Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
nyles

About the US military in ArmA

Recommended Posts

I think everyone has a fair point to some extent in this one. Obviously (unless a decent explanation is presented) the mis-match of equipement is going to cause a loss of immersion for some people, its like the Ak47 burst option in CWC. I always thought that was fine, I was none the wiser. As soon as I found out it didn't actually have a burst option, it became annoying.

Of course, extreme details on particular units arn't really worth the hastle, especially when this game is all about tactics and nailing bad guys at hundreds of meter ranges. tounge2.gif

To sum up: None of this is important as Armed Assault is already at too late a stage for such complaints. It'll be up to the modding community.

Damn it, I've lost my point, my post seems so pointless now.

Too late at night no doubt. smile_o.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As long as I can use Sarahni as a "sandbox" for testing out military tactics that I read and watch about, things are good.

So as long as support for say, bounding forward in an attack, becomes easier (can do this in OFP but AI response is a bit sluggish), then I can simulate a typical assault.

As long as soldiers don't carry bedrolls into combat, I don't really care.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, the U.S cammo went from WL to des 3 color to ACU so that gives me some hope that some newer vehicles might go in still.

When I first saw arm ass screens, I thought it was another 1985 version.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Like I said, the problem is not that some stuff is outdated but more the mix between the latest in technology mixed with equipment that has been dumped on reserves decades ago.

It's the consistency that seems off in some areas. As long as there is either just old equipment or either just new equipment, it's alright, but mixing the stuff too much like I am afraid might happen in Arma - especially mixing vehicles from different branches like Army, Marines and special forces, makes for a weird combination.

Well as I said, you're going to see these mixes and matches in the actual military...seems to me that your expectation that the equipment is either type A or type B is unrealistic itself.

And if, as we've read, most of the US units on the island were being withdrawn when the war broke out, you're going to have a sort of hodgepodge force left over defending the place. I still think this is perfectly acceptable and I don't really see the reason you think these units can't operate side by side in the middle of a surprise invasion.

On the other hand I can't understand why they INSIST on putting the G36 in this game. Has not been used by the US military. Ever.

Meanwhile we still have this giant community hard-on for Littlebirds, Delta operators, SCARs and all that other nonsense...take a look at the Addons and Mods boards and you'll notice that people care far more for shiny new high-speed stuff that sees relatively little action than for better (or any) versions of stuff that sees loads of combat time.

The point is that we all say we want realism, but then we seem to have warped expectations of what realism actually means. Realism here is not using only the newest stuff and preventing any cross-contamination between branches of the service; realism should be representing a small mixed force which might find itself in the middle of a fight on this island. Provided the US gear in the game is actually still in use in the US military and properly identified vis-a-vis correct name and service branch, I'm fine with it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First of all, I’d like to offer my compliments to Nyles for his educated and will written post. I agree fully with you on this issue and really have nothing more to add to your statement (or request).

Well Nyles the only way this will happen is with the community made addons. As i see the vehicles in ArmAs to be what we've seen already.

I'm thinking that we wont see a Bradley or a linebaker or vehicles like this because of the USARMY1 pack. We all know how much that cost and to give ArmAs a vehicle list similar to that of the USARMY pack at a much reduced price would have VBS1 haters laughing there tits off. Maybe i'm wrong but it's just a thought..

Irrelevant. BIS has stated from the beginning that VBS1 (and thus its high price) was never meant to be marketed as a game. As such, there should be no relation between the lack of VBS1 addons in Armed Assault, other then pure laziness to optimize and implement them. Of course there’s always the possibility we haven’t seen all of ArmA’s vehicles and soldiers (from whatever branch of the military they might be). I myself am hoping the latter is the case.

