Infantry vs Vehicles - What do you prefer?

[lato190 55]

Ive read in the net that some people wish that ArmA would be infantry only. Others wish that Infantry should be priority, but vehicles should stay.

What is your opinion about this topic? What do you like the most? What should BI change in Infantry or vehicle aspects? Do vehicles fit into arma in its current states (for example, damage system, flight model etc)? Is infantry fine or does it need changes? Are terrains fine for infantry only gameplay or too big? Are terrains fine for multirole or vehicle combat or too small for jets? questions over questions.

 

My opinion is, that terrains should be smaller to fit infantry gameplay,i prefer also infantry. Imagine insurgency game but with more players and bigger terrains. Creating vehicles for arma is -from what ive heard- time consuming and complicated compared to creating weapons. Also, its strange to have advanced flight models for helicopters, but not for planes. I wish that ArmA would be without vehicles as im more an infantry guy in FPS games.

 

im interest to hear your opinion.

[ineptaphid 6413]

If-as you say you are more infantry focused, then play infantry. Nobody is forcing you to use vehicles. The idea of removing them from Arma is insane.

 

Arma is basically the only combined arms game/sim available. If you removed the vehicles, you would be left with a shooter like any other-but with slightly more complex systems. Vehicles are an integral part of the game.

 

The great thing about Arma is choice-if you are only interested in infantry, then you can design infantry only missions in the editor. People who love helicopters can make awesome helicopter missions. Tank people can do the same. Large groups of players can use everything together for the full experience of combined arms.

 

I don't think games should ever start to remove features-that leads to the situation we see now with so many games having been dumbed down and made so boring.

 

Also-as you said " Imagine insurgency with bigger maps and more players"..Well that sounds like Insurgency.Which I have no interest in. Thats why I play Arma-not Insurgency. I also play Mainly SinglePlayer so Insurgency style stuff hold little appeal for me.

 

P.S Try walking across Altis without any vehicles...It will take about 4 hours ;)

[beno_83au 1362]

If a scenario calls for vehicles, it'll have vehicles. If a scenario calls for infantry, it'll have infantry. If a scenario calls for combined arms being utilised across the full spectrum of a modern battlespace, then it's doing well to showcase Arma's potential. Best thing is, you get to take your pick.

[lato190 55]

If-as you say you are more infantry focused, then play infantry. Nobody is forcing you to use vehicles. The idea of removing them from Arma is insane.

 

Arma is basically the only combined arms game/sim available. If you removed the vehicles, you would be left with a shooter like any other-but with slightly more complex systems. Vehicles are an integral part of the game.

 

The great thing about Arma is choice-if you are only interested in infantry, then you can design infantry only missions in the editor. People who love helicopters can make awesome helicopter missions. Tank people can do the same. Large groups of players can use everything together for the full experience of combined arms.

 

I don't think games should ever start to remove features-that leads to the situation we see now with so many games having been dumbed down and made so boring.

 

Also-as you said " Imagine insurgency with bigger maps and more players"..Well that sounds like Insurgency.Which I have no interest in. Thats why I play Arma-not Insurgency. I also play Mainly SinglePlayer so Insurgency style stuff hold little appeal for me.

 

P.S Try walking across Altis without any vehicles...It will take about 4 hours ;)

 i just want to hear opinions and i have my own opinion about this, not turn this game into an infantry only game. I am not the only one who prefer infantry and there are also people who prefer vehicles and people who prefer both. Its all about personal taste. Also, for infantry only, i play insurgency as this dont have 3rd person, crosshairs etc and is harder than arma without switching any difficult setting or installing any mods and if i want vehicles, i play PR or SQUAD. No need arma for this.

For Altis: Yes, and this is the reason why i wrote "Yes, ArmA should focus only on infantry, i dont mind if terrains would become smaller to fit infantry gameplay" in the poll. Other solution is to focus on one small area in mission editor, creating a playable zone and when leaving, then having like in battlefield a timer to go back to battle zone.

[ineptaphid 6413]

 i just want to hear opinions and i have my own opinion about this, not turn this game into an infantry only game. I am not the only one who prefer infantry and there are also people who prefer vehicles and people who prefer both. Its all about personal taste. Also, for infantry only, i play insurgency as this dont have 3rd person, crosshairs etc and is harder than arma without switching any difficult setting or installing any mods and if i want vehicles, i play PR or SQUAD. No need arma for this.

