Make Arma Not War - Winners

[Ranwer135 308]

Congrats to all Winners.

But I do find it very unordinary that KOTH got in 1st, theyve been up for months and have already got donations up and running. (love it, but do find it unfair to others who worked hard on their project)

The melee was my favourite project :D

Anyways, CONGRATS ALL!!! :)

[code34 248]

you widen the context to be everything which is inaccurate. You can also say "The gameplay context of Arma is a game. All modifications should be disqualified". Where as its much more narrow than that, something along the lines of "The context of Arma is a military game set in the future fictional conflict between futuristic NATO and futuristic Iran on a Greek island" and anything that changes that should be fine being considered a Total Modification.

I only use the comon sens of "gameplay" for gaming developpers.

I remember BIS had the same kind of problem with the date format (they use their definition instead the word comon definition)

[SaOk 112]

But would be nice to hear some feedback how entries played in the competition. This silence makes me suspicious if there was some problems with my entry? Did you download the WLA SP mission right after the deadline as was said? Since bit over week later I updated it in workshop (there was green light to do it) and it was no longer compatible with MANW build.

Easiest way to check if the mission version was not the one meant for MANW would be to start new progress with RHS mod. If there is a listbox selecting RHS template then you mixed the files (RHS was released after the deadline).

Also I hope the unstable MANW game build didnt affect my scoring. The game was stable until last summer. That MANW build crashed randomly. Nothing I could have done to prevent that. Only the today's dev-game builds are stable again.

Remember over 1500 hours was spent to create that entry for the competition.

Edit: RHS was released same day as deadline. But my point stays the same.

Edit2: Mission change log in workshop around the MANW deadline (those slingload script-commands added 7.11-> would have conflicted with MANW game build):

http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/changelog/173155826?p=6

Edited April 7, 2015 by SaOk

[Wiki 1558]

Yeah, some feedback from the jury about the entries would be appreciated.

[Redphoenix 1540]

But would be nice to hear some feedback how entries played in the competition. This silence makes me suspicious if there was some problems with my entry? Did you download the WLA SP mission right after the deadline as was said? Since bit over week later I updated it in workshop (there was green light to do it) and it was no longer compatible with MANW build.

Easiest way to check if the mission version was not the one meant for MANW would be to start new progress with RHS mod. If there is a listbox selecting RHS template then you mixed the files (RHS was released after the deadline).

Also I hope the unstable MANW game build didnt affect my scoring. The game was stable until last summer. That MANW build crashed randomly. Nothing I could have done to prevent that. Only the today's dev-game builds are stable again.

Remember over 1500 hours was spent to create that entry for the competition.

We released several days before the deadline.

Get your facts straight.

[SaOk 112]

Oct 28 2014, 00:26

http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?184842-RHS-Escalation-(AFRF-and-USAF)-Release-0-3-6-(UPDATED)

Well, okay its same day as deadline, not after. Your facts are even less straight. Straighten them first. ;)

Edited April 7, 2015 by SaOk

[tachi 10]

In addition there are a full amount of features, like the new damage system ...

What damage system are you talking about? And what do you mean by saying "binary penetration"?

I have a strong feeling that you've used someones else work, tried to adapt it into your mod, it works, but not as intended, there are tons of problems with it, and i hope you can come up with something better then is right now in the mod, because in current state it doesn't deliver "a more accurate and "simulation" game", it delivers frustration when you are using it.

---------- Post added at 06:38 AM ---------- Previous post was at 06:11 AM ----------

What i basically wanna say, i'm not judging RHS. It's just strange for me that every other Category has 3 places with money spread between places, and we have Total Modification category. For me Total Modification addon - is addon that improves and enhances gameplay of the game, adds new gameplay elements and so on. Yes, i agree that RHS does that at some point, yes there is some kind of improved armor system for some vehicels.p3d models and some FCS for vehicles. But that's basically it. It doesn't add any new gameplay features or improves vanilla ones. It adds alot RU and US millitary content, but again it's just a content.

And there are mods like AGM or CSE, that improve vanilla gameplay, add alot of new features , improving and expanding basic vanilla gameplay in different directions, and also adding new gameplay elements. That's what i call a total modification. A mod that totally changes original gameplay of the game, by adding gameplay elements and changing the vanilla ones. So if we are talking about gameplay - RHS adds FCS and Armor System for some vehicles. Yes it's changing gameplay in a specific way, but it doesn't change the way game is being played. In every other aspect it's still vanilla game but with new 3d content, that doesn't enhance or improves basic gameplay of the game.

