Which would you most like to see improved/added

[Blake 0]

ALL OF THE ABOVE.

Ability to fire from vehicles might be fun for few minutes but it really is not that important. You don't even hit anything from a moving vehicle. There are way more important issues in the list such as improved close-quarter combat and suppressive fire and artillery.

Armor damage system is a disgrace and should be imroved! How about making just more sections to tank for damage if it is otherwise too hard to implement.

Ability to control entire platoons and companies with a swift command structure would be one thing to add there.

[Col. Kurtz 0]

More realism is a definite.

Better graphics would be nice, but if I could have only one thing in OFP2 it would be more realistic modelling. For example, if you were in a T-55 and were firing at a Leopard 2A6 at a range of 1km and hitting its frontal armour, it would not penetrate, no matter how many times you fired it off. And visible damage on vehicles and buildings. Being able to see entry points from AP rounds on knocked out tanks and the like.

[havocsquad 0]

Hit Points system should be totally removed from Armored vehicles in OFP as a determination of hit/disabled/destroyed.

The primary thing that needs to be done is to accuarately simulate different types of armor (Sloped, Reactive, Composite, Cohbam, Ceramic Armor, and Ceramic Armor with Dupleted Uranium Reinforcement.)  Then have an armor effectiveness against Sabot rounds depend on the thickness of the armor and the type of armor for certain vehicles.

Type of armor determines mostly penentration of ATGM missiles and HEAT rounds.

Armor Thickness and armor type determine the penentration ability for Sabot Rounds to penentrate the armor.

Any vehicle with sufficient amount of steel thickness to stop or heavily resist small arms or higher caliber bullets should have to go by armor thickness.

If OFP can develop vehicle systems damage more realistically (Engine, Fire Control, etc.), and simulate armored warfare combat that goes by armor type and armor thickness in ALL directions  (Front, Rear, Left, Right, AND Top Armor.), then they should produce a top notch Armored warfare simulation.

A set standard for particular rounds of ammunition need to be set so that the "official" ammo like 25mm, 30mm, 76mm, 105mm, 120mm, 125mm, and various artillery rounds produce the same damage and realistic behavior characteristics when used in combat in OFP 2.

I want armored warfare to play like the games Steel Beasts or M1 Tank Platoon.

Once the ammunition used in OFP 2 behaves in a realistic manner, people won't have to create the same ammo just to produce a realistic effect.  They will just only need to create the vehicle that uses it.

Minor differences in pentration power exist between different types of 30mm rounds used by different vehicles/helos/aircraft, so these should be modeled accordingly to their each seperate abilities.

Oh, and when I use an A-10, I want that 30mm Avenger to really do some serious damage to armored vehicles in OFP 2 instead of giving it a few scratches right now.

[Col. Kurtz 0]

I agree with everything you suggested

[zayfod 1]

All the above improvements would be great but as u can only vote for one I voted better CQC.

As it stands there is simply nothing out there atm that can touch opflash for wide open space warefare and TRUE environment interaction (albeit in need of improvement--but still brilliant and light years ahead of anything else).

If BIS were to make a priority of better CQC it would add an incredible new dimension to the game that just doesnt quite work atm.

They would have to solve all the clipping issues with the models(no more falling thru walls--off ladders) this would be an immense improvement. Once they nail this then there wont be a snow balls chance in hell of any game touching it in the forseeable future.

It would also rally Addon  makers and open WONDERFUL new doors for them as they would start to produce intricate and complex INTERIORS for buildings, castles, tunnels, houses.

Addon makers would have just the REASON to make the interiors as amazing as some of the exteriors and landscapes etc.

Taking a town would be a whole NEW ball game from what it is now, if you had to scout all the buildings (which u would in RL) and clear every nook and cranny.

Think of it, while your busy clearing one house the AI might see u  and go and hide in another, or move from room to room either evading u or stalking you.

Yup--all posted points in this thread are good ones but I reckon having great CQC would certainly be step closer to covering the entire spectrum of warfare gaming.

Zay

[Jinef 2]

Aircraft Flight Models

[Drakkhen 0]

Better collisions.

OFP is great for open-ground fighting but finer collisions would

improve the close-quarters and urban combat... a style that fits well to a resistance guerrilla standard.

[Tibby595 0]

just read all the options and i've gotta say

why choose get an arty system?

check the codesnippets on OFPEC for arty and you get great results

[Drakkhen 0]

An other great point would be a real modular class management, allowing even the weirdest things like putting a turret on a soldier or whatever not only when you master scripting (which consumes your CPU time for something the engine could have handled faster).

[Guest]

This may set off some flames but...

I want to see the AI take cover like the Ghost Recon AI.

I feel that the AI in that game was spectacular in this regard.

How I think it can be implemented...

1:  Erase the ridiculous weapon switching pauses:  When opening fire on a "SAFE" enemy, it is too easy to peg them as they freeze.  It should be a smooth motion, coupled with running (maybe even running without taking out the weapon).  The first thing any AI should do when under fire is try and find cover, the more frantically, the better. (will also add challenge in maintaining unit cohesion).