For Altis: Yes, and this is the reason why i wrote "Yes, ArmA should focus only on infantry, i dont mind if terrains would become smaller to fit infantry gameplay" in the poll. Other solution is to focus on one small area in mission editor, creating a playable zone and when leaving, then having like in battlefield a timer to go back to battle zone.

Well i suppose the way I see it is that all those things can be done already without having to change the game. You can limit 3rd person and crosshairs. Most missions do not use the whole map-they are confined to one area.And it is easy to design missions around small scale infantry combat and to limit where people can go by using triggers etc. So i think the best thing is to keep doing what BI has been doing-so that everyone gets to play the way they like.

 

But if terrains are made smaller or vehicles removed, there is no going back from that.Isnt it better to keep everything in and allow those who just want infantry to just use infanrty? Everything else will still be there for those who want it.

[lato190 55]

But if terrains are made smaller or vehicles removed, there is no going back from that.Isnt it better to keep everything in and allow those who just want infantry to just use infanrty? Everything else will still be there for those who want it.

yes you are right. though its interesting to hear what players like more, but everything should ofcourse stay as it is. The other like infantry and the others vehicles, if you combine that, you have players who take infantry role while others take vehicle role so its teamwork and (i hope) the players knows theyr roles since they prefer them, so enemy will be destroyed :D

[pooroldspike 128]

I'm a tank nut because tanks were invented to make war more fun..;)

Abrams 120mm round-

 

More discussions-

https://forums.bistudio.com/topic/189117-are-aa3-players-tank-shy/#entry2996108

[sic-disaster 311]

What makes OFP/ArmA great is the feeling of being a small cog in a big machine. Without vehicles, there is no machine. 

That being said, I only play infantry-centred missions. I play infantry in every game whenever I can, and in games like Company of Heroes too. The lack of tanks in my army composition there usually costs me my head, but something about vehicles always feels so soulless to me. That, and I like infantry tactics and the tension of CQB situations for infantry. Ambushing mighty war machines as a puny meatbag is fun though. I love me an underdog. I always play as the most basic grunt. In games like Red Orchestra I practically never touch SMG's, MG's etc. I stick with my trusty bolt action rifle and bayonet :D

[CaptainAzimuth 714]

Arma needs a balance of both vehicles and infantry. Problem is, that vehicles can only get so much features before they're impossible to function with AI, which BI depend on for pretty much every aspect of their game, otherwise it probably won't even see the light of day in the Armaverse.

 

However, with AI out of the equation... Vehicles are awesome. Though the handling on them could be improved to make them even more skill oriented, they're something that need to work alongside infantry. Tanks for example can EASILY be killed by infantry, despite the tank having advances systems like Thermals and NV sights. An infantryman can easily get up close and put you out of commission... for ever. Same with APC's. Your effectiveness in these vehicles will only last for so long. As for light strike vehicles and such, MRAPS, cars, those are pretty much like infantry, just on wheels. They can easily be dealt with, and effect gameplay in very minimal and specific ways. Aircraft are different however, where as they're fast, agile, and can change the tide of a game, depending on the skill of the operator of course. With new logistics features like Sling loading, and Vehicle in Vehicle transportation, i think it's safe to say that you can now make things super challenging by having heavier vehicles moved to places in almost silly amounts of time. Get from allied forces to behind enemy liens with a couple of AMV-7 Marshall's and the enemies gonna have a bad day. Though, again, those vehicles will be useful for only so long. Naval units... don't even get me started. But hypothetically, assuming we had them, they could bear just as much strategic value as helicopters, in an event you don't have helicopters. They can also play the role of Heavily armed attack units like Tank's and APC's, but in a limited space, of course, being in water, but close to shore. They could also fill the logistical role for vehicle transport and infantry transport. in short. All things work like gears, together. infantry and vehicles together, make a great gameplay experience in the Arma series. 