Actually you didnt disprove anything, you're arguing the same thing I am. What Im arguing against is this nitpicking of every single small aspect of ArmA all in the "name of realims". We're on the same side here. Also a dictionary isnt the end all source of the meaning or connotation of words. Realism has a much larger connotation and use then what the dictionary says. What my argument isnt that "rarr OFP was shit" its that using the whole annoying argument of "RARR ARMED ASSAULT IS SUPPOSED TO BE REALISTIC, THERE BETTER BE 546 STITCHES ON THE RIGHT HAND SIDE OF THE ACU JACKET OR IM NOT BUYING THIS GAME!".

Well noone in his (or her) right mind would argue over certain tailoring aspects like the number of stitches on a uniform. I don’t think anyone has used this as an argument to –possibly- not buy ArmA too.

Or this bullshit about Marines and Military. Who cares!? Just like you said, the game is about the EXPERIENCE and FEELING, not the "realism"

You do realize the marines are part of the US Military? What you’re probably trying to say is the marines and army, which infact are two different branches within the US Military. You have to understand that some of us think having proper represented units adds to the experience. The realism as a whole adds to it. Now you probably don’t share this ‘feeling’ with us, but think of it this way: How could a proper representation of the US military forces (leaving the rebels and OPFOR aside) harm your (gaming) experience in any way?

People should make a difference between realism in gameplay, graphics, setting(story), and the stuff you just described.

While realism in gameplay is most important to me, and a realistic setting is nice aswell, graphics and weapontype/version/number/UCUstuff don't matter at all to me, i dont see the difference between a m16a3/a4, and i dont know who is supposed to wear what camo anyway... tounge2.gif

Again, there is a large contingent of ofp fans (to which I include myself) that do notice such ‘trivial’ (in your mind) inaccuracies. Do you like seeing a Mecedes Star on a BMW? No, because that would be an odd thing to see, wouldn’t it? Same thing here really. Also, we won’t shoot you for not knowing the difference between certain m16 variants. They can appear nearly identical to the untrained eye.

Plus the whole realism issue will be solved by our Modding community. Want your ACU jacket to have exactly 5,567 pixels on it? Go ahead.

Oh there is no doubt in my mind that great modding teams will lay their hands on ArmA and do wonderful things with it. This is fine for singleplayer. Problem is, addons are hardly played with in multiplayer. Save perhaps certain large Total Conversion mods like the FDF. Why not put a little more effort in creating a realistic (accurate) game to begin with? Having a game that’s good ‘out of the box’ sure beats the hell out of having to mod it to achieve a similar state.

Arch.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While realism aspects are being discussed here, i'm sure that BIS is doing the best they can to make ArmA a great game, and that's really all we can ask of them. If some equipment or vehicles wont be exactly the same as in RL, we'll just have to live with it, i guess (or mod it).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BIS wants to reach also the regular gamer with this game. And most regular gamers don't know much about the military. Most of those gamers didn't even care if a tiger tank fired upon there bradley, as long as it looked and feel good.

Well what i'm trying to say is that things like ACU uniforms and such aren't that important for the regular gamer. And most buyers will be regular gamers. It's more the athomosphere thats does it for them. Not everybody is an military expert you know... smile_o.gif

But I can imagine that you are unpleased about such (for some small) things. I have the same thing watching world war two documentaries where they say American Sherman tanks where the best tanks of world war two rofl.gif .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah shit wrong thread or page banghead.gif note to self,no more posting as soon as I wake up..

Shermans as the best tank..well if ya say a Tiger taking out 9 shermans without being destroyed until the 10th is good then....somebodeh has some issues rofl.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One Sherman on its own was crappy! It had thin armour and only a small gun compared to most other WW11 tanks at the time. Where it succeeded was in numbers and its speed. It was quite fast and they were assembled in vast numbers.

It was I think the US initiation of mass-producing crappy vehicles! .... If one breaks down hop in another, we've got a lorry load of 'em back at base!  biggrin_o.gif

... I just hope they give this tank a miss for ArmA! ... lol  wink_o.gif   biggrin_o.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well noone in his (or her) right mind would argue over certain tailoring aspects like the number of stitches on a uniform. I don’t think anyone has used this as an argument to –possibly- not buy ArmA too.

