will you play co op or ctf etc

[kernriver 4]

The best mode would be something like:

2 teams - 32 vs 32 players or even more (60vs60 ) and everyone controls 1 unit, 1 action (one player is shoter in vehicle, other is driver) + cti mode (money for capturing flags/towns) but without possibility to buy AI. Only human beings vs human beings.

That would be great, but how are you gonna find that much people that would really want to play that way, to obey orders and generally to play the way it should be played, not run around and shoot at everything that moves.

[deanosbeano 0]

i like ya way of thinking and dont worry them people are out there, on servers like fraghaus ,zeus , cia and others that have gone to vbs but will be back ,like ses etc. hopefully when all this comes out and campaigns been finished , we will see this kind of map being played.

[Zerg 0]

I would agree with you, but the problem is they (humans playing CTF, CTI) DON'T plan or think, they're just a bunch of happy-triggers running in circles after each others.

This is supposed to be funny?

[NeMeSiS 11]

I would agree with you, but the problem is they (humans playing CTF, CTI) DON'T plan or think, they're just a bunch of happy-triggers running in circles after each others.

This is supposed to be funny?

No, its true  

EDIT: Well, in my experience on public servers, myeah, at least 50% of the players think they are rambo and just run and gun untill they die...

Its less coop, but still too many people just running around without thinking about what they are supposed to do.

(And they care more about their score then about the mission)

People suck!

[CsonkaPityu 0]

Never played OFP online, didn't have net back then and felt i was out of the loop later on. Soo what's the community like?

Is it a big problem for infantry that there is little to no concealment on most islands? Hows the lag, stability, etc.?

[Uziyahu--IDF 0]

Coop in OFP:E is the best combined arms gaming I've ever played.

[zaphar 0]

Coop in OFP:E is the best combined arms gaming I've ever played.

I liked/like playing CTF, COOP, and CTI. I don't really care for CTF without vehicles, since there aren't many things to hide behind and , most of the time, everybody are using G36s; iT becomes the most boring/bland/uniteresting thing to play. I also think CTF could use some major changes in the way it is set up. It was kind of screwed up when people started putting buildings in the woods and things like that. There are many things I would change if I were to create my own type of CTI. It also sucks when you have to run half way across the map because there are too many destroyed vehicles on the map.

[shataan 1]

Mainly Co op.

[drakaan 0]

i can see the attraction of CTI but my first love is CTF all the way

[LT.Schaffer 0]

i only play COOP.

well i try to..  

Yeah Same Here,

there's nothing like getting together with some of your buddys and playing OFP Coop...

Can't wait to play ARMA Coop Campaign

[majorpwnage 0]

Capture and hold (C&H) all the way!

[JoeKick 0]

in general, i've found ALL forms of MP fine as long as there is no lag or cheating.

coop hasnt been a favorite of mine : sure the comraderie and then 34573 kills and coordination is fun, but the missions are always plain and it gets boring knowing everything the enemy does! you know an AI will never bust out and rush you, and you know they wont sit behind a rock and peek out until they hear you and then jump out and BAM! coop gives people the theatrical feel of a warzone (thank you hollywood) and alot of people feel that killing useless AI is fun.

cti/rts/etc i think are the most advanced gameplay scenarios in OFP! bases, locations, defensive/offensive strats vary with each team of humans, and you lose if you dont work with your own team. karrillions rts has always been more fun than cti, some poeple are just too proud tho.

ctf is an OFP pastime for most MP players. close quarters battles and hot firefights werent originally intended for this game, but whether the oldies here can admit it or not - they're fun and popular. alot of people consider it 'unrealistic' without realising that it actually simulates a good deal of modern urban warfare - hasnt anyone heard of reinforcements? this talk about 'rambos' is untrue, in RL, if you're rambo, you'll shoot and kickass like rambo. same as ingame, but if you dont have the coordination and quick-thinking to do it, you are the person backing up rambo. only unorganized blind players lose to rambos! most people are too lazy to look in the most obvious (wide open) areas for an enemy.

c&h style maps would seem like the ideal maps for ofp, right? i dont think so.. those who claim 'rambo' know how lame it is in a c&h - like bf2, people race for vehicles and go get killed quickly. .there's never any good coordination unless it's an experienced good clan together.. playing in groups of 4 or 5 to take areas i always had a blast doing, but randomly by yourself - forget it.