 

A short backs story, before i even got Arma, i saw some gameplay of Arma 2, seeing it was at the time branded a "simulator" i was intrigued at how you could have tanks, jets, and infantry all in the same space. In my mind, then, it was MASSIVE. Knowing nothing about the game, only seeing footage of Frogfoot's gun running vehicles, and attack heli's shooting at infantry, i even thought it was better than DCS. Of course now years of playing both Arma 2 and Arma 3, i understand things a little better now, though i'd still be pleased to find a game in the future that as vehicles and infantry in an environment like DCS. But for now, Arma fills that niche for me with the combined arms thing, despite how selective the mechanics content are.

[DieselJC 196]

My vote is for Infantry..in both cases..too many people overuse and abuse vehicles and aircraft,you can have a squad of infantry moving along fine having fun and out of nowhere some bonehead grabs a tank or an attack chopper and blows the shit out of everything around you and your squad..literally destroying what you've worked for..vehicles and air support have their place but 99% of the people have no idea what that is. Then you have the people who think they can fly when in reality they cant and end up destroying vehicle after vehicle then promptly leaving the server to go to another server and do the same thing...get frsustrating when people don't want to work together and communicate.

 

Diesel

[ineptaphid 6413]

My vote is for Infantry..in both cases..too many people overuse and abuse vehicles and aircraft,you can have a squad of infantry moving along fine having fun and out of nowhere some bonehead grabs a tank or an attack chopper and blows the shit out of everything around you and your squad..literally destroying what you've worked for..vehicles and air support have their place but 99% of the people have no idea what that is. Then you have the people who think they can fly when in reality they cant and end up destroying vehicle after vehicle then promptly leaving the server to go to another server and do the same thing...get frsustrating when people don't want to work together and communicate.

 

Diesel

While I do agree those things do happen-that is usually only an issue on large public severs, which is only one small part of Arma's player base. Not so much of an issue for groups/units, team servers or coop players or SP.

[lexx 1332]

Yeah, people being like people on a public server is hardly the fault of BI and shouldn't affect wether vehicles count as useful or not.

 

Me personally, I am not a too big fan of heavy tanks. Infantry only is boring too, though. What I like are APCs and IFVs, which basically combine tank and infantry gameplay into one, have both work together to be highly effective, etc. most awesome.

 

Also, like someone else pointed out somewhere else, I am really, really missing the 3d interior. Yes, they serve almost no gameplay purpose, but they give you a better feeling of being in a tank, and not just being a 2d sprite that tries to be a viewport.

[acealive 8]

The thing with ground vehicles in Arma is that they feel like Mario Kart or Need For Speed.

Being able to drive a tons heavy truck with WASD is a joke and only good for some public server fun action. 

 

The vehicles miss a realsitic driving model, like the helicopters have gotten as an option.

 

So that when switching that option on, you would have to use wheel, pedals and a shifter to drive and actually need a little bit of skill.

Currently the driving is very 'meh'.
I would never want to drive a car or truck in a Milsim event again. Did it once, felt so stupid.

 

I do drive tanks in such events however at times, as it is at least more immersive than cars or trucks.

 

I used to drive racing sims, so I might be slightly biased ;)

 

Helicopters are fun though and also have the realistic model, so that you can choose to have a challenge learning to use them. I'm still learning to master the regular flight model (I do not fly very often), once I am really confident with it, I am looking forward to learning how to use the realistic model. 

[Mirek 166]

Add more realistic physical, damage and drive model to the landvehicles?  - YES off course! Why isnt that done allready?

 

Make the maps smaller? - NO!

 

Remove Vehicles? - NO!

 

Can OP please explain why he things that the terrains should be smaller? Is it somehow restricted in his culture to use only small part of the terrain?

 

This thread does as much sense as asking if football shouldnt be played on ice, and without the ball.

[Lobotomy Lobster 6]

Arma needs vehicles but the OP raises a really good point, smaller maps have a whole bunch of advantages over huge maps and there is such a thing as an island that's too big.

 

Look at this picture from Karel Moricky:

 

Altis is one of the biggest maps there but it is nowhere near as detailed and varied as places like Los Santos, one part of the island looks and plays much like another. The bigger you make a map, the less time the map makers can spend on detail work so you get copy and paste towns and bases and wilderness that look lifeless and repetitive (think Cherno woods). Its pointless having a huge map if it looks mostly the same across the whole thing as you are never going to use all that space at once.