Its called Exaggerating for effect.. I am not being literal.. icon_rolleyes.gif

You do realize the marines are part of the US Military? What you’re probably trying to say is the marines and army, which infact are two different branches within the US Military. You have to understand that some of us think having proper represented units adds to the experience. The realism as a whole adds to it. Now you probably don’t share this ‘feeling’ with us, but think of it this way: How could a proper representation of the US military forces (leaving the rebels and OPFOR aside) harm your (gaming) experience in any way?

Again you're reading into the wrong things. I never said there is a difference about Marines and Military DID I? No I simply stated that people are arguing about little nitpicking things to each. You seem to like looking at the dumbest things and arguing about that instead of my actual point

Plus the whole realism issue will be solved by our Modding community. Want your ACU jacket to have exactly 5,567 pixels on it? Go ahead.

Oh there is no doubt in my mind that great modding teams will lay their hands on ArmA and do wonderful things with it. This is fine for singleplayer. Problem is, addons are hardly played with in multiplayer. Save perhaps certain large Total Conversion mods like the FDF. Why not put a little more effort in creating a realistic (accurate) game to begin with? Having a game that’s good ‘out of the box’ sure beats the hell out of having to mod it to achieve a similar state.

Bullshit. I see PLENTY of servers with different addons in Multiplayer. I myself a long with a bunch of friends play using these addons, not TCM. Also if you go too realistic you'll lose business because not every Tom, Dick, and Harry wants to play some godawful stiff simulation where you die because you stubbed your toe (EXAGGERATION). I'm sorry but BIS is a business and they have to appeal to everyone. Our community cannot sustain them forever, they want to branch out. If our community wants realism right away then they can mod it. But BIS needs to reach out to BF2 players and to UT players and all the players. You can go ahead and call the people who play BF2 idiots all you want, but BF2 is selling like crazy. Personally I don't like it, but if we can bring players to OFP, i.e. more money for BIS, then we can proceed to have more games from BIS. A realistic game out of the box wont happen, it didnt happen with OFP and it wont happen with ArmA. Also, no not all BF2 players are stupid or jerks. It has nothing to do with the game itself. There are jerks in OFP too. Its because BF2 has a larger playerbase, and just like the whole population, there are bound to be jerks. With the larger playerbase this population of jerks is more noticeable than our small community in OFP. Sorry but no matter how much realism complaining we do, BIS is not gonna go all out and create VBS1 for ArmA.

...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ukraineboy, you obviously misunderstood the purpose I had in mind when writing this thread. I would be very happy, if you could take your discussion away from this thread and maybe create your own thread, as this thread has a different purpose. Thank you for your understanding.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ukraineboy, you obviously misunderstood the purpose I had in mind when writing this thread. I would be very happy, if you could take your discussion away from this thread and maybe create your own thread, as this thread has a different purpose. Thank you for your understanding.

Ditto.

Ukraineboy, I think that maybe you are getting a little too heated about your beliefs that its kinda like beating the dead horse.

Here's something you can try to release all that pent up energy.

Works wonders for me. smile_o.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ukraineboy, you obviously misunderstood the purpose I had in mind when writing this thread. I would be very happy, if you could take your discussion away from this thread and maybe create your own thread, as this thread has a different purpose. Thank you for your understanding.

No, my point still stands. You are nitpicking little useless things, and I am arguing against it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote[/b] ]Well noone in his (or her) right mind would argue over certain tailoring aspects like the number of stitches on a uniform. I don’t think anyone has used this as an argument to –possibly- not buy ArmA too.

Its called Exaggerating for effect.. I am not being literal.. icon_rolleyes.gif

Obviously you’re missing my point. Thing is, nobody actually cares about the number of stitches. But proper representation of the various US military brands is hopefully not too much to ask for.

