Possible Solution to Stamina/Fatigue Conundrum

[mcstubs 13]

Hello, Bohemia Interactive.

    It's been some time since we've gotten the new stamina system and to be quite honest I'm disappointed.  Now, this isn't going to be a whole thread about me ranting on and on about my opinions and other such things because I've already done that to myself and I've worn it thin.  I've searched the forums thick and thin and I am here to discuss possible solutions, some presented by others, and compile them in one consolidated place so that we can be constructive and productive about this.  Arma, beginning with Operation Flashpoint: Cold War Crisis back in 2001, was and still is my all time favorite game series.  It's had it's ups and downs without a doubt but I'm here to see it through.

 

     Now to the meat and potatoes...

 

     So as we all know everybody comes to play Arma for different reasons.  You could call mine more "traditional".  I enjoy the military simulation sandbox side of the package but many other game modes and play styles exist and have existed for a very long time.  The fatigue system which we previously had was a very solid, well built system which supported many players play styles but was also disliked by many others due to it's severity (though I must say the Arma dude was in gooooood shape!).  This is entirely understandable, one shoe never fits all but I don't believe that replacing the existing system with an entirely new universal system is the right answer either.

 

     Now, I just finished trying out the latest beta and I gave a glance at your difficulty settings menu.  Many people had previously mentioned making fatigue and stamina a difficulty based option or user configured option much like the Advanced Flight Model.  I can't think of a better time to bring this up and get this stirring around the community to see what people think and maybe to allow a wider range of diversity while still allowing people to keep what they want.  Making fatigue something to be modded back in is absurd and I can't stress that enough.

And while you're at it BI, why not make both Fatigue and Stamina adjustable to a users/servers needs within the game via sliders and check boxes and make a user element for fatigue as well.  You'd be doing the whole community a favor.  Stamina can be your forefront for faster paced gameplay while fatigue can be your stronghold for us milsim folk.

Thank you for your time.
Sincerely, Benjamin.

Now Everybody!  Discuss the living hell out of this but keep it respectful!  I want ideas and and cool stuff spilling from your noggins.  None of that "Casual vs Hardcore" shit.  This is the Arma community so lets keep it what it always has been and make me proud.

[chortles 263]

I'm afraid I can't see this going anywhere when Bohemia already got the "difficulty option" feedback months ago and pressed on anyway... no way they didn't already take impending criticism into account when they decided on stamina.

[fn_Quiksilver 1636]

Like this? 

 

 

 

Great thing about modding is most of the stuff in your post is achievable for servers without having to use required addons. As a user I'd also like more flexibility with stamina/fatigue. But I think a standard system is best, so you know from server to server, mission to mission what the stamina will be like. It is possible to mod the stamina system as well, again without the use of required addons.
 

This mod worked for the fatigue system, you and anyone else are free to use it for ideas to design a modified stamina system:

https://forums.bistudio.com/topic/178982-release-modified-fatigue-system/

[mcstubs 13]

This mod worked for the fatigue system, you and anyone else are free to use it for ideas to design a modified stamina system:

https://forums.bistudio.com/topic/178982-release-modified-fatigue-system/

Yes, the stamina system is modable but it's entirely different down at the core.  Lowering your weapon doesn't save energy, no animation slow down from exhaustion, etc...  (If you don't slow down as you run there is far less danger in retreat).  Besides as I said before, it's ludicrous that players should have to go mod in a major component that was in the game several months prior.  Especially one that markets itself as a military simulator.

Someone else on the forum put it best (not verbatim of course).  "It would be just as ridiculous if BI removed 3rd person view and weapon crosshairs for the realism community and everybody else had to bite the bullet and find a scripted/modded solution to get them back."

I've been with this community since it started.  BI fucked up but I love 'em so I'm here to offer solutions however I won't take it like a bitch.  This was a mistake and it needs fixing.

[CaptainAzimuth 714]

Yes, the stamina system is modable but it's entirely different down at the core.  Lowering your weapon doesn't save energy, no animation slow down from exhaustion, etc...  (If you don't slow down as you run there is far less danger in retreat).  Besides as I said before, it's ludicrous that players should have to go mod in a major component that was in the game several months prior.  Especially one that markets itself as a military simulator.

Someone else on the forum put it best (not verbatim of course).  "It would be just as ridiculous if BI removed 3rd person view and weapon crosshairs for the realism community and everybody else had to bite the bullet and find a scripted/modded solution to get them back."

I've been with this community since it started.  BI fucked up but I love 'em so I'm here to offer solutions however I won't take it like a bitch.  This was a mistake and it needs fixing.

