New interview with Maruk

[funnyguy1 0]

ArmA could really profit from a more "band of brothers" kind of approach (small team, individual soldiers, memorable characters). basically like OPF.

and a small team doesn't necessarily mean spec ops only, now does it?  

Yes, and no. Imo it depends on the campaign's plot. The fastest way I can describe it:

commanding big squads (without ordering every single soldier watch/fire direction etc.) - good

commanding your fireteam in a realistic conflict (with cooperation with other teams etc.) - good

being the leader of 5-men army - ghost recon

I'm affraid (and that's just a pure speculation) that 5 men is not enough to create realistic atmosphere, and I kinda agree with Frederf when it comes to the commanding interface (although I'm not saying the one we have now is bad).

Would be cool if every of those 4-5 men was a fireteam leader himself though.

[Fred DM 0]

ArmA could really profit from a more "band of brothers" kind of approach (small team, individual soldiers, memorable characters). basically like OPF.

and a small team doesn't necessarily mean spec ops only, now does it?  

Yes, and no. Imo it depends on the campaign's plot. The fastest way I can describe it:

commanding big squads (without ordering every single soldier watch/fire direction etc.) - good

commanding your fireteam in a realistic conflict (with cooperation with other teams etc.) - good

being the leader of 5-men army - ghost recon

I'm affraid (and that's just a pure speculation) that 5 men is not enough to create realistic atmosphere, and I kinda agree with Frederf when it comes to the commanding interface (although I'm not saying the one we have now is bad).

Would be cool if every of those 4-5 men was a fireteam leader himself though.

not sure. i always liked those OPF missions best that focused on smaller teams. this obviously includes special ops but is not limited to that kind of warfare.

also, a small team does not have to be limited to 5 members. i'm thinking of up to a dozen. but not (much) more.

i've recently tried a custom SP mission that puts you in control of about 50 soldiers right from the start. that's a hopeless situation. even in an RTS you'd have a hard time keeping them under control (and from dying). in a shooter like ArmA it makes no sense at all.

the (sad) truth is that ArmA's AI needs to be babysitted (this would be true with other games as well, but they usually limit the number of troops on the battlefield anyway). and it's no fun to babysit 50 soldiers at once.

[4 IN 1 0]

3) And correct, there is no plan to implement complex chain of command anything like this in Arma 2.

so we might end up try to fix this ourself again...........

[colkurtz 0]

2) We are working on improved squad control for Arma 2 but in the same time we feel focusing on smaller team is best option for the main single player story.

That is a bit of a pity but I understand the complications involved with managing larger squads.

Focusing on smaller squads may also be the first indication of gearing the game towards a more simplified console gaming interface.

Does this mean an end to larger scale campagin battles or better integration of the player controlled squad within a large scale engagement?

I wouldn't mind multiplayer squad vs squad or even co-op scenarios.

[MATRA 0]

Things are changing around here!

Thanks Maruk for the clarification.

I hope we can see more of this in other issues .

[dslyecxi 23]

3) And correct, there is no plan to implement complex chain of command anything like this in Arma 2.

I hope that this is reevaluated. A squad being broken down into fireteams, or a platoon being broken down into squads and then fireteams, is not a "complex chain of command". It's how real military units are structured, and it has dramatic ramifications on tactics and such, both from the player's point of view and the AI's.

I am worried that the general combat against the AI in ArmA2 is going to be the same that we had in OFP and ArmA, but with a few upgrades. I'm personally tired of having squad-based units that do not know how to work with each other to carry out proper military tactics. I don't know if I'm ready to go through that same style of combat yet again. It was fun in OFP because it was new - it was good for a while in ArmA, but the thought of facing it yet again in ArmA2 without serious reworking is very, very worrying.

Again... I hope that decision is reevaluated.

[Flat!!! 0]

For those who want to know more stuff about the "5man gang" and some improvements with the AI:

*Note* This is a rough translation from tiscali.cz (translated by VojtzechGamer). Also note that some things might have changed due to the age of the translated article so therefore don't bomb BIS with things that might not be true and don't put forward any assumptions...

Quote[/b] ]• You are not alone

Most of the time you will have 5 members in your squad, and you can switch between them as Maruk states: “The Idea of the game is that we don’t want the player to save, load, save, load and all over again. If you lost one of the team members you will get someone else after some time. Only if you lose your whole squad is it time to load. We don’t want the player to be too frustrated from those saves/loadsâ€. In Arma 1 soldiers were usually walking in the middle of the street so they were easy to take out. In Arma 2 the AI is much smarter. They always cover their movements in urban areas without any commands from the player. This will ensure a much greater gaming experience than the one found in Arma 1. You can check this out in the first video. Movement will be improved too as an example you will be able to reload your weapon while moving.

Read the full article here: (Click Me)

[smellyjelly 0]

The small squads sounds great, mostly because I always found managing squads a pain. Maybe I just suck, but sometimes it's difficult to get the AI to shoot at the enemies, and sometimes my squads actions are unpredictable which usually get's them killed.