Quote[/b] ]You do realize the marines are part of the US Military? What you’re probably trying to say is the marines and army, which infact are two different branches within the US Military. You have to understand that some of us think having proper represented units adds to the experience. The realism as a whole adds to it. Now you probably don’t share this ‘feeling’ with us, but think of it this way: How could a proper representation of the US military forces (leaving the rebels and OPFOR aside) harm your (gaming) experience in any way?

Again you're reading into the wrong things. I never said there is a difference about Marines and Military DID I? No I simply stated that people are arguing about little nitpicking things to each. You seem to like looking at the dumbest things and arguing about that instead of my actual point

What ‘dumb’ things? I only replied to your arguments. Calling them stupid would be very unwise, as that would insinuate you yourself are stupid. I would hope that is not the case. It might be nitpicking to you, but to others it’s not. All about perspective.

Quote[/b] ]Oh there is no doubt in my mind that great modding teams will lay their hands on ArmA and do wonderful things with it. This is fine for singleplayer. Problem is, addons are hardly played with in multiplayer. Save perhaps certain large Total Conversion mods like the FDF. Why not put a little more effort in creating a realistic (accurate) game to begin with? Having a game that’s good ‘out of the box’ sure beats the hell out of having to mod it to achieve a similar state.

Bullshit. I see PLENTY of servers with different addons in Multiplayer. I myself a long with a bunch of friends play using these addons, not TCM.

Majority of the servers is mostly vanilla. There are some that require you to download certain addon packs, but this is often a hassle. Why not get it right the first time around.

Quote ]Also if you go too realistic you'll lose business because not every Tom, Dick, and Harry wants to play some godawful stiff simulation where you die because you stubbed your toe (EXAGGERATION). I'm sorry but BIS is a business and they have to appeal to everyone. Our community cannot sustain them forever, they want to branch out. If our community wants realism right away then they can mod it. But BIS needs to reach out to BF2 players and to UT players and all the players. You can go ahead and call the people who play BF2 idiots all you want, but BF2 is selling like crazy. Personally I don't like it, but if we can bring players to OFP, i.e. more money for BIS, then we can proceed to have more games from BIS. A realistic game out of the box wont happen, it didnt happen with OFP and it wont happen with ArmA. Also, no not all BF2 players are stupid or jerks. It has nothing to do with the game itself. There are jerks in OFP too. Its because BF2 has a larger playerbase, and just like the whole population, there are bound to be jerks. With the larger playerbase this population of jerks is more noticeable than our small community in OFP. Sorry but no matter how much realism complaining we do, BIS is not gonna go all out and create VBS1 for ArmA.[/b]

You obviously know little about marketing and business in general. A lot of OFP fans (I’d wager the majority) are realism freaks, or enthusiasts at the very least. This should be (and most likely is) BIS’ target group. They’ll probably focus all their marketing power on this group. Evidence of the E3 only supports this case; the mainstream gamer was hardly targeted during this event. That leaves us with 3 possibilities:

1. The target group (‘realism freaks’) is to be reached via other communication channels. This could be through the forums, a fictional weblog, newsletters, etc. Please note that BIS is communicating with us via channels known to the fans. Fans that are attracted to OFP’s realism aspects.

2. BIS sucks at marketing. I certainly hope this is not the case, but it’s certainly a possibility that should not be overlooked.

3. BIS wants to keep a low profile. A dodgy argument at best. Why communicate with your already well established fanbase and keep potential new customers in the dark? Besides, the game is nearing completion now.

Keep in mind that BIS does not have to create a mainstream game to generate a sizable profit (or to keep financially healthy). The competition in that segment is murderous anyway. You have Bf2 and its upcoming successor, Quake Wars, UT2007 etc. etc. You want to compete with them? Get a proper publisher first! Otherwise the (financial) results are going to be disastrous. No, BIS is probably aiming at a niche market, one which they currently dominate and hopefully continue to do so (provided the level of quality of their products remains high). There is no direct competition opposing OFP, none released anyway. A possible competitor could be that game from the creators of the H&D series, ‘Enemy in sight’ (or something).

