realism

[Rikki Tikki Tavi 0]

Not sure if this has been covered before, and it's probably really hard to implement but:

  The way OFP works, when another soldier in your squad is shot, the leader just says:

"Oh no! 3... is down." and keeps walking. I'd like to see the casualty/medical side of Game2 improved.

  In OFP, soldiers are either walking (or crawling) wounded, or dead. Incapacitation and serious wounds that require medical attention or evacuation would be a huge step I'd imagine, but would add a lot of realism.

  Note, I'm NOT asking for graphic wounds, tons of screaming and that side of it. But I WOULD like to see:

"HQ, we've taken a serious casualty, need medevac immediately."

Basically, (ironic as this sounds in a shooter) more regard for human life in NGPG.

[jakerod 254]

Quote[/b] ]And that's just for the AI, players themselves would never surrender when you know you can just respawn if you die.

Not true I would surrender in some cases. I try to treat the game as realistically as possible so I try not to die. I would rather surrender than respawn. There is always a chance of escape. For all you know as they are transporting you a friendly squad shows up and nails the bad guys for you.

[therealFerox 0]

Quote[/b] ]And that's just for the AI, players themselves would never surrender when you know you can just respawn if you die.

Not true I would surrender in some cases. I try to treat the game as realistically as possible so I try not to die. I would rather surrender than respawn. There is always a chance of escape. For all you know as they are transporting you a friendly squad shows up and nails the bad guys for you.

since most of ofp is non respawn anyways... surrendering would be a viable option if you knew you had people who could rescue you and would need an extra hand to complete the mission.

[cozza 24]

yeah how cool would it be if you surrended and they taking you back to HQ but a SF team stop the convoy and frees you. Then you have to escape with a AK from the enemy

or surrendring and back at base you have to answer question. You can chose "Spill your guts out about your army" or "Follow the big 3".

[funnyguy1 0]

It (just like many other things) depends how `dynamic` the campaign will be...

I`m really confused now....

I don`t know how the AI would work, would we feel really like It`s real (dynamic) war...

Things like for ex better CQB ai slowly becomes less important for me now...

[PhantomStalker 0]

personally I would like to see the aircraft be a bit more realistic in terms of controls, the way they were in ofp doesnt make much sense.

Other then that i loved the realism in ofp1, and I say the more realism the better.

[xnodunitx 0]

I'd like to see more realistic helicopter controls,for instance you get a vortex ring if you put in too much power or go too high and possibly force the engine to much that it cuts out for a moment or somethin like that,would increase realism and teach people not to fly so dang high. But also things like wind and such,flying helicopters in OFP is just too easy theres not much threat from the biggest threat they have in real life and that is weather.....okay on e of the biggest threats.

And to me it would be awesome flying an attack helicopter around,somebody calls for medevac and the blackhawk (or w/e their using) requests some air support because they know the area's hot so I'd have to fly in to cover them and cover the helicopter along with the soldiers,I just enjoy that type of thrill and helping my team mates and treat the game as real as I can as well.

[tug2000 0]

Definightly need :

Safety catch

Unload magazine

Make Safe ( Unload followed by load but without a round in the chamber so another "Load" take a fraction of a second)

[Metal Heart 0]

I wouldn't mind having to practice a week or two flying jets/choppers and weapons systems use. Same with tanks. I'll be playing the game for years so the more challenge and realism the better. This would also cut down the newbie pilots crashing fully loaded transport choppers/stealing aircraft etc since they wouldn't get the things airborne in the first place

[PhantomStalker 0]

I wouldn't mind having to practice a week or two flying jets/choppers and weapons systems use. Same with tanks. I'll be playing the game for years so the more challenge and realism the better. This would also cut down the newbie pilots crashing fully loaded transport choppers/stealing aircraft etc since they wouldn't get the things airborne in the first place

That reminds me of the first days of ww2ol, watching n00bs who thought it was aircraft were arcadey spinning around on the runway and crashing on takeoff rofl, if they were able to get off the ground anyways.

Those were the days.

[ofpchaos 0]

Next update.