I'm really hoping for some good urban combat missions in ArmaII. In Arma it was usually so forward, "just follow that street" or "kill the group of enemies standing over there". I'm hoping there will be larger cities, where the enemy will have set up positions on rooftops, bases, checkpoints, roads/alleys, ect, and we will have to fight them along with other squads. That way we have some nice background noise as they fight, we're not forced to do all the work, and if the AI is dynamic enough then every mission should end differently as the other squads take different paths or sections of the city.

Honestly, I'm hoping for battles like that to last a while, so it'd be nice to have a few checkpoints and save spots to choose from when loading.

Anyways, enough about my wishes and stuff, but my original point is having a 5 man squad doesn't necessarily mean an unrealistic atmosphere or boring gameplay. If anything, it could push BIS into adding allies to battles which is funner and more realistic. (Yea, I know that sometimes there were allies in Arma, but they would rarely actually help)

I have a question though. Is the campaign going to be free roaming, where we can get ask for special missions, explore our base, go through training, and get requests for us join an on going battle (with no loading screens), or is it going to be in chapters like Arma was?

[Fred DM 0]

if you can continue the mission after "your" character has died, how will a story like Cold War Crisis be told?

because i seriously hope there will be a well-scripted story line in the singleplayer campaign.

[froggyluv 2130]

I think the smaller squad is the tradeoff for having a genuine cover system. Imagine R6 Vegas with 20 squaddies all trying to find cover/leaning etc...

[hoz 0]

Quote[/b] ]2) We are working on improved squad control for Arma 2 but in the same time we feel focusing on smaller team is best option for the main single player story.

I hope that there is also MP campaign capabilities. We've waited for this a long time.

[twisted 127]

i look forward to arma2. big time.

one big thing i ask is don't shortchange in the realism department or editing features (AI, terrain, etc).

ballistics, weapon handling (bipods ), soldier movement speed and ability and reactions, tracer behavior, reloading time length, effects of being suppressed, realistic missions, wounding, etc

ambitious? of course.

the you'll be able to claim the title of ultimate combat simulation and own on both PC and consoles as you'll have a real sale-worthy point of difference.

[-Puma- 2]

i look forward to arma2. big time.

one big thing i ask is don't shortchange in the realism department or editing features (AI, terrain, etc).

ballistics, weapon handling (bipods ), soldier movement speed and ability and reactions, tracer behavior, reloading time length, effects of being suppressed, realistic missions, wounding, etc

ambitious? of course.

the you'll be able to claim the title of ultimate combat simulation and own on both PC and consoles as you'll have a real sale-worthy point of difference.

all those are good improvments and i think easily done. splinter cell like movement speed system would be nice. allso to add more realism into AR the reloading must be changed. maybe so that u it takes ages to reload AR/MG by urself, but if theres a teammate helping u out the reloading can happen faster, like they do IRL where u have gunner and loader(who carries extra ammo allso)

still drooling for the day we can mount/rest pipods and allso other rifles on objects

[TrunkzJr 0]

looks great, i can't wait

[mrj-fin 0]

To get better game you need just listen the community more. I hope that u can give us more customizable game that the basic engine is easy to mod like WWII or RTS orienteited gameplay is more possibilities to do. Try to make game as so realistic u can but let a option to custom gameplay option to those who like fast style gameplay ala DM, CTF.

[Maddmatt 1]

3) And correct, there is no plan to implement complex chain of command anything like this in Arma 2.

I hope that this is reevaluated. A squad being broken down into fireteams, or a platoon being broken down into squads and then fireteams, is not a "complex chain of command". It's how real military units are structured, and it has dramatic ramifications on tactics and such, both from the player's point of view and the AI's.

I am worried that the general combat against the AI in ArmA2 is going to be the same that we had in OFP and ArmA, but with a few upgrades. I'm personally tired of having squad-based units that do not know how to work with each other to carry out proper military tactics. I don't know if I'm ready to go through that same style of combat yet again. It was fun in OFP because it was new - it was good for a while in ArmA, but the thought of facing it yet again in ArmA2 without serious reworking is very, very worrying.

Again... I hope that decision is reevaluated.

I gotta agree with that. A chain of command system could be a pretty big step forward in gameplay. And it would put ArmA 2 even further ahead of other games.

I'm sure it would be a lot of work, but the results could be great.

Fireteams, platoons, and more. ArmA can already handle a huge amount of units, especially on a dedicated server. It could use a better way to command them.

I know about CEX, but having chain of command system in-game and splitting squads into fireteams could make such a huge difference.

[colkurtz 0]

3) And  correct, there is no plan to implement complex chain of command anything like this in Arma 2.

I hope that this is reevaluated. A squad being broken down into fireteams, or a platoon being broken down into squads and then fireteams, is not a "complex chain of command". It's how real military units are structured, and it has dramatic ramifications on tactics and such, both from the player's point of view and the AI's.

I am worried that the general combat against the AI in ArmA2 is going to be the same that we had in OFP and ArmA, but with a few upgrades. I'm personally tired of having squad-based units that do not know how to work with each other to carry out proper military tactics. I don't know if I'm ready to go through that same style of combat yet again. It was fun in OFP because it was new - it was good for a while in ArmA, but the thought of facing it yet again in ArmA2 without serious reworking is very, very worrying.