im just excited for the new features and engine in arma.. imagine the more dynamic map scenarios we can have!

this is my ideal map:

there are two teams.. each team has like 3 starting points, but is given only ONE randomly at the start... then, they are given orders to assault/secure/defend a specific area, say you have 5 or 6 areas.. if each team is given an area at random, eventually they shall cross each other (whether one team is on guard or if both are moving to the same area)..

randomness like that w/ unpredictable enemy movement is what i really search for.. thats why CTF is so popular in ofp.. i may not understand why people found my 'Corridor CTF' to be so much fun though.. since it forced two teams to funnel into one middle chamber and brutally massacre each other in the middle..

these are my thoughts (possibly biased because of my personal ofp history). haha, <3 bis

[EiZei 0]

coop hasnt been a favorite of mine : sure the comraderie and then 34573 kills and coordination is fun, but the missions are always plain and it gets boring knowing everything the enemy does! you know an AI will never bust out and rush you, and you know they wont sit behind a rock and peek out until they hear you and then jump out and BAM! coop gives people the theatrical feel of a warzone (thank you hollywood) and alot of people feel that killing useless AI is fun.

Only if the mission maker has been lazy, creative application of randomized mg bunkers and patrol routes will make life hell for the human players.

[bravo 6 0]

Only if the mission maker has been lazy, creative application of randomized mg bunkers and patrol routes will make life hell for the human players.

ARMA will bring back my inspiration on missions for sure

[Metal Heart 0]

Quote[/b] ]alot of people consider it 'unrealistic' without realising that it actually simulates a good deal of modern urban warfare - hasnt anyone heard of reinforcements?

zOMG, It's nothing like I'd imagine real urban combat to be, except that there is men and guns involved. I mean, players just run at each other with out giving a shit if they die for a f......g flag. The area is like 100mx200m. Reinforcements are sent one man at a time (why not go all at the same time on every flank and over run the enemy if the f.....g flag is so important?). It's all about running and gunning, not real world tactics or real world anything. And I'm not saying that c&h, cti, or most co-ops are realistic either.

[CsonkaPityu 0]

Quote[/b] ]this talk about 'rambos' is untrue, in RL, if you're rambo, you'll shoot and kickass like rambo. same as ingame, but if you dont have the coordination and quick-thinking to do it, you are the person backing up rambo.

Never EVER, ever join any organisation even resembling the military in even the sightest way, shape or form for your own sake and the sake of all those poor people who would have to work together with you.

[Zerg 0]

It's all about running and gunning, not real world tactics or real world anything. And I'm not saying that c&h, cti, or most co-ops are realistic either.

You are both correct and wrong.

You are correct that in PvP OFP missions real world tactics are not applied. But you are wrong that it is all about running and gunning.

You see in PvP missions acctually loads of strategies and tactics that require teamwork and planning *are* applied, it is just that theese strategies are nothing like real world strategies and if they do resemble them it is only as a coincidence.

I stil generaly like them better than coops though. You see even though the strategies decisions made in say CTI are nothing like real world strategies CTI at least has a strategical layer. Thus you get to make strategical decisions. Say you can invest in an armored platoon to take a town on the front, or you can invest into a transport helicopter to transport commandos to near the enemy base.

In coop however all theese decisions have been made for you already by the mission maker though and are presented to you in the mission briefing and objectives and you only get to make decisions on a tactical level (say from which direction to approach the target assigned to you by the mission maker).

If I stretched it a little I would compare OPF PvP missions to chess (or football). It is certainly not anything like a real war, but it definetley is about tactics and outsmarting a real human enemy (among other things).

On the other hand if we stretch it a little coops seem like those staged reanimations of historical battles. You know where thousands of people get into American Civil War uniforms and move around according to the script of the Gettysburg battle. It surely is very historical and true to real life and particpiants even have some tactical freedom, but the overall strategic decisions have been pre-made for them a hundred years ago.

[GBee 0]

In real life the overall strategic decisions are made by the senior officers and they don't participate in the battles. In real life you rarely get to do both, which is just another reason why coop is more authentic.

OFP always was about freedom and great AI, coop missions could always play out in different and interesting ways.