Armed Assault so far....

[dslyecxi 23]

I know this is controversial , but sticking to little issues like that seems to me to be the wrong fight . I barely believe reloading while running will change the outcome of many battles (CTF and DM aside, but I still consider those incredible misuse of this engine). So is shooting from LittleBirds actually. If you model it correctly,the accuracy of your fire is going to be awful and the enemy is still going to have a large advantage of him killing you instead of you killing him. Shooting at him might help your morale but I am just going to say that I doubt it is going to help you much at surviving

I don't believe that this is true. Infantry is the core of the game - everything else, and I mean everything, is there to support the infantry.

The fidelity of the infantry movement model and related issues is of a massive priority. It is the foundation of the game itself. Anything done to it to improve it will pay off huge dividends.

One prime example of where this has happened in the past involves the way weapons used to move. I've always known that it was a huge issue in OFP, and I knew it was a huge issue in ArmA. I could have told anyone that changing it would have a significant, positive impact on the infantry experience. Lo and behold, when it was changed, what was the response? It was huge. It did a tremendous amount to un-clunkify the infantry. The same is true with reloading while moving, firing AT from different postures, firing from Littlebirds, or the backs of trucks, or whatever. It's fidelity. Throw us in human form and then tell us that we can't do basic things that we'd be able to do in reality, and what does that get us? Frustrated, that's what.

I like ArmA. I really admire BIS as a developer, and I am a huge supporter of them. That doesn't change some fundamental things - namely, that the general infantry movement and weapon/gear/etc modeling has been done better in other games, and BIS could do well to learn from them and adapt various elements to ArmA where technically feasible. Infiltration, the ooold UT mod, is a prime example of an infantry game that had great depth and fidelity. If even half of Infiltration's features made it over to ArmA I would be ecstatic. For all of them (and more! to show up would put ArmA in an infantry realm that would be untouchable by any competitors. I hope that Game2 delivers on this, but I think it is absolutely imperative that BIS understands why that is so important right now, before Game2, so that they can go into it with the mindset of improving it all to the level it needs to be instead of the ArmA model where many elements were glossed over because it was planned to "just" be an overhaul of OFP.

I don't want to get into the nitty-gritty of why specific features would be useful, and where they'd have tactical application, aside from saying that they would flesh out the infantry and would be positive additions in general. I think that should be good enough for now. However, if you (and others) insist on telling me (and others) how such-and-such feature would be pointless and not change anything, I may have to reevaluate my stance and start citing the countless incidents from past OFP sessions where such features would have meant the difference between life and death for an individual, fireteam, squad, etc. There are plenty to be cited if necessary.

[HamishUK 0]

Dslyecxi I know it's a different kettle of fish (partly) but does VBS2 allow or improve on any details in ArmA in terms of the animations etc?

[dmarkwick 261]

Well I'm not adverse to having reload-while-moving, as long as the penalties are severe enough to promote cover-before-reload as a more professional option.

Such as greatly increased reload time, possibility of jamming etc.

One thing that might improve my own chances of survival is the possibility of breaking out of a reload so I can go prone or scamper away. But that's really a fix for my own poor practice of course

[lwlooz 0]

I apologize if I come across as calling those features pointless. They are not, they add to the fidelity of the infantry sim part of the game. I was merely trying to say that those issues are solutions to very specific problems. Reloading on the move seems to me not to be something that happens in 9 out of 10 cases. So is getting under fire on a landing and actually seeing the enemy,so you can fire back and having to do that because you don't have any fire-support aircraft who would engage the enemy otherwise.

I know where you come from and I think your research and suggestions are great , but I think ignoring the aircraft-sim part or the tank-sim part or the wargame-part(this would be mainly AI not acting like retards on a tactical scale) seems to me to be a huge mistake. For one you never going to attract Sim people if the vehicle simulation is awful and second all battles not only involving infantry are going to fail terrible in believability if the other parts of the sim are not on par,not even close , but just "Infantry Cruise-Around Material".

Thats all I was trying to say .

Now if you you or anyone else gets BIS to just improve the infantry part, thats terrific as well

[Scrub 0]

OK!!! Enough 'splaining this stuff to us and get your ArmA tactical guide published already!     Been jonesin' for that guide ever since I read the inf. based one.

@Lwlooz:  I've been killed reloading I don't know HOW many times by an AI that sprinted up to me when I was covered by a corner.  That really changes the outcome of my mission.  I'd wager to fire from any moving vehicle position is not very accurate. If you get enough fire on area, I'm certain there would be a suppressive effect and a possible magic BB.  Having any odds at all is infinately better than none. Just read your above post.. Yup, I can agree to that.