You don't theoretically have to do anything. The system works as it should. The game is also not a Mil-Sim, and to be honest, never was. If it were mil sim it would be as accurate as DCS in which case is impossible on an engine like this, not to mention you can't simulate infantry anyway because you wouldn't be able to run long anyway.

BI have spent honestly too much time on Fatiuge. They re did the system twice. The first time was to make it more involving of the game, but the second was almost a complete 180, in terms of stamina. However they did a great job the second time. Only problem is, no one uses Stamina anyway, because either they mod it the way they want it, or they disable it completely. Aside from that there are the few that leave the game completely because they don't get their way. The game is fine the way it is. Just find a server with the features your looking for because you won't find it in Vanilla servers, and if so there far and few in between.

[mcstubs 13]

You don't theoretically have to do anything. The system works as it should. The game is also not a Mil-Sim, and to be honest, never was. If it were mil sim it would be as accurate as DCS in which case is impossible on an engine like this, not to mention you can't simulate infantry anyway because you wouldn't be able to run long anyway.

BI have spent honestly too much time on Fatiuge. They re did the system twice. The first time was to make it more involving of the game, but the second was almost a complete 180, in terms of stamina. However they did a great job the second time. Only problem is, no one uses Stamina anyway, because either they mod it the way they want it, or they disable it completely. Aside from that there are the few that leave the game completely because they don't get their way. The game is fine the way it is. Just find a server with the features your looking for because you won't find it in Vanilla servers, and if so there far and few in between.

I'm not going to go in depth between the two systems on this particular forum because that isn't what I came here to discuss.  Just to be clear though, the current system (stamina) works for only a part of the gaming community while the old system (fatigue) worked for a radically different part of the same community (Arma).  I'm going to agree with you about the milsim part; Arma could never be classified as a milsim.  However, that was the sort of community that built it from the ground up and the community that Bohemia has catered to for years.  Now I know that times are changing and new people are arriving along with many new mods and game modes but Arma is, in my opinion, still the best open, tough infantry shooter on the market.

What I don't understand and what I came here to discuss and find solutions for is why we removed fatigue entirely.  This system was already in place and working and Bohemia came along with a new system.  Why not make the two coexist?  I think with the way Arma has been expanding it's been somewhat baffling and confusing for a previously small company like Bohemia.  they've been reaching out trying to find a middle ground and what they've ended up with misses the vocal majority of players.  I'm here because I love this series and I want it to be something great and if that's what i want to achieve then I need to be critical and so does everybody else who has a clear idea of a good future.

[CaptainAzimuth 714]

Snip

Well let's start with the why. Fatiuge isn't exactly removed, but rather it's taken a watered down standard. Why? Because in reality, a majority main stream players that have bought the game are now the ones who have provided their feedback in regards to the system. These main stream players out number us, which are the ones that like fatigue. Who are they? The main stream players are pretty much the ones who only found out about Arma via. Days the mod. They then got into the whole Arma scene later on at which point they were already heavily spoiled because they had been able to run from on end of cheenarus to the other with ease. The result? They started playing Arma 3 and instantly hated the fatigue. They the complained, and had BI change the fatigue, twice. Now, it comes to my disappointment that even my squad members now have constantly complained to me about the fatigue being annoying and more of a pain than a feature of the game. Of course I always tell them to pack light or deal with it. But the reality remains the same. The majority are used to simply not having to deal with Fatigue, period. This is why most servers don't even use it despite it being watered down.

[en3x 209]

I don't think players decided what they wanted, It seemed more like 2 sided contest

decision by bohemia staff.One part liked fatigue and the other more of standard

run of the mill FPS approach.

 

I base this from their oprep where they mentions something along the lines like

"similar to modern FPSs".And from the fact that they implemented fatigue

in engine in a first place.

 

For me in my heart it it's the worst deliberate feature regression in 15 years of arma.

Is not in spirit of depth or authenticity.

[andersson 285]

It's not much to discuss really. It doesn't matter how much I want to old system back when BI has decided what they want in their game. A lot of players, me included, have been vocal and given feedback long before it made it into stable, but BI's mind was set. I have a feeling it has something to do with end game..? To create a MP friendly gameplay that would attract more casual players. A lot of man hours for BI and they started to tweak it back to what was, but for some reason they will not accept the losses and go back.

I'm wondering if any of the servers that had disabled fatigue have enabled stamina..? I wouldn't be surprised if all this did was to have more servers disable that feature.

 

So even if I fully agree with you and I would love to see a solution I'm convinced BI will not spend more time on it. They seem to be happy with stamina and claim that it fulfills their vision. It baffles my mind...

