1970 vs 2010

[stakex 0]

While I wouldn't mind the game being in a modern setting. I do prefer the "what if" historical scenarios.

I will admit, I'm having a hard time getting into the storyline for ArmA whereas OFP's Cold War background had me hooked from the start- maybe because I was brought up in that era and distinctly remember the tension that happened in the early 80s.

Maybe its becuase OFP, and more so OFP:R had really good stories... as where ArmA's feels half hearted and very flat IMO.

As for the setting of "Game2", modern setting is better I believe. Especially with the dynamic campaign. It just seems to fit better with a modern setting as opposed to a vietnam time frame. Communications, and technology of the modern era will make a dynamic campaign alot more intresting, and believable... at least I think so.

[Jack-UK 0]

Yeah seriously i think people are thinking that 2010 is going to be some super-futuristic game...

Its in 3 years... so people who think the game will be futuristic have seriously got it wrong... The fact that BIS will base it in the near future means they can create their OWN scenario much more easily...

[max power 21]

OFP2 will be about 1970's wars or eeuu imperialism of 2010 ?

Quoting the Operation Flashpoint 2 press release.

Quote[/b] ]The year is 2010 and the world has changed.

So it's 2010, which personally I prefer over another Cold War era game. I just hope the XM8 isn't in the game

I think that that was an anticipation of the release date. Hehe.

[vilas 477]

if anyone wanna WW2, 1970, 1914, 1985 - thats why there are MODS

game such as ARMA for me is not good to 2010 battle, why ?

in modern war infantry fights are not present

modern confilct is ; mass bombing against poor equiped guerillas with AK, G3, FAL, UZI

ARMA cannot symulate electronical warfare an termovision

thats why it is better to 1985, 1970, 1950, 1944 wars

there is no trigger of waypoint "shoot on area" which clould be good, for example you make mission, that artilery support attack of infantry or bombing before land troops will enter city

in OFP as well in ARMA there is no such thing

ARMA is simulator of man and vehicles

not war simulator

conflict in 2010 is for me not whit this engine now

also no bullet proof vest work

so where technical advantage of modern US/NATO technics against poor country like nothern Sahrani republic ?

if you wanna make war as man vs man (infantry) or even motorized troops - it is okay, but not as modern conflicts

modern armies are developing weapons such as PDF (personal defence weapon)

M4 or maybe futere HK construction fires at lowe distance than Mauser or Mosin rifles

because modern soldier do not need rifle killing at 1 or 2 kilometers

sniper has such weapon

modern HK PDW as MP7, UMP, or other constructions as FN P90 cannot be comparable to for exaple Garand or G3 or FAL

moder soldiers enter city when it is crushed to ruins, first enter heavy tanks

so mission like this in ARMA should be:

script to bomb city , few man left with AK, so Abrams goes into city, after some time from Bradley few man with M4

what is sense or joy of playing like that ?

so my vote is for history MODS

of course everyone can do his mod in 2020

modern war is not equal, it is not "fair", it is what money you have on equipement

what is sense of this without thermal vision, without artillery, bombing waypoints/triggers implemented in engine, without vests, without ERA reacting armor

so let everyone do his own MOD as he wants

i am making 1985 and those who like it play, whose who want 2010 play another mod

[sickboy 13]

Vilas, they're talking about the next generation game. I've seen OFP2 mentioned and Game2, not about mods for ArmA.

Also, I don't think that "Modern", means "Far Future", I've seen ppl talk in here about "Modern" when it was just "After Vietnam ERA", aswell as ppl talking about "Modern" 2010 Warfare.

Prototypes of weapons, sure, and when do you believe such weaponry would really be standard gear for grunts etc?

No infantry warfare you say? Maybe not in 2050, but for now I don't see how a town, city or metropolis is going to be taken without Infantry.

[vilas 477]

city, yes, not field, not large areas

but what is city fight if you don't have working vest, when you cannot see by thermal view ?

in "modern war" if enemy is spoted firing from block/house tanks shoot at this building, can it be implemented in game ?

AI is moving badly in buildings, the cannot take some positions and fire from buildings

i say about war on existing engine

in game AI engage too much, it should be moving in group, because 2 engage target, 3 engage other target is too dangerous

i think warfare situation should be fited to engine

fights in city in existing OFP, ARMA are far from real, there were bugs reported when AI see you inside buildings through the walls

i expect from OFP2 much better vehicle/AI engine and behaviour

existing game is good for fields

[sickboy 13]

but what is city fight if you don't have working vest, when you cannot see by thermal view ?

in "modern war" if enemy is spoted firing from block/house tanks shoot at this building, can it be implemented in game ?

AI is moving badly in buildings, the cannot take some positions and fire from buildings

i say about war on existing engine

in game AI engage too much, it should be moving in group, because 2 engage target, 3 engage other target is too dangerous

i think warfare situation should be fited to engine

fights in city in existing OFP, ARMA are far from real, there were bugs reported when AI see you inside buildings through the walls

i expect from OFP2 much better vehicle/AI engine and behaviour

existing game is good for fields

I don't understand the relevance (what the current ArmA and before OFP have to do with possible Modern warfare in Game2). (Other than serving as ur personal way of telling all the bugs or missing feature in every thread you can get your hands on). Btw maybe we should keep terms clear, OFP2 = not by BIS, and kinda not really interesting

