Co-op Campaign: APEX PROTOCOL

[Alwarren 2767]

I really don't understand why you can't have AI's in your team like in Arma 2 campaign. Anyone else agrees with me?

 

I think 99% agree with you.

The reason, I think, why there isn't any AI teammates in the campaign, it AI pathfinding. It's heavily, well, "impaired" in some areas of Tanoa, especially in the ruins and on some of the small footpaths through rocky terrain. They didn't (or couldn't) fix the issues, so they insist on everyone being a player of not there.

 

But there is so much wrong with the campaign that, at this point, I consider it not fixable.

 

EDIT: I meant Tanoa, of course not Altis

[R3vo 2654]

I think 99% agree with you.

The reason, I think, why there isn't any AI teammates in the campaign, it AI pathfinding. It's heavily, well, "impaired" in some areas of Altis Tanoa, especially in the ruins and on some of the small footpaths through rocky terrain. They didn't (or couldn't) fix the issues, so they insist on everyone being a player of not there.

 

But there is so much wrong with the campaign that, at this point, I consider it not fixable.

 

If that is true, than I don't actually know what do say about that....

[IndeedPete 1038]

It might also be related to the clunky commanding menu. Which really, really, really, [...], really needs some love. I agree though, AI pathfinding is a bit wonky on Tanoa.

[Alwarren 2767]

If that is true, than I don't actually know what do say about that....

 

It is, unfortunately. The old Japanese fortesses are a primary culprit, and I had seen at least one instance were AI refused to pass between to rocks because they were too close together. Truth is, there are places on Tanoa that are more or less inaccessible to AI, and I suspect that might have played a role in the decision to remove AI.

 

Because, in any way you see it, removing AI does not make any logical sense. Yes, commanding them can be a pain in the anus, but if you restrict it to four guys it is becoming manageable. As it is now, if you play solo then Raider 2 is a one-man team, something that practically does not exist in reality.

[froggyluv 2136]

Your talking infantry or cars? Cars are hilariously horrific and I mean that literally - Lmao all the time at the high speed accidents, thankfully the mission I play the AI fix there own flats which I also get a kick out of. Infantry in my experience move very well even among some wonky rock formations - not too many AI games have to deal with such an intricate landscape 

[Alwarren 2767]

Your talking infantry or cars?

Infantry I'm afraid.

Send from my tablet, so pardon any autocorrect bollocks

[Stalkermaster2015 60]

Well would you look at that. The nagging is finally paying off

The new roadmap mentions that they are gonna start converting the apex campaign to Sp. while it won't fix the issues I have with the actual campaign at least it looks like I'll finally be able to enjoy it in some form solo

[.kju 3245]

nice to see the campaign made fully SP too :)

 

while people among the long time players or realism fans wanted something different,

I think its still fair to reckon that among the larger player base A3 has these days, there is still

a crowd that enjoys this approach and it works as a tool to get these closer to the arma core potentially.

 

i hope you are to release some specific and actual stats on player usage for "each" of the official content, SP and MP,

as well as some data on the community made some time in the future   :)

[Wiki 1558]

I wonder what it's gonna be.

I mean, porting it to SP:

Just add the 3 AI team mates and savegame ability?

[Stalkermaster2015 60]

I wonder what it's gonna be.

I mean, porting it to SP:

Just add the 3 AI team mates and savegame ability?

Well that would already make it ten times better then it is

[lexx 1363]

I wonder what it's gonna be.
I mean, porting it to SP:

Just add the 3 AI team mates and savegame ability?

 

I think it's a waste of time. There is still no added atmosphere with your team communicating, etc. and I am not sure if it would motivate me to play it again.

 

This Tac Ops thing sounds to me like a flow of missions that you can purchase. I am fine with this, as long as it includes singleplayer content and the content-price balance is kept well.

[Wiki 1558]

I think it's a waste of time. There is still no added atmosphere with your team communicating, etc. and I am not sure if it would motivate me to play it again.

 

I know, same for me aswell.

I already finished it a lot of times, coop and playing solo.

I'll probably play it again in SP to have it marked as "done", but nothing more.

 

 

This Tac Ops thing sounds to me like a flow of missions that you can purchase. I am fine with this, as long as it includes singleplayer content and the content-price balance is kept well.

 

Yep, I hope that too!

 

Anyway, it will be the same as usual: BIS will get my money  

[OMAC 254]

I think it's a waste of time. There is still no added atmosphere with your team communicating, etc. and I am not sure if it would motivate me to play it again.

 

This Tac Ops thing sounds to me like a flow of missions that you can purchase. I am fine with this, as long as it includes singleplayer content and the content-price balance is kept well.

 

I very much agree on the second point, but not on the first. 

 

I don't think it will take a whole lot of time to add normal SP gameplay capability to Apex Protocol (AI squadmates and normal saves, no respawn/revive), especially given the amount of time already spent.  I think that the time will be well spent, as the result will extend BI's SP legacy that stretches back almost 16 years, and will be quite fun to play, adding new opportunities to develop effective tactical strategies to tackle the missions and make the existing missions more complex given the required commanding.  BI could even enhance the effort by adding more missions, new Steam achievements, or even (fingers crossed) optional scouting missions/side quests a la East Wind.  They could also add one or more missions where you play as CSAT or Syndikat within the current story.

 

Adding AI squadmates will substantially change the way players must approach the missions.  Currently, with only one person, enemy are to be avoided in many instances, especially with respawns disabled.  With a full squad, that will not be the case.  IMO, such changes will definitely make playing the campaign over again worth the effort.

 

Myself and others have suggested official playable content packs for years!  Such products will earn good $$$ for BI while showcasing their mission-making talent.  But there better be SP, or at least old-style (Harvest Red) SP/COOP, content in there!  In terms of communication, hopefully BI will be more clear about the playstyles offered by the pack(s) than they were about Apex Protocol...

[foffy 58]

I would like to agree with the calls to content packs. I think if the coming DLCs are not going to have campaigns like ArmA II did, the least they can be are mission packs. Showcase missions are ingame tutorials, and not enough.

 

That said, I am very happy this campaign is being converted. I do wonder what they'll change though. If it's adding AI and making it follow SP rules...couldn't someone actually mod this to to be so right now? I didn't get too far in the game because I disliked the forced solo play and respawns, so I only got up to mission two. I understand the campaign is short and was designed this way, so I am happy to see they've taken the time out to try and design the campaign for players in the formula they've had with prior campaigns.

 

I can't see too much being added, for I don't know what they could add. Customizable loadouts for all blufor elements on your squad seems like the only big change I can think of...