[domokun 515]

All of the above. Essentially why can't BI offer (as part of their Difficulty Overhaul) players an option to:

a. disable stamina (arcade)

b. enable stamina (light)

c. enable fatigue (realism)

It's that simple. We're not asking BI to re-invent the wheel but simply re-enable that which they had before.

I can't see why BI are happy allow players access to game-impacting options such as cross-hairs and 3rd person view but not this.

Honestly I've been following the Arma series for almost 15 years now and this was by far the illogical decision so far.

I understand that the majority of the community voted for option B. Guess what? They got option A and B. Since BI have decided not to enforce stamina, i.e. make it an option. Why not add another option, i.e. option C.

[chortles 263]

A lot of players, me included, have been vocal and given feedback long before it made it into stable, but BI's mind was set.

Pretty much why I haven't spoken on stamina since its reveal: I can't think of any argument that I've seen on these forums or elsewhere, this thread included, that they didn't already anticipate (much less hear) before the push to stable... which seems to be a trend for several decisions in Arma 3 development: announced only after it was finalized internally.

[mcstubs 13]

Well, regardless of the situation, I am going to pressure Bohemia as best I can.  I urge you all to do the same.  Unless our voices are heard together and consistently then Bohemia may as well pass us by.  They made a mistake but I believe they are a good company and, given a good vocal thrashing, can also make good decisions.  I'm off to the support section to write the devs for answers.

Thank you.

[St. Jimmy 272]

I myself gave up with the stamina. We tried as best as we could in the dev branch thread but it still was pushed. They had already decided to do it and they won't return back to stamina until there's an announcement of it. Fatigue was scrapped because of AI.

[mcstubs 13]

I myself gave up with the stamina. We tried as best as we could in the dev branch thread but it still was pushed. They had already decided to do it and they won't return back to stamina until there's an announcement of it. Fatigue was scrapped because of AI.

Do you mean how AI were too accurate while fatigued?

[St. Jimmy 272]

Do you mean how AI were too accurate while fatigued?

They couldn't handle it because they were constantly moving with gun up. It's usual to see AI run in combat pace gun up which was very tiring.

[mcstubs 13]

They couldn't handle it because they were constantly moving with gun up. It's usual to see AI run in combat pace gun up which was very tiring.

That's a poor excuse from them to say the least and I also suspect it's not the real answer.  I'm not finished with this...

[sic-disaster 311]

Honestly, I don't think a load of options are good when it comes to core gameplay mechanics. It only serves to divide the online community. Granted, that seems to be happening now as well, but it's better for everyone to adjust to one set of mechanics.

 

The best example I can give of why I don't think options would be a good thing here is Red Orchestra 2: Heroes of Stalingrad. That game now counts, if I remember correctly, four different gameplay 'levels', originally starting out with two. The original two were basically mostly the same mechanics but with the 'hardcore mode' turning off various HUD elements and such... Now this hardcore mode was not to the satisfaction of RO1 fans, being too action-oriented and also having other issues (not nearly enough bolt action rifles for one), so after a long time (too long!) TWI added two extra modes: classic, bringing the game more in line with the original... and an 'action-mode' making the game COD-like, which feels added out of spite because the original fans were 'bitching too much', and even the original casual mode wasn't casual enough for the gaming community at large. So now the game has four game modes which are wildly different, and an already declining playerbase (discontented fans of RO1, casual gamers bouncing off the difficulty even of casual mode) spread thin over all of them, making it harder to find servers for what you want. And not steadily being able to find servers with what you want = even more people giving up, and the game dying off.

 

ArmA servers are already hard enough to get into with all the required mods for many of them. We don't need this kind of thing adding to the difficulties. I say leave it up to mods. Hell, even mission makers can make missions that disable the fatigue system.  

[old_painless 183]

That's a poor excuse from them to say the least and I also suspect it's not the real answer.  I'm not finished with this...

Unless you write for PC Gamer or something with similar clout you will end up disappointed, sorry to say. It is a conondrum indeed, and in the initial report on the development there was also mention of how even the development team at BI was very divided with the decision to redo fatigue/stamina. So somebody pulled rank at BI and we got this.

 

The truly sad part is how much developer time it took away from fixing really important game flaws, but that is water under the bridge now, cf. the thread in development branch.

 

-OP

[Beagle 684]

The main problemm currently is that neither system is accepted. Right now even those Onlien communities that considers themselves "hardcore" have switched fatigue off. he system was never really thought throug since for example even the shortest 10m Sprint makes the use of lauchers practically impossible. Stamina is neglecting the fact that the weight of a weapon itself is a anti sway factor.