<span style='font-size:11pt;line-height:100%'>- very important ! -> reverse gear for tanks/vehicles</span>

As retired mot. infantry sergeant i will see tanks/apcs moving backward over the battlefields when they changes their positions. In real life no one tank commander will turn his tank with the tail of his vehicle to the enemy when he moving to next defensive position.

This is one of the biggest things which distrub me at ofp1.

[funnyguy1 0]

Vehicles in ofp have reverse gear, although the AI seems to don`t know how to use it.

Anyway, gears for vehicles and tanks would be a nice addition, driving would become a bit more difficult, but less boring...since you wouldn`t be allowed to shoot when driving.

[Airbourne Alchaholic 0]

Well technically "on foot" would beat "on road."

It's a bit difficult for a gunner to keep his aim while speeding through rough terrain. And it don't take much to jump out of a vehicles way if it's travelling under 40 (I should know... unfortunatelly ). All the rifleman has to do is shoot the tyres/ radiator/windows etc. and the vehicle crew is screwed.

[Rikki Tikki Tavi 0]

Manual or automatic transmissions in vehicles...that would be cool. A button for the clutch, a "shift up/down" button; I think it could work.

In helicopters: Engine failures, being able to auto-rotate, and making them generally much more difficult and realistic to fly would be a nice improvement.

[gandalf the white 0]

I know it's not nice, but I prefer the sounds that (for instance) ECP brought to the game. the sound of intense pain and ripping flesh, instead of a girly scream. It sounds awfull, but it's something that is part of the experience.

Autorotation is already possible in OFP. it's difficult, but "possible" . I also wouln't mind that people are more forced to "study" the stuff they want to fly. it would improve the need to coordinate your team

[xnodunitx 0]

Yeah no kiddin,its a shame they can't do like VBS and release the core OFP2 then provide,helicopter,plane,tank and infantry upgrades for better realism.

[Rikki Tikki Tavi 0]

Quote[/b] ]Autorotation is already possible in OFP. it's difficult, but "possible"   .

Duh, I guess I never thought to try it out.   *Loads up OFP*

Having to study and learn about flying, and possibly other things would be cool. Maby the game could include a series of missions like "Flight School".

[4 IN 1 0]

AI could be quite realistic with some scripts and config tweaks, some mod already tried that e.g.VME, CQB units would stay back at cover, didnt test it on its own yet, but seems instead of rushing into enemy, they could engage at a longer distance i think, would like to see a more realistic AI sniper built-in engine

about choppers and planes, just dont make it bf-lish, thats as uncontrolalbe/non-realistic as a game could get(i mean yes it may got most of the movement a chopper could get but putting all those thing together in a frontwheel drive car with a 300+ BHP engine, there is a name, as Jeremy Clarkson said, called Chaos Theory)

[ofpchaos 0]

Using of:

- knifes

- bents

- wire (choke)

- other "white weapons"

Actions

- choke

- strike

- step

- sting

- better and more realistic animations

[Jinef 2]

It seems that a lot of you are interested in having a more advanced simulation which gives people an opportunity to specialise.

People could specialise as:

Rotary Wing Pilots

Fixed Wing Pilots

Armoured

Infantry

Medical

Sniper

Special Forces

Commander (Coy/Bn)

From the combined arms MP missions I have been playing on Zeus for the last 2 years. I know that some people just don't do well in certain areas. Some do very well in others.

Examples 1 - Rotary Wing Pilots

This would be one of the hardest jobs. A helicopter pilot needs to know what forces are acting upon his airframe thus keeping him alive. When one force is reduced/increased he needs to know the adjustments to be made and make them. He needs to be aware of his position and relative movement.

All of this needs to be natural, unthinking as things can happen very slow, and very fast.

As for specifics on flight model - all you would need is the 3 basic controls and several aerodynamic features.

Controls - Cyclic, collective pitch and anti-torque.

Auto-Rotation - Real ones, you need lowered attitude to increase airflow through the rotor disc, side effect is speed, you want to be hitting the ground at about 30mph/20knots.