But on the other hand if we will look at the side of how much work RHS have put in their mod, and how much content it adds, it's probably deserves a win, but still i am convinced that there should've been 3 places in total modification category, not only one. But whatever, I can't say that RHS don't deserve the win, but in my opinion some other mods deserver it a bit more :p

The reasoning for me is, that it seems like BIS agreed that they've made a mistake by making A3 in a futuristic setting, and they've needed something like RHS to bring back the cold war era conflict content, to please the community, so here we go :)

[chortles 263]

That last sentence is full of hopelessly wishful thinking there. ;) That RHS won on points doesn't indicate anything about what BI themselves think of it, much less of a 1980s-2010s setting (which, as a Eurogamer review revealed, they haven't been attempting for almost five years now -- Arma 3 is actually the evolution of something that they were trying to do instead).

[maturin 12]

By the standards of most games, neither AGM nor CSE qualify as total conversion mods either.

In almost all cases, 'total conversion' implies a mod that offers a complete new game mode, where few of the vanilla game's assets are used.

With AGM and CSE, you are left with the same old NATO vs CSAT missions and units, for the most part. You just have a great new suite of realistic features to enhance that original gameplay.

With RHS you have all new units, with enough content to never touch a vanilla mission or Armaverse setting again, but only a few fully-fledged added features.

Neither constitute a total conversion in the usual meaning of the words. The contest had no mods that fit the bill 100%, and the category must in all fairness be interpreted loosely. So grow up and stop whining about it.

[Redphoenix 1540]

blablabla

Last I checked the Total Modification was about "changing the game" instead of "making vanilla Arma3 better".

Hence AGM and CSE and whatever are NOT Total Modifications.

Again:

Total Modification - Modification of the game delivering new context of gameplay and setting represented by an array of addons and playable content. Total modification can focus on any type of gameplay (not all possible gamemodes need to be delivered), genre or setting.

RHS: We delivered an array of addons changing the settings.

What is so hard to understand there?

[teilx 4]

Total Modification -

miss - new context of gameplay

check - and setting represented by an array of addons and playable content.

miss - Total modification can focus on any type of gameplay (not all possible gamemodes need to be delivered), genre or setting.

:p

who cares/wayne

[mistyronin 1181]

What damage system are you talking about? And what do you mean by saying "binary penetration"?

Binary means 1 or 0, true or false (power or not power). Check Wikipedia. Is BTW the basic element in computer programming and electronics, as the base is if power pass through the wires or it doesn't :)

On this case, I meant that in RHS when you shoot a vehicle, the round can penetrate or not, and has a lot of maths to calculate the damages instead of a simple hitpoint reduction as A3 vanilla.

I understand that for someone that doesn't know much about ballistics, computer science or algorithmic this sounds like magic.

I have a strong feeling that you've used someones else work, tried to adapt it into your mod, it works, but not as intended, there are tons of problems with it, and i hope you can come up with something better then is right now in the mod, because in current state it doesn't deliver "a more accurate and "simulation" game", it delivers frustration when you are using it.

That's your opinion, and I respect it. After all, everyone is entitled to have an opinion for weird, uninformed, or far-fetched as it may be.

Seems that the MANW jury had a different opinion (probably they have a more informed one as they know about programming, physiX and so on, and could check in detail all what we did), and for good or for bad, they were the ones that had the final decision on the matter. On the MANW rules we had nothing to do in their creation, we just followed them in our entry.

With the MANW contest it happens like with any other competition, some people win some people lose, a lot of people are happy with the result, and a few doesn't find the it fair... It's impossible to please everyone's tastes. For instance I personally think that the FC Barcelona deserved to win last year's UEFA Champions League... but it didn't even get to the final... :(

Edited April 8, 2015 by MistyRonin

[Rydygier 1304]

Why? So people know who to specifically target with their misguided opinions on whether or not 'Mission A' should have won or how highly 'Addon B' should have been praised?

Such jury feedback perfectly well could be given anonymously without loosing any informational value. Or at least scores. But since BI PR stated, they'll discuss this internally, IMO nothing more to add to this topic.

[.kju 3241]

First of all congratulations to all the winners!

Even though one might not be happy for the outcome for whatever reasons, you have to accept that BI defined the rules and categories in the given manner,

enforced them to a degree they saw fit and the judges with their given background made up their mind in the context of the decision making system set out by BI.

With this in mind I'd say its pretty pointless to argue whether something else should have won or a winner should not have made it.

What seems more meaningful is to reflect upon the competition itself: why it was done, how is was set out and in what way it was executed - at least in case BI

decides to run another competition again.

Some of my points would be:

• What was the purpose of the website and did it serve it well? Did it integrate well with this forum or other community places?
  
• Was money a good choice as prize? For all the various reasons and implications involved.
  
• Were such high prizes a good idea? Normally you want to encourage people going professional as a result/turning their project to a commercial product of some form - will this happen here and how were the chances in the first place?
  