[majoris 10]

Dslyecxi you know your stuff.

I also agree that you should "do what you want, but face the consequences."

Maybe a total freedom mod will come out? Who knows.

[dslyecxi 23]

OK!!! Enough 'splaining this stuff to us and get your ArmA tactical guide published already! Been jonesin' for that guide ever since I read the inf. based one.

Actually, surprise surprise... it'll be out this weekend. I'm putting the finishing touches on it on Friday and should publish it Friday evening, Saturday, or Sunday. It's over 55,000 words worth of tactical goodness, and is filled with all manner of screenshots and illustrations to flesh things out.

I'm rather fond of it myself. I think the community will enjoy it as well.

[dmarkwick 261]

OK!!! Enough 'splaining this stuff to us and get your ArmA tactical guide published already! Been jonesin' for that guide ever since I read the inf. based one.

Actually, surprise surprise... it'll be out this weekend. I'm putting the finishing touches on it on Friday and should publish it Friday evening, Saturday, or Sunday. It's over 55,000 words worth of tactical goodness, and is filled with all manner of screenshots and illustrations to flesh things out.

I'm rather fond of it myself. I think the community will enjoy it as well.

Looking forward to it.

[wodin 0]

I love the tanks etc but as a spectator. The infantry is where its at for me.

[INNOCENT&CLUELESS 0]

I had to read this thread up and down twice to believe:

Some of the same guys killing me virtually in other threads moaning about the same things or similar are now criticize ArmA? Sometimes it seemed to me that ANY criticism against ArmA was a sacrilege.

Ok, my way was always...strange.

Without looking at OFP, VBS1/2, GAME2, what could improve the quality of the engine?

I guess BI started to work on their dream with OFP. It became true and was unique at their time.

ArmA / VBS2 is also unique in terms of the general design approach while many technical aspects are not treated with the maximum effort or knowledge since it seems BI is simply to small.

We can not expect that a small team can be the master in:

- net code

- graphics

- AI

- animation

- 2D Art

- 3D

- GUI design

- mission design

- RL vs. addon tuning

- whatever

...to deliver a master piece perfect and world leading in all areas.

Is that an excuse? No, but an explanation.

BI must decide sooner or later if they concentrate on a smaller range - maybe just the core engine - or to expand their team drastically. Otherwise sooner or later a company with a huge financial background could come along and copy/paste the successful OFP approach.

Currently, even with that many bugs BI is alone on the throne of military simulations.

[Heatseeker 0]

One prime example of where this has happened in the past involves the way weapons used to move. I've always known that it was a huge issue in OFP, and I knew it was a huge issue in ArmA. I could have told anyone that changing it would have a significant, positive impact on the infantry experience. Lo and behold, when it was changed, what was the response? It was huge. It did a tremendous amount to un-clunkify the infantry.

Actually is just looks a little nicer, operation wise its the same if i choose to shoot & walk with the sights up, wich i dont 99% of the time.

Maybe its a priority to some, for me its trivial and reducing the recoil in most assault rifles would have been far more important or have a greater positive effect on gameplay regarding simulated realism.

Reloading on the move is the same... it only takes 2 seconds and i believe that if you are being shot at you wont perform your tactical reload on the move thing. Its something trivial featured in most dumb run and gun shooters.

Lets put some actual thought into it:

Arma uses the same animation sequence and time for every single rifle, this includes magazine, bolt action and belt fed.

Can you reload the M240 or M249 on the move, under fire? If you faced a real combat situation would you even consider it?

Things like this would have to be taken into acount... would it be worth doing all this so that you could record yet another "tactical" movie?

There i room for improvement in Arma, true but i would rather see BIS efforts prioritising non trivial things.

[Banzai! 0]

My biggest gripe with ArmA is that the US Army is the lesser of the Sahranis. For a two-bit teapot banana country, the Sahranis have more advanced and capable weapon systems. Compare V-80 and Su-34 vs the 1960s(! derivative Ah-1 and Harrier, ak-74 which does more damage than m4, bmp2 that is more capable than the stryker, mi17 that has like 200 rockets and a t-72 which can one shot the abrams.

Furthermore the traditional strengths of the US Army are completely absent ingame. Where are our artillery, UAVs + satscans, thermal sights, Javelins and overwhelming air superiority? The US force has one plane that doesn't even engage the enemy!