Vortex Ring State - On slow descent large collective output, this usually occurs during formation flight in descent, where the pilot does not realise he is losing altitude and over jagged features such as cliffs, mountains where lift is displaced easily.

Dysymmetry of lift - Basically as the rotor blades goes whish whoosh around and around different amounts of lift are produced by the retreating blade and the advancing blade. Effect - you never have a rock steady platform, you must always be in correction.

Wind - .... Do I need to explain.....

Translational Lift - As you progress forward above the speed of around 20 knots the rotor disc becomes more efficient.

Ground effect - As you get to within 2/3 rotor diametre of the ground the air quite simpy forms a nice cushion, like a hovercraft, increases rotor disc efficiency. Wouldn't rely on it, unexpected gust of wind and you find yourself in hospital for 6 weeks with crushed vertebrae.

Ummm what else...

If you wanted to get all fancy you could have these additional factors -

> Fuel - The amount of fuel an aircraft carries determines its weight and operating capabilities.

> Cargo - The amount of cargo an aircraft carries determines its weight and thus performance.

> The addition of an under slung load, the attachment of an optional external piece of equipment (e.g. hoist/winch) or even having a door open will add significantly to drag, requiring more collective pitch and larger forward-cyclic-pitch inputs.

> A lot of things can go wrong in a helicopter, triply so if bullets happen to be entering important systems and severing important cables. A helicopter pilot needs to be able to diagnose and react quickly to a certain failure.

So, Mr Helicopter Pilot, these very basic factors need to be subconcious pretty much, you need to know them off by heart back to front so when you fly, you can focus 100% on the enemy, LZs, war. Etc.

In comparison, OFP all we do to take off is press Q right?

More realistic takeoff procedure:

1: On ground, engines running, rotors at 100% rpm.

2: Lift collective slowly, pitch increases thus torque increases.

3: The aircraft lifts off ground, you need to add left pedal to keep it on heading.

4: You add forward cyclic, the attitude lowers and you need more collective to keep airborne.

5: More collective = left pedal.

6: You fly forward into un-disturbed air; the rotor disc becomes more efficient.

7: You lower collective to keep your desired altitude, no left pedal, maybe some right pedal.

8: You flare to a hover. The nose rises and you need to lower collective to keep desire altitude, pedal to the right.

9: As the aircraft loses translational lift you need to raise the collective to maintain altitude, increase throttle to maintain RRPM and apply pedal to maintain heading.

Good fun eh? This would definitely put 'noobies' and seasoned OFP veterans in their place, holding an M16 in the back.

Example 2 - Sniper

I know nothing about shooting long range. I know someone who was a sniper in the Finnish military though and he hit targets in an exercise (Shot the enemy force commander) up to 1200 metres away I think. To do this I imagine he had to calculate range, adjust for wind over range, adjust for drop and be pretty bloody calm.

Camouflage is also important I would imagine.

If a more knowledgeable person may want to put forth detailed info on snipers do so.

Example 3 - Special Forces

From the definition Special Forces I mean forces which act under special conditions and are given more difficult taskings due to their higher training.

Special forces are not amazingly cool super heroes. They are soldiers from the regular forces who simply are very very good at being soldiers. Soldiers are about discipline, teamwork, killing.

SF can act in many ways, generally though, when a battalion of regular infantry is called for, commanders don't substitute with SF regardless of what OFP mission makers may think.

SF are good for observation, destruction of enemy C&C and missions of a politically sensitive nature.

OFP based SF could be about following SOPs exactly. Aircraft approaching - lie down. It could also be about difficult schedules, SF need to manage time much more than normal infantry. They need to do their objectives to the second and need to be at certain places for extraction/resup to the minute. In modern all arms battles the precision requested by commanders is very fine. Air support drop their bombs according to timings, SF turn on laser designation according to timings. No radio contact allowed unless emergency etc. A plan is devised, everyone is given his part and follows it. No radio contact needed unless someone fucks up. The enemy never hear it coming, no radio signals to warn them. Then 1 minute later - No Comms, No Power, No Water, No Leadership, No Runways, No Radar, No Fuel. A lot easier to do on third world countries admitted :P

This specialisation is time consuming for developers but the community may think it is worth it. Extra 5 months added to release for proper roles? Yes Please

[Warrior Xâ„¢ 0]

*Reads Jinef's post* uhum.....yeah....alright.....mkay....