 

I joined ArmA 3 quite lately after it took ArmA 2 so long to really shine, but now after just 9 onths I must say....ArmA 2 is still the better game and pinaccle of the series. ArmA 3 just shines a bit more in the gfx abd animations department but that not making a better game in my eyes that are still used to gfx from the 90's

[fn_Quiksilver 1636]

The main problemm currently is that neither system is accepted. Right now even those Onlien communities that considers themselves "hardcore" have switched fatigue off. he system was never really thought throug since for example even the shortest 10m Sprint makes the use of lauchers practically impossible. Stamina is neglecting the fact that the weight of a weapon itself is a anti sway factor.

 

I joined ArmA 3 quite lately after it took ArmA 2 so long to really shine, but now after just 9 onths I must say....ArmA 2 is still the better game and pinaccle of the series. ArmA 3 just shines a bit more in the gfx abd animations department but that not making a better game in my eyes that are still used to gfx from the 90's

 

the issue with the sway was that even when bipod deployed there was still a sway value, which irritated many. the issue with the stamina was the carry weight, and the fact that some primary weapons (rifles) took up half the max soldier load, leading to forced walking when the soldier decided to put on a uniform and vest and have a few mags with him. basically some of the config primary weapon weights were too significant for the system to be playable. Not sure what state the system is in now though (1.56)

[mcstubs 13]

Honestly, I don't think a load of options are good when it comes to core gameplay mechanics. It only serves to divide the online community. Granted, that seems to be happening now as well, but it's better for everyone to adjust to one set of mechanics.

 

The best example I can give of why I don't think options would be a good thing here is Red Orchestra 2: Heroes of Stalingrad. That game now counts, if I remember correctly, four different gameplay 'levels', originally starting out with two. The original two were basically mostly the same mechanics but with the 'hardcore mode' turning off various HUD elements and such... Now this hardcore mode was not to the satisfaction of RO1 fans, being too action-oriented and also having other issues (not nearly enough bolt action rifles for one), so after a long time (too long!) TWI added two extra modes: classic, bringing the game more in line with the original... and an 'action-mode' making the game COD-like, which feels added out of spite because the original fans were 'bitching too much', and even the original casual mode wasn't casual enough for the gaming community at large. So now the game has four game modes which are wildly different, and an already declining playerbase (discontented fans of RO1, casual gamers bouncing off the difficulty even of casual mode) spread thin over all of them, making it harder to find servers for what you want. And not steadily being able to find servers with what you want = even more people giving up, and the game dying off.

 

ArmA servers are already hard enough to get into with all the required mods for many of them. We don't need this kind of thing adding to the difficulties. I say leave it up to mods. Hell, even mission makers can make missions that disable the fatigue system.  

This is a very valid point.  That was probably the biggest reason I left Red Orchestra 2 even though I bought it and played it for a while.  "Those who stand for everything stand for nothing."

 

Well I haven't heard back from one of the devs as of yet but my message has been received and is being put through and I hope to hear back shortly.

[Imperator[TFD] 444]

and the fact that some primary weapons (rifles) took up half the max soldier load, leading to forced walking when the soldier decided to put on a uniform and vest and have a few mags with him. basically some of the config primary weapon weights were too significant for the system to be playable. Not sure what state the system is in now though (1.56)

This honestly is exactly how it should be. Weapons like the M320, G6, and Cyrus are all very large and heavy weapons so players should not expect to be able to cart one around with a backpack full of ammo and explosives/gear. Turn off stamina completely if this issue is unacceptable to the player base of a mission OR encourage the player base to engage in meaningful teamwork via ammo carriers, re-supplies etc (*snicker* won’t ever happen on a pub server)

As for fatigue v stamina I still prefer the old system as the current system only truly penalizes you for sprinting. Having said that I’ve learnt to live with the current stamina iteration and feel that it still manages to convey some semblance of a requirement to properly manage your loadout. I especially like the part where you are forced to walk if you load up on too much stuff.

[fn_Quiksilver 1636]

This honestly is exactly how it should be. Weapons like the M320, G6, and Cyrus are all very large and heavy weapons so players should not expect to be able to cart one around with a backpack full of ammo and explosives/gear. Turn off stamina completely if this issue is unacceptable to the player base of a mission OR encourage the player base to engage in meaningful teamwork via ammo carriers, re-supplies etc (*snicker* won’t ever happen on a pub server)

As for fatigue v stamina I still prefer the old system as the current system only truly penalizes you for sprinting. Having said that I’ve learnt to live with the current stamina iteration and feel that it still manages to convey some semblance of a requirement to properly manage your loadout. I especially like the part where you are forced to walk if you load up on too much stuff.

 

I guess it depends if BI cares about the public multiplayer. As you say, the concept of ammobearers in MP is not practical (rarely ever seen players take on the role). That and the Virtual Arsenal are not friendly for ammo bearers.