[vilas 477]

so if game2 will be in modern warfare as on screen posted

than it must include thermal technology, scripting to bomb/fire on area from cannons

better wound of AI behaviour

better moving AI inside buildings, maybe 2 different waypoint as for example : "hide" and "defend"

those 2 waypoints can be put at building and each memory LOD of building model should have points as "safepoint" away from windows and "fireposition_01" to be holded by AI

also there should be trigger as "bomb place"

than you gave waypoint "shoot at area" and airplane or howitzer shoot some at this area , such trigger can take few shots, few seconds to be active, or can ba activated repeating radio command

and in game 2 vests must be working to represent technical adventages between different armies

good if shock to unit could be added, than i will say 2010 enough

also i have no idea if in existing engines AI decides HEAT or Frag bullet

game 2 should have threat properties in bullets

like now in units

for example

frag bullet threat 1,0.1,0.2

heat 0,1,0

when x,y,z means; soft (man, car, building), armed vehicle, air

to avoid situation in which AI shoots from HEAT togroup of man, of by Stinger to tank

[sickboy 13]

...

Right on. I guess you kinda sum up the nececairy ingredients indeed. Electronic tank systems etc, monitors, the whole bunch

[fasad 1]

My personal preference is towards the past, because of the closer engagement ranges due to less precise weapons. Less capable anti-air anti-armour missile/rockets allow tanks and aircraft to be used in closer quarters to the enemy, adding to the intensity of a battle. I'd prefer this is done in a time where this was realistic, rather than done solely for gameplay purposes.

Being killed by a missile launched many kilometers away is less exciting from a gameplay point of view.

[nephilim 0]

im up for some newer theme..

but ffs! please no vietnam or WW2 theme..

is been done so often now it gets really boring....

id rather watch some documentaries about ww2 or nam rather playing that stuff over and over again..

[Sennacherib 0]

2010. something like that: http://www.frontlinesgame.com/

[chefd261 0]

I would vote for 2010 for a few reasons not the least of which is personal preference

a. BIS has ALWAYS given us the ability to Mod so wwII and nam should be around soon after the game release.

b. Ground war is very much a likleyhood in 2010 a perfect example is Afganistan or Bosnia Plenty of field fighting

c. Relates to point a it is much simpler, for lack of a better word to reverse engineer scenarios that to try to create tools for new ones.

just my humble opinion

[M. D. Geist 0]

Russia and low tech , give me a break. A few examples of "low" Russian technology:

AN94

T-95 -arguably the best tank in the world

Su-3x (Su-30MKI (4.5th gen.); superior to all F-1x variants, and probably the EF Typhoon as well)

MiG-39 -5th gen. stealth fighter

Mi-24/28/35

Ka-50

It was a Russian scientist who developed the first generation stealth formula, which later Lockheed picked up and built the F-117. Russia also had the HMS (Helmet Mounted Sight) system some 20 years before the USA recently adopted it. And also had thrust vectoring way before the F-22 got it.

Anyway, personally I would like to see Europe vs USA set in 2010.

[churnedfortaste 0]

I'd love to see America and U.K. vs China and Russia

[alext223 0]

I would go for the 2010 time frame. Has more potential IMO, and we still have the mod's and addons to try to be in history. So every one is a winner, untill we find out what bugs we have to deal with.

Just got to save up for the upgrades to make it run well.

[xendance 3]

How about 2100 era? I love scifi, and you could have anything in it, based on newtonian physics of course. Think of railguns, they're definitely doable in real life, but the power it requires is huge. Maybe a mini fusion plant powered AA platform that uses a railgun? :P

[~Pantera~ 0]

How about 2100 era? I love scifi, and you could have anything in it, based on newtonian physics of course. Think of railguns, they're definitely doable in real life, but the power it requires is huge. Maybe a mini fusion plant powered AA platform that uses a railgun? :P

YEAH!!!!

It can be like BF2142!!! HOW AWESOME WOULD THAT BE???

[CrazyDentist 0]

How about 2100 era? I love scifi, and you could have anything in it, based on newtonian physics of course. Think of railguns, they're definitely doable in real life, but the power it requires is huge. Maybe a mini fusion plant powered AA platform that uses a railgun? :P

YEAH!!!!

It can be like BF2142!!! HOW AWESOME WOULD THAT BE???

I hope to God that you're being sarcastic as hell...

For me personally, anything from WWII to present day is ok... but no sci-fi crap! (I do love sci-fi movies, but not games...)

[xendance 3]

How about 2100 era? I love scifi, and you could have anything in it, based on newtonian physics of course. Think of railguns, they're definitely doable in real life, but the power it requires is huge. Maybe a mini fusion plant powered AA platform that uses a railgun? :P

YEAH!!!!

It can be like BF2142!!! HOW AWESOME WOULD THAT BE???

BF 2142 != good scifi

I said based on newtonian physics, morons. I didn't mean lasers and all that shizzle.

[Turkeys 0]

Ty for insulting us

[Money 0]

2010 is a great time.

We should be able to see some of the weapons that are currently in development on that game.

Like XM8 , HK416...

Pretty much anything you see in Future Weapons would be cool in this era.

[pmd 0]

2010 is a great time.

We should be able to see some of the weapons that are currently in development on that game.

Like XM8 , HK416...

Pretty much anything you see in Future Weapons would be cool in this era.

that's my thoughts exactly.

i would like to see artillery in the game. My Battery is getting HIMARS in october (high mobility artillery rocket system)

picture a 5ton with a rocket pod holding 6 rockets on the back of it and that's what it is.

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/himars-980730-A-0089G-003.jpg

[xnodunitx 0]

post edited, sent via PM