 

Arma might have land, sea and air but its an infantry focused game. Land vehicles generally aren't all that much fun to play as the handling, damage modelling and visuals are quite crude compared to a lot of even quite arcadey games such as World of Tanks and Red Orchestra 2 and they're just too vulnerable to infantry AT (as discussed here https://forums.bistudio.com/topic/189117-are-aa3-players-tank-shy/#entry2996108).

 

All of that sounds very harsh but I think BI see it the same way considering they made Tanoa smaller, though its a shame that more buildings aren't enterable. I think Arma's future should definitely focus more on quality than quantity with smaller, more detailed maps.

[ivan keska 45]

I have no problem with vehicles because hell it's really easy to disable nearly everything you run into. Your basic 5.56 rifle can knock out the all light turrets like on the MRAPs and Marid, with only a few hits. But medium turrets like on the BTR or Tigris, need a 50 cal machine gun or a 50 cal sniper rifle. But heavy turrets on the MBTs need AP rounds from cannons or AT rockets or missiles.

BUT!! I really think we need health for view ports and optics on MBT and vehicles in general. Since that is a very real tactic, in which you shoot the view ports and optic with your rifle in order to cause crack blocking view or just break it. Which is why tanks in real life have to be careful in how they deal with infantry. Because skilled soldiers will know how to deal with something like say an BMP, even if they don't have AT. Sure they might not be able to kill it but if you break the view ports and optics, the crew either have to fall back and navigate with GPS or turn out and risk getting shot. Both situation i'm sure no armor crew whats to deal with.

[lexx 1332]

I disagree with Altis looking the same everywhere. The west looks completely different than the east, for example. There are beautiful locations like Zaros between two mountains with the pines, or tiny desert towns like Ifestiona, or the big city Kavala (where rarely people dare to play due to performance in the beginning.. sadly), all the places with different ruins,.... Sure the building style and stuff is pretty much the same everywhere, but saying Altis looks identical and copy&paste is really not true. Hell, I am playing on Altis for so long now, and I still find tiny beautiful and unique spots with a great background view that would make fancy locations for new missions.

[Mirek 166]

Ill rathe see bigger maps, The level of detail on Altis is just fine. I could live with even less detail. 

[infrareddimming 195]

It would easily be vehicles for me... if the mechanics concerning vehicular gameplay were solid. Unfortunately they're a bit of a mess right now, which makes for a less than optimal gaming experience. I recently played OFP again and found myself amazed at how immersive vehicle interiors were. I understand the tremendous workload involved with designing them, but scrapping them (for tanks atleast) was big mistake. Especially now with PiP tech we could have truly immersive interiors (although the lighting would need some serious work). Hopefully for Arma IV BIS will reconsider their stance on vehicle interiors. I'd love to fluidly transition from being unbuttoned to being in a dimly lit armored shell surrounded by MFDs and other instruments. 

[andersson 285]

Fully agree. Tank interiours is what I miss from ofp. I loved playing with armour but with no interiours I stopped. Cant stand floating around with my face glued to the sight...

[Mirek 166]

I strongly agree that wehicles need lot more detailed physical and damage models. 

[dragon01 902]

For all you AFV lovers, Burnes Armories mod has excellent tank interiors. I really wish BI did implement them in their tanks, as well.

 

TBH, I'm more of a vehicle guy, though I do like the infantry gameplay as well, from time to time. Helicopters are currently my favorites, as they have a good flight model and decent damage model.

[AegisWolf 16]

Tanks all the way! Hopefully, they'll give them some form of APS, and infantry tactics to deal with APSs, in the Tanks update.

[en3x 209]

This reminds me on "hey we have cars killing people everyday, lets remove cars to prevent that."

 

Obviously that is not the right solution. The right solution is to create sophisticated computer system

that minimizes human fault and make streets safer.

 

Similar with arma. If you feel betrayed by the vehicles on your preferred game mode contact author

and present better way to deal with those. Removing something so established in identity of game

to please your way of playing is very egoistical.

[froggyluv 2130]

So infantry minded that doubt Ive been in all of Arma 3's vanilla vehicle content.

 

 That said, glad as hell there are vehicles and I do have fun when a mission presents me with one. The more they enhance a learning curve (making it skill based) and a more robust damage model, i expect to play vehicles more and more.  But id never play DCS until they add infantry..