ArmA's US soldiers are running around in ACUs, but they seem to have missed out on the last 15 years' revolution in warfare. Aside from the m4 and Stryker they are a 1985 force.

PS: Thermal sights and artillery are not just small omissions. Thermal sights are the main reason we managed to turkey shoot the Iraqis in the Gulf War, and artillery is the Queen of the Battlefield!

[Banzai! 0]

Right now GRAW is a better representation of the present US war experience than ArmA.

[Heatseeker 0]

Right now GRAW is a better representation of the present US war experience than ArmA.

*crosscom activated* .

[Banzai! 0]

Right now GRAW is a better representation of the present US war experience than ArmA.

*crosscom activated* .

Well in real life you would have your squadmates shouting out "sniper in that tower!", etc. and a hovering apache calling out targets. Tagging with Crosscom works better in a computer game situation than shouting at the computer screen (unless that floats your boat).

[dslyecxi 23]

Quote[/b] ]Actually is just looks a little nicer, operation wise its the same if i choose to shoot & walk with the sights up, wich i dont 99% of the time.

Well, I disagree. The fact that the view no longer bobs crazily makes it possible to move and shoot in a fashion that is MUCH closer to real-world capabilities than before. You can think this is a "trivial" change and doesn't do anything, but for me and many others, it is a very significant and useful change.

Quote[/b] ]Reloading on the move is the same... it only takes 2 seconds and i believe that if you are being shot at you wont perform your tactical reload on the move thing. Its something trivial featured in most dumb run and gun shooters.

Disagree again. There are countless situations that I encounter in every OFP or ArmA session where in a real-world situation I would be able to move and reload in a fashion that would be completely realistic and logical. This is not modeled in ArmA. It's not there because of an apparent technical limitation. You're making an excuse for it and trying to minimize the impact of such a potential change, instead of simply acknowledging that it's something that can be done in reality and would flesh out the infantry model of ArmA. You're fighting an utterly pointless battle in that respect.

Quote[/b] ]Lets put some actual thought into it:

I've put plenty of "actual" (as opposed to fake?) thought into it already, thanks.

Quote[/b] ] Can you reload the M240 or M249 on the move, under fire? If you faced a real combat situation would you even consider it? Things like this would have to be taken into acount...

Uh, those things have to be taken into account right now. The fact that you're lumping them into this "moving while reloading" issue is pretty irrelevant. Any change requires things having to be "taken into account", you're not stating anything new here to be perfectly honest.

Quote[/b] ]would it be worth doing all this so that you could record yet another "tactical" movie?

Do you really feel compelled to start using personal insults here? I think we can stay above that and still accomplish something in this discussion. I want features like that, and others, because - as I said previously - it increases the depth of the simulation and fleshes it out further. I guess you have a different idea of what "realism" should be, and you're entitled to it. I don't share it, though.

Quote[/b] ]There i room for improvement in Arma, true but i would rather see BIS efforts prioritising non trivial things.

Trivial to you, perhaps. Thankfully BIS takes a wider range of opinions and suggestions into consideration than just from you, or else we'd be in a bad place.

[shataan 1]

Have you ever felt the weight of a fully loaded 7.62 round mag?? Just wondering. I have back in the old days when we used a the 7.62 round in Canada. Pretty heavy. Not sure how heavy the new C1s are tho. They I believe are the M4 Canadian counterpart. I could be wrong about the name. Been outta the loop for over 20 years.

I imagine tho that moving while changing mags is possible. But at a much reduced speed. I think being stopped dead in yer tracks ingame is a tad overdone. Imho we should be slowed down to walking speed..... not be forced to be totally immobile while reloading.

Middle of the road is good. Not being like quakefast/running and able to reload, and not be totally immobile while reloading. Right in the middle. Limited movement. Just my oppinion.

I can live with it as is. But logically, you should still have some movement while reloading. It`d FEEL right and way better. .... immersionwise.

[dslyecxi 23]

Have you ever felt the weight of a fully loaded 7.62 round mag?? Just wondering. I have back in the old days when we used a the 7.62 round in Canada. Pretty heavy. Not sure how heavy the new C1s are tho. They I believe are the M4 Canadian counterpart. I could be wrong about the name. Been outta the loop for over 20 years.

I imagine tho that moving while changing mags is possible. But at a much reduced speed. I think being stopped dead in yer tracks ingame is a tad overdone. Imho we should be slowed down to walking speed..... not be forced to be totally immobile while reloading.

