT goals, what about the AAF involvement, etc) and then, additionally, leaving the end in a cliffhanger (CSAT army attack again, retreat! The End).

[bullet purveyor 85]

Alright - I just completed "Resurgent West". Here's my reaction to it.

You couldn't find the defensive position, the ammo crates or from where the attack would take place, seriously!?

At the last way point there was static weapons and hesco walls, no bells ringing when you saw that?

The crates are next to the static AT weapon(clue!?), facing the direction of the attack(another clue!?), that you also have been told will come from the airport.

And if I remember correctly there is even a giant arrow on the map telling you this.

If you didn't figure this out, then it's not the mission makers fault...

[IndeedPete 1038]

I think it's one thing to have a end, with a cliffhanger in a facet of the story, and other have the story ending without explaining... nothing (who was Miller, what's was he doing, and who was his boss, what was the device, who built it, what were CSAT goals, what about the AAF involvement, etc) and then, additionally, leaving the end in a cliffhanger (CSAT army attack again, retreat! The End).

Exactly. These questions should have been answered. I'd be fine with a simple debriefing scene or standoff with Miller that explains what the hell was going on. I somehow hope that BIS is just fucking with us DevBranch people and this is some kind of prank. So they will release the "real" Win episode next week. But I don't really think that will happen.^^

[Westonsammy 1]

Thoughts about possible hidden ending

So I played through the episode, chose the Miller ending, and got to the Game Over level. Like everyone else here, I was pretty disappointed when I rode my boat out into the sunset, and then the campaign ended without any explanation. And from what I am seeing here, the NATO ending isn't much better.

But then I saw something on steam that made me curious

With this update, they added achievements for the ending, and the one for escaping Altis says "Epilogue B completed. You choose to escape Altis on your own."

The strange thing IMO, is that it says "on your own". I had completed the mission with soldiers in my squad in my boat, so it obviously wasn't referring to if you did it solo or not.

This has led me to believe that there may be some way to link up with Miller or someone else and get a sort of "Secret" ending. Although this is probably just me trying to be optimistic, if any of you want to take part, I am going to be listing the areas i visited during the mission and what happens there, so we can try and see if going to a specific place triggers something.

In my play through, I initially went south and regrouped with the NATO squad that contacts you soon after leaving the ruins. I then proceeded South East, and met up with a FIA squad in the swamp. After linking up with them, I proceeded to the nearby AAF heliport, which was empty (In terms of Heli's) I then went and searched every location on the North East part of Altis, eventually ending up at the AAF naval base near the Molos airfield, and found a boat there which I used to escape.

So we can pretty much count out the entire North East part of Altis as harboring secrets.

Some locations I would check out would be the CSAT military base at the main airfield, the CSAT airbase to the South East (If they got a hold of the device, that is probably where they took it) or the North West part of the Island where the FIA are in ADAPT, because that is probably where Miller would have taken the device (He obviously didn't make it to the sub, as we can hear gunfire in the background when he contacts Kerry at the start of the mission)

[lugiahua 26]

NATO still holds major bases on the southern part of the island. Some are really well defended with tanks and IFV.

I escaped with a Ghosthawk there

[L3TUC3 32]

Preventive Diplomacy

Second try with the savegame glitch fixed.

Solar array wasn't too bad, finally figured out where the sniper spot was (had to look around for the door a bit, it's a looong climb). Spotted for arty a bit, shot some guys with the .50 before moving on. Most of the enemy force was dead already thanks to the artillery and the sniper fire.

Then the town defense...

The attack starts and most of the other squad gets taken out. I call in the gunship and it takes a hit and goes down. One of the Kuma's goes after it and parks itself by the crashsite. The attack slowly whittles down my squad until the town is empty of enemies. That just leaves that one Kuma by the helicopter crash site.

I could see it, but it was parked in a depression so the PCML couldn't hit it and I had no artillery left. I tried walking there but I got killed by the invisible border script. =/

Game over

You can revisit the research dome. I'm sure there's other interesting locations as well.

Edited March 15, 2014 by L3TUC3

[COL.C.T 11]

Huh... didn't the original plot of the game mention about how Iranian CSAT troops occupied Turkey after it suffered a devastating earthquake? I don't know, probably contributed to my vague guess of what this secret objective was all about. Anyone else?

[super-truite 54]

I enjoyed the campaign and I personally liked the fact that the scenario is getting crazy ;), yet I hope this is not over. I have some unfinished business with miller :mad:

[roberthammer 582]

Some tip in Preventive Diplomacy - when you have to attack and then defend the town

- use UAV's laser to bombard the whole town (use TI to see all the enemy units) , to destroy the IFV - you can use laser guided round

- after you have to defend the town - you can easily destroy the enemy ifv/tank by uav because it has 6 LG missiles and then you have to just clear the enemy inf

Edited March 15, 2014 by RobertHammer