Couldn't agree more on the proper roles. I fully agree on this one. Bring on the realism! Would make the game even better if everybody just had a proper role and the role you have results in different play from role to role. (...to much role here...) You could have a different experience every time you play it. Would be a lot of fun. You could now really specialize in a skill of your own. I already see 10000 special forces running around with sniper rifles Meh so be it lol. Special is what special does. No matter it would be fun anyway.

[Batukhan 0]

But then again... if you want to make specialized players, then you'd have to make it really hard. Maybe even a bit unrealistically hard. Tho yes, REAL is HARD anyway 

I'm all for it! REAL ALL THE WAY! (/me wanna read 100 pages manual before picking the sniper class)

[Daniel 0]

I've read arguments here about how interactive and simulated the game should be. I want to bring up the issue about tank loaders. I reckon they should be included and playable, with the player having somesort of ability to load shells. Even if it is just click and drag the shell up into the slot, and click on the hatch to close it, etc. Obviously, the player would probably prefer not to play this position, but for me, it would add so much more immersion just to know that I can play this position if I want to or need to.

And imagine the pressure of knowing your fellow human players on MP's lives depend on how fast and how correctly you load those shells? Or knowing that your life is in the hands of the person shooting those shells, and all you can do is load them? And don't forget that on tanks like the Abrams, the gunner does have his own private machine gun.  

[Jinef 2]

Yeah Warrior, it would probably be America's Army style with 200 SF wannabes bunny hopping around shouting about faggots and 'pwning'. However fine by me. I'll just play as the enemy commander, use in depth MG positions covering minefields, have mechanised infantry as rapid reaction, use rivers and bridges as defiles. Those poor SF guys won't have a chance.

*200 SF guys get cut down by static fire, 81mm mortar fire and rifle fire from interlocking entrenched fire positions*

"SHUT UP NOOBIE, I Pwned Jooo Faggot!"

"This SuXX0rs, I had An M24 N00Bie"

"DeltAs Don't Di3 you fags!"

"Tis Server Gey! ScreW joo All NooBies"

"I AM A US MARINE FORCE RECON. YOU CAN'T KILL ME"

"USMC SuX, NAVY SEALS ALL THE WAY!"

*giant handbag fight*

Meanwhile, on the enemy coy net.

"The enemy seem to have tried to rush our defensive positions world war 1 style sir."

Commander "Hmm, interesting tactic. Cease 81mm missions, use 2 hinds from Bn to take 2 rifle squads to capture any wounded. Oh, and get me more tea."

Anyway, that is what I am expecting from ArmA. So we need to find a method of screening people.

On connection, a message box appears saying "Please type your introduction message to other players".

If the entailing message contains:

"!" "Whassup" "R0xx0rs" "OMG" "tis" "Wot" "D3lta" "I am a US Marine" : Goto "Kick Player - Reason: Come back when you are over 12 years old."

[Batukhan 0]

Daniel @ Sep. 28 2005,23:27)]I've read arguments here about how interactive and simulated the game should be. I want to bring up the issue about tank loaders. I reckon they should be included and playable, with the player having somesort of ability to load shells. Even if it is just click and drag the shell up into the slot, and click on the hatch to close it, etc. Obviously, the player would probably prefer not to play this position, but for me, it would add so much more immersion just to know that I can play this position if I want to or need to.

And imagine the pressure of knowing your fellow human players on MP's lives depend on how fast and how correctly you load those shells? Or knowing that you're life is in the hands of the person shooting thjose shells, and all you can do is load them? And don't forget that on tanks like the Abrams, the gunner does have his own private machine gun.  

Ya know... they're making half robotic tanks now, with auto loaders, so by year 2010 (the predicted date the game is set in), maybe you won't need a loader player. Hehe, just teasing, it would be great if you would have players with less important jobs than FIRING (and i'm not suggesting deck-mopping here...)