If I had a place to film it, I'd grab my AR and show you just how possible moving and reloading is in reality. Many of you are way overstating how "difficult" it really is. Anything short of a belt-fed machinegun can be reloaded on the move as a standard, nothing-out-of-the-ordinary event.

[Banzai! 0]

Have you ever felt the weight of a fully loaded 7.62 round mag?? Just wondering. I have back in the old days when we used a the 7.62 round in Canada. Pretty heavy. Not sure how heavy the new C1s are tho. They I believe are the M4 Canadian counterpart. I could be wrong about the name. Been outta the loop for over 20 years.

I imagine tho that moving while changing mags is possible. But at a much reduced speed. I think being stopped dead in yer tracks ingame is a tad overdone. Imho we should be slowed down to walking speed..... not be forced to be totally immobile while reloading.

Middle of the road is good. Not being like quakefast/running and able to reload, and not be totally immobile while reloading. Right in the middle. Limited movement. Just my oppinion.

I can live with it as is. But logically, you should still have some movement while reloading. It`d FEEL right and way better. .... immersionwise.

I believe in STALKER when you hit reload while sprinting you get slowed to a walk. Similarly if you begin firing.

[Dallas 9]

I probably wouldn't mind a walking reload, but I really don't care much. Dslyecxi's post for some reason reminded me of a paint pic I drew as a response to how easy it is to reload a rifle with one hand. Hope it's not too OT:

[Rg 0]

Quote[/b] ]Actually is just looks a little nicer, operation wise its the same if i choose to shoot & walk with the sights up, wich i dont 99% of the time.

Well, I disagree. The fact that the view no longer bobs crazily makes it possible to move and shoot in a fashion that is MUCH closer to real-world capabilities than before. You can think this is a "trivial" change and doesn't do anything, but for me and many others, it is a very significant and useful change.

To be honest, I probably wouldn't be playing this game right now if they didn't fix the "view locked to ironsight" issue. It was that big of an issue for me.

[Heatseeker 0]

My point was that it seems trivial gameplay wise, its not about possibility, its more about practical use.

When i play Arma i dont consider reloading out of cover or walking and shooting with the sights up. Im talking no respawns, full veteran mode where a bad move can be the last one.

Imo Arma does a better job at being realistically challenging than all the other shooters put together so BIS must have done something wright .

[NeMeSiS 11]

Im talking no respawns, full veteran mode where a bad move can be the last one.

In that case the new 'iron sight mode' is a life saver for me, now i can aim quickly  when im walking around instead of getting dizzy because of the shaking screen

For reloading on the move: To be honest i dont care, a 'stop current action' button would be nice but hey, if you are reloading and an enemy suddenly stands in front of you you might be able to stop the reloading animation, but without bullets in your rifle he is still going to shoot you in the face

[Sennacherib 0]

i don't understand why a reload anim is so important? in game, i don't watch myself or the other soldiers reload the weapons

if people want the real life, this is easy a lot of armies need guys.

Arma is just a game, and not intended to be the real life.

[sanctuary 19]

Quote[/b] ]Actually is just looks a little nicer, operation wise its the same if i choose to shoot & walk with the sights up, wich i dont 99% of the time.

Well, I disagree. The fact that the view no longer bobs crazily makes it possible to move and shoot in a fashion that is MUCH closer to real-world capabilities than before. You can think this is a "trivial" change and doesn't do anything, but for me and many others, it is a very significant and useful change.

To be honest, I probably wouldn't be playing this game right now if they didn't fix the "view locked to ironsight" issue. It was that big of an issue for me.

Indeed, in OFP this player view being completely locked to the gun view was a real pain, not only for gameplay in urban environment but for the eyes as the default walk animations had a "jumpy" gun, making the game even more arcade than some FPS when the player was slowly walking and using the ironsight.

As there was already a variable "aimprecision" in the main game config that was already used to define the intensity of the "weapon waving", coupled with the original "gun jumpy" animations was resulting in this problem being multiplied.

It was the reason of my design choice in my later animation packs to "stabilise" entirely the weapon proxy in every animations that was linked to soldier walking, letting only the "aimprecision" value to decide the waving.

The improvement on gameplay was very good as you could at least use the walk animation with ironsight and have good result in urban combat.

But having the player view not locked anymore to the gun view now the ironsight are in 3D is an even better improvement and i hope it will be in the future game2 by default.