• Why were there not more categories (terrains, more differentiation for missions, sound mods) and more/"all" forms of community work (tools, documentation, forum assistance heroes) included?
  
• Was the community/players involved in the right way to determine the winners? Or why should they not?
  
• What is a good idea to drop multi submission albeit they were allowed explicitly, or to drop same type of mods for the finalists?
  
• What was the intended goals and outcome of the competition?
  

As far as I can tell the outcome is pretty meager and the whole process caused various negative impacts as well.

BI did not find the next DayZ. Nor are the winners/participants or their ideas/concepts seemingly planned to get integrated into the core game.

It didn't seem to attract much outside modding talent to arma, nor to grow the A3 modding scene in any significant way.

Instead this is what BI should focus on as much as possible from my humble perspective.

After all these years a far easier way for players to make use/play mods, aka the "sync mods to mission (SP/MP)" feature", seems way way more important to get realized finally.

The second main challenge is to make modding far less effort, more enjoyable and way easier to get into/learn.

This would be far more beneficial to the modding scene and make it more vibrant.

Edited April 8, 2015 by .kju [PvPscene]

[Rydygier 1304]

Well, IMHO hard to assess, how well/to what extent contest fulfilled its purpose, since we don't know (?) this purpose, having only own guesses, the more we don't know, it was standalone initiative, or intended part (beginning) of something bigger. Without such context hard to say, was MANW a success or not. IMHO, at least in part, it was kind of experiment ("let's see, what happen") and if will be repeated in the future, most likely gathered experiences will be used to optimize its formula.

About that context so far we also can only guess without reaching any real answer on our own, without BI official voice on that.

[doveman 7]

After all these years a far easier way for players to make use/play mods, aka the "sync mods to mission (SP/MP)" feature", seems way way more important to get realized finally.

God please! I've been asking/begging for this long before A3 and did so again in the Launcher (dev) thread recently but got no response. It doesn't even strike me as particularly difficult to implement, for SP/offline missions at least.

It clearly doesn't help to encourage user-created content if mission makers won't use it because they know a lot of players won't want to manually download and install a bunch of mods to play their missions and manually create and manage a ton of different profiles to launch A3 with the mods needed for each mission.

Grr, it makes me mad that A3 is still so lacking in this respect and I never get to play all the great missions I see as it's just too much hassle. :mad:

Edited April 8, 2015 by doveman

[SaOk 112]

I am not crying or lynching anyone. Just want to hear something of jury opinions, and especially if there was file mix up or not. If there was no mix up, I am ready to let it be. I dont get why certain people get so easily offended.

+1 Sync mods to mission feature would be awesome.

Edited April 8, 2015 by SaOk

[St. Jimmy 272]

I'll give my opinion on some of these:

;2915666']

Some of my points would be:

[*]What was the purpose of the website and did it serve it well? Did it integrate well with this forum or other community places?

- The website was badly integrated with the forums. There was no quick switch between BIS sites and MANW site and I just googled it everytime. This alone likely ate a lot of players even checking the whole competition.

[*]Was money a good choice as prize? For all the various reasons and implications involved.

[*]Were such high prizes a good idea? Normally you want to encourage people going professional as a result/turning their project to a commercial product of some form - will this happen here and how were the chances in the first place?

[*]Why were there not more categories (terrains' date=' more differentiation for missions, sound mods) and more/"all" forms of community work (tools, documentation, forum assistance heroes) included?

[b']- Next time less money per category and more categories. Next competition should happen when the game is more stable and not getting these huge overhauls.[/b]

As far as I can tell the outcome is pretty meager and the whole process caused various negative impacts as well.

BI did not find the next DayZ. Nor are the winners/participants or their ideas/concepts seemingly planned to get integrated into the core game.

It didn't seem to attract much outside modding talent to arma, nor to grow the A3 modding scene in any significant way.

- Agreed it felt like a failure in this side. There are likely many reasons. Quick timeline, the game and tools changes so much between patches, the game was still too young and so on. It felt like most of the competitiors needed to rush their things to get even a small tasty early version out.

The most interesting concept was the Cosmos engine. Too bad that we haven't heard about the mod or the guy behind it more but that was really unique thing what MANW was likely looking for.

[R0adki11 3949]

Thread cleaned up from the bickering and flame-baiting comments - please stay on topic, any further issues will result in the appropriate punishments

[chortles 263]

I'll give my opinion on some of these:

Remarking simply on the "next competition should happen when the game is more stable and not getting these huge overhauls" part -- until the devs' plans leading up to and after the Expansion are more publicly clear, I don't believe that we can within-the-ballpark guesstimate when this will ever be; that being said, the devs did (eventually) mention/clarify that there would be a specific Steam branch for MANW for both entrants (i.e. what Arma 3 version the entries should be made for) and jurists (what Arma 3 version the entries would be tested with).