2: Cover fire should work:  The AI should be afraid of bullets.  I do appreciate the flanking behaviour of the AI, but they don't really respond to covering fire (which is why the machinegun is so crippled)

3:  Use real cover:  The OFP world is filled with fantastic cover, why do they always drop to the ground in an open field?

These effects shouldn't be too difficult to implement, and would add alot more atmosphere to the game (specifically the chaos and confusion)

[swtx 42]

Dual processor support would help most of these suggestions become reality

[kroky 1]

I have a wish which would be very simple for BIS to implement in OFP 2.

PLEASE, PLEASE implement the COC (Chain of Command) Engine in the next release. It's definitely an upgrade to the game when you can command a whole army, with air support, tanks, infantry platoons, supply trucks and so on.

I remember the mission made on the Ia Drang valley where you had to fight all over the island and you had to regenerate troops when they were killed or destroyed. This has put OFP to a level where no other game has been before. I hope they will implement that in OFP2.

And one more wish: I want I could swim in OFP2!

[Grizzlie 0]

All above

And one little thing - throw grenates left or right direction, even with constant 90 deg angle - urban warfare...

[Colossus 2]

Im sry but I think they need to add/improve all of this:

 Improved AI

 Improved Squad Control

 Better Close Quarter Combat

 Enhanced Aircraft

 Add a small navy

 Supportive/directional fire

 Ability to move inside a vehicle

 Ability to shoot multiple guns out of a vehicle

 Add an artillery system

So, I can´t really vote for this.

 

[TheManWithManyIdeas 0]

Suppressing fire commands, model animation variances, most definately an artillery system make it very complex and fun.

Here is some potential dialogue:

"Load S80", "Target 80-70-475", "Ready!", "Ready!", "FIRE!" *BOOM* ..... *pause and whistle*........*SMASH!*

[Friedchiken 0]

At least fix the retry-again-and-again problem of engaging just-around-the-corner enemies. That sort of applies to CQB but can be fixed in any way. Could be easily fixed if we could shoot point-blank enemies easier (but then maybe easier for them to shoot back).

[shataan 1]

here is my vote:

higher detailed and rez character models

high rez weaps models like at least as good as the best mods out now.

High rez skies ala Kegetys

And a skillbased/realism based ballistics code. IE bullet drop, ACOG scope dialing in distance to target. This way there can be more mid to long range engagements, with a skill factor involved. For those who are not using sniper weaps.

Lastly, a wide variation of terrain types, and a good selection of stock default map types for mp ala CTF DM, TDM, TKoTH, etc etc etc. So those of us not inclined to map making can JUST play.

[Judge Rabbi 0]

Well its already stated and i'm certain BIS already said but a dramatic improvement in the CQB section of the game would be a nice change. Also city combat (if possible) would be fantastic.

[Friedchiken 0]

Yeah, maybe we should shut up about CQB already  

We've already requested it a billion times

PS: but it's so fun... And I guess I could easily be the worst offender of the above request

[Maddmatt 1]

I think all of the above should be improved or added. Also add the ability to fly above the clouds in planes and have proper damage on aircraft. Also rotor failure on choppers.

An artillery system like the chain of command unified artillery.

Better handling of large scale battles. The maps in ofp are so huge but when you add 200 guys it starts to lag. Also it would be cool to have the Havoc physics engine, look how well it worked in Maxpayne 2 without being too cpu intensive

[Ice Zeppelin 0]

To be able to have multiple gunners in vehicles you could have some great times in multiplayer, and singleplayer.

Improving the AI is something that needs to be done and I think BIS have most likely already started it...

hope they improve as many things they can

[m21man 0]

I can't wait to go crashing through a jungle in my M113 with soldiers blasting their M-16s out of the firing ports .

[OmniMax 0]

I can't wait to go crashing through a jungle in my M113 with soldiers blasting their M-16s out of the firing ports .

m113 back has capolas for each soldier.

or the back two.. forget which.

A really needed feature is being inside a soild moving object without the stuff inside falling out below or flying towards the back. Kinda like how BF1942's Desert Combat Mod's AC-130 does it. (exept it's a little buggy...)

But that would be great. No more GET IN CARGO... just jump in, close the back ramp, you're done.

[Blain. 0]

I think all of them should be improved, but mostly the destructable terrain and objects instead of them just deflating or falling over.

[Batstat 10]

I voted for the ability to shoot multiple guns out of a vehicle. Mostly because it will offer a more including game or play style.

Also I want to add to the list the ability to use HT, multiple CPU or the Nirvana multiple dedicated server in one game (linked togheter in a OFP II server packâ€farmâ€), handling tons of people i one game. Or if you don't want tons of people then you can use your extra CPU power to turn on terrain damage, burning forest and so on. With OPF1 you can turn on or off features in the client, the same ability on the server is more restriced. It's there but mostly for the tweak geeks.

IF OFP II sells as OPF I and continue to live on for years, then it doesn't matter if some option cant be used with todays computer. So BIS don't restrict yourself to whats possible with the avg computer, please. The same goes for the bandwith issue. If people use LAN, then let the players benefit from it, give them more bandwith consuming option too turn on.