Again... I hope that decision is reevaluated.

I gotta agree with that. A chain of command system could be a pretty big step forward in gameplay. And it would put ArmA 2 even further ahead of other games.

I'm sure it would be a lot of work, but the results could be great.

Fireteams, platoons, and more. ArmA can already handle a huge amount of units, especially on a dedicated server. It could use a better way to command them.

I know about CEX, but having chain of command system in-game and splitting squads into fireteams could make such a huge difference.

My gut feeling is that the ARMA2 development may be too advanced for them to implement fireteam/platoon chain of command breakdowns into the game.

It would however be a positive step in the right direction and if it is possible to incorporate in ARMA2 then they really should go ahead and do it.

[MehMan 0]

3) And  correct, there is no plan to implement complex chain of command anything like this in Arma 2.

I hope that this is reevaluated. A squad being broken down into fireteams, or a platoon being broken down into squads and then fireteams, is not a "complex chain of command". It's how real military units are structured, and it has dramatic ramifications on tactics and such, both from the player's point of view and the AI's.

I am worried that the general combat against the AI in ArmA2 is going to be the same that we had in OFP and ArmA, but with a few upgrades. I'm personally tired of having squad-based units that do not know how to work with each other to carry out proper military tactics. I don't know if I'm ready to go through that same style of combat yet again. It was fun in OFP because it was new - it was good for a while in ArmA, but the thought of facing it yet again in ArmA2 without serious reworking is very, very worrying.

Again... I hope that decision is reevaluated.

I gotta agree with that. A chain of command system could be a pretty big step forward in gameplay. And it would put ArmA 2 even further ahead of other games.

I'm sure it would be a lot of work, but the results could be great.

Fireteams, platoons, and more. ArmA can already handle a huge amount of units, especially on a dedicated server. It could use a better way to command them.

I know about CEX, but having chain of command system in-game and splitting squads into fireteams could make such a huge difference.

My gut feeling is that the ARMA2 development may be too advanced for them to implement fireteam/platoon chain of command breakdowns into the game.

It would however be a positive step in the right direction and if it is possible to incorporate in ARMA2 then they really should go ahead and do it.

It can't be too far in, not a year before the first heard release date. In a year they could implement it. Hell they almost completely changed the looks of ArmA in a year and a half! So it's possible, and would add more depth. It's possible to get a fireteam structure working within OFP/ArmA(look at Gen. Barrons handsignal addon) and it worked awsomely, now if a simple modder can do that, then BIS can surely do it. It's never too late for changes.

One thing I've also disliked is air units and formations, vehicles, etc, they all used the same thing as infantry. While it worked for vehicles, it doesn't for aircraft and helicopters.

Also I hope that BIS isn't moving too much into the mainstream kind of gaming that is popular, because that was one of the good points of OFP, it was just so different and in a good way.

[Guest Ti0n3r]

They said it was going to be a Next Generation PC game back then. I'm pretty sure they changed their mind after reading this interview. There's just too many challenges they seem to avoid.

I'm not surprised though... Now I'm just hoping for a A+ campaign.

[frederf 0]

Quote[/b] ]2) We are working on improved squad control for Arma 2 but in the same time we feel focusing on smaller team is best option for the main single player story.

I hope that there is also MP campaign capabilities. We've waited for this a long time.

When they say "improve" I would assume that to mean minor changes, like being able to specify color-team formations or changing the interface more away from the 1-9,0 menu or some such and not the tiered command chain you envision?

[benreeper 0]

Of course Arma2 should be, and possibly will be, a mainstream type game. ArmA does not appeal to the mainstream and, if BIS reads this forum they will conclude that, it doesn't appeal to the OFP crowd either. Why would they make a game that nobody likes and make no money. They can make a half-ass pretty game for a console and make oodles of money. I don't want that to happen but if I were them, that's what I would do.

You can't please everyone all of the time (and mostly no one on this forum) but at least you can keep your company afloat and maybe make a little profit.

--Ben

[Flat!!! 0]

Quote[/b] ]2) We are working on improved squad control for Arma 2 but in the same time we feel focusing on smaller team is best option for the main single player story.

I hope that there is also MP campaign capabilities. We've waited for this a long time.

As far as I know and according to another source the whole campaign is to be reworked as much as possible into MP.

[Dallas 9]

I say the future is in MP campaigns. Really ditch the SP campaign and focus on creating a dynamic story you can share with others.

[efefia 0]

The potential that BIS have for future games has never been in doubt. I'm personally of the opinion that if they can nail online co-op on a huge scale, like nothing else that's been seen before then I think they're sitting on a huge cash cow. The online gaming community has exploded over the last couple of years, online components in games are almost taken for granted now, the first polished game that focuses on an online persistent game world will be huge. The only problem I can see is that it'd need to be something like the current crop of mmorpg's with official servers and probably monthly fees but BIS' engine is the most suited to that style of game of any other currently out or in development. It's all going to be about the execution of the final product though, we can only hope that lessons have been learned from ArmA's launch.

[madrussian 347]

Monthly fees?!?

Never!

If there's one thing I