[code34 248]

;2915666']

Instead this is what BI should focus on as much as possible from my humble perspective.

After all these years a far easier way for players to make use/play mods' date=' aka the "sync mods to mission (SP/MP)" feature", seems way way more important to get realized finally.

The second main challenge is to make modding far less effort, more enjoyable and way easier to get into/learn.

[/quote']

Must arma players are RP players. They have not even seen or play the vanilla version.

BIS have a problem with this, arma for RP players is not anymore fashionable. Thoses players go away to other game like h1z1, garry mod, etc

You should consider it, and consider RHS, King of the hill, task force radio selections are a gift for oldier players that play the game in the original way.

What will be the future of ARMA , a world extended engine with advanced scripting, hud, modding features ? It s possible as must of players use it in this way.

Anyway, ARMA suffers of its own building history, there is so much bad things that should be (already) completly deleted and rebuild.

Edited April 9, 2015 by code34

[SaOk 112]

I think its very fishy that there is no any comments from jury or bis workers. Just remember the silence wont fix things. I have memory of elephant. :pet6:

[Jackal326 1176]

I think its very fishy that there is no any comments from jury or bis workers. Just remember the silence wont fix things. I have memory of elephant. :pet6:

I don't find that fishy at all. After you yourself advocated in your mission thread that the community should bombard the judges and BI with forum PM and tweets to get the decisions overturned (I think the term you used was "justice"), I'm surprised they haven't all gone into hiding.

The decisions were made, the prizes awarded and the victors have been gracious in victory (when they haven't been picked on for submitting on deadline day and quite rightly defended their positions). Its just a shame the same can't be said for those who were defeated...

[SaOk 112]

Just want to get some info how the entries played or did they have some problems (e.g file getting mixed up and thats why getting broken). Very strange to drop out of top3 when had so much more player votes and feedback from community have been ultra positive. There is much players very addicted to play it. Even some that got very mad at me behaving badly and made trashtalk/non-english speaking hater threads against me, still annouced they like my consept the most. Thats something too. Top 3 entries were also awesome projects, but cant see how my entry was worse to loose for all three. Odds are tiny. I had massive amount of features over them, full mod support, consept made just how the game is meant to be played (as large-scale military sandbox) and endless replay-value. Game modes where seeked orginally, but when getting one its overlooked. Also else the TOP3 followed the ranking of player votes. Just feels very strange to drop out and getting no answers from anyone. Hearing that BIS are meant to have inner conversations if they announce all votes or not at least sound very fishy to me. Why so tiny interaction with community? Had jury really the freedom to give their votes as they wanted after testing stuff properly? Did image only matter?

Again I didnt say people to start harashing anyone, just maybe post some light support messages. Does "keep it fully civil" mean something not civil? Still went bit too far with that, was really mad. Getting more over it now, but still would be nice to hear something.

Only if there was injustice then looking for justice.

Edited April 9, 2015 by SaOk

[IndeedPete 1038]

What do you expect? A detailed critique from every jury member for every single entry in every category? That'd be a few dozen per jury member!^^

I'd like to see the full ranking as well, just out of curiosity, but I never expected full reviews from every jury member, let alone most of them were externals and geographically dispersed. Also, the contest rules were pretty clear and have been repeated a dozen times by now: Players' votes selected the 20 finalists but nothing else. The jury didn't have to take popularity into account. Doesn't matter if WLA had 50, 500 or 5000 votes. Development time and size of the content are irrelevant as well. If you started in late 2012 that's a good thing and admirable, yet this fact alone doesn't affect quality of potential of your entry. Also, endless replayability and the amount of time someone can potentially spend with WLA is not a quality criteria by itself. Anyone remembers the small 2D game called "World War II" ("Der Zweite Weltkrieg" in German)? It was literally "real time strategy" - you'd need like a whole month of real time to produce a tank and a few months to move your troops to Russia or to attack Britain. It was more of a joke but you could actually watch your army marching for weeks... Anyway, potentially 10000s of hours of "playtime" but no fun whatsoever. Not saying this applies to WLA of course - I tried it and didn't like it, but I still think it's very well done and took a lot of effort to create. And you have a solid fan base for sure. By my guess, it would have been in the top three. But one may enjoy to replay Resist ten times over finishing one WLA session, it's all subjective.

And there simply haven't been any objective criteria the jury had to follow, it was totally subjective and as I'd like to point out again, pretty clear from the beginning. Each jury member outlined what they value the most at some point. You enlisted and by that accepted the risk of losing, we all did. By the way, compared to an ordinary lottery our chances were quite high. Each SP finalist had a 3/20 = 15% chance of winning something by statistics alone - way better than any lottery.^^