Now leaving all that aside. How could realism in terms of accuracy cost you customers? I can’t see that happening? Accuracy is a bonus, if anything, it will draw more potential customers from the targeted segment.

Also, what does the behaviour of the BF2 fanbase have to do with this discussion?

One more thing though, realistic games do come out of the box. Think of Flight simulator, Steal beasts and Falcon 4 for instance.

Arch.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I'm sorry but ArmA won't be out of the box super-realistic. OFP wasn't, and neither will ArmA be. And you know what? It will still be fun and worth the money.

Personally, I hope the modding community stops making these individual addons, and they join mod teams. Because it will be impossible to play on MP with all these little addons. I.E. If you're a modeller, join a mod team and work for them instead of releasing the 500th M16 model or the 20,000th M1A2 Abrams model.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well I'm sorry but ArmA won't be out of the box super-realistic. OFP wasn't, and neither will ArmA be. And you know what? It will still be fun and worth the money.

No doubt, but with a little more effort it could be so much more. That's what I'm aiming at.

Personally, I hope the modding community stops making these individual addons, and they join mod teams. Because it will be impossible to play on MP with all these little addons. I.E. If you're a modeller, join a mod team and work for them instead of releasing the 500th M16 model or the 20,000th M1A2 Abrams model.

That's easier said then done and it still does not guarantee a standardized addonpack for servers. And in case you haven’t noticed, a lot of modteams create duplicate addons as well. Good thing you agree with me on the addon/multiplayer issue though.

Arch.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We know that politically, Rumsfield is trying to convert the military into a quicker more ready responce force. Therefor the presence of strykers and marinised AH-1 Cobras isn't suprising - remember this is 2012 we are speaking about.

We know that the North has considerable armour, and therefor given the U.S role is to train the South to be able to meet a contingency, it isn't unrealistic for the U.S to send it's only MBT so they can get some practice in tank warfare. In anycase, an MBT will be needed to counter any Armour threat.

M113's are in use by MANY countries and will continue to do so for many years to come. It certainly is not Uncommon for the U.S or any other country to sell equipment & training packages for their own equipment they don't need anymore.

We could see anything, maybe even a WASP class ship. Why speculate?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
remember this is 2012 we are speaking about.

pistols.gifpistols.gifpistols.gifpistols.gifpistols.gif

CHRIST, for god sakes people

This game is not 2012, its not 2008, its not anything. ITS TODAY, ITS MODERN DAY. 2006!

This has been said 50 times already.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

huh.gif Just an opinion, but some people need to go and cool off...

As much as we'd like to see unified addon makers, I'd have to say it's not going to happen. Apart from language barriers, geography and whatnot, everyone has their own little opinion on what-should-be-what in each and every addon. There is no such thing as a "Global Lord of OFP/AA," unfortunately, who dictates over everything concerning addons. My example is the recent fiasco concerning a recent tank release and its subsequent (and illegal) re-release by a few individuals concerned about its armour values.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
My example is the recent fiasco concerning a recent tank release and its subsequent (and illegal) re-release by a few individuals concerned about its armour values.

link? Sounds interesting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Where have you been? I'll give you a hint concerning the tank: latest Abrams. biggrin_o.gif

Be more specific please, theres 20,000 Abrams models. Link, I only found King Homer's one and theres some discussion about the .pbo being locked or something. Is that the one?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Where have you been? I'll give you a hint concerning the tank: latest Abrams. biggrin_o.gif

Be more specific please, theres 20,000 Abrams models. Link, I only found King Homer's one and theres some discussion about the .pbo being locked or something. Is that the one?

I don't really know the specifics, but I think there was a disagreement between Homer and *ORCs*. *ORCs* took Homer's tank and tweaked down the armor values because they felt the tank was too invincible.

Something like that.

EDIT:: Argg, my mistake about RHS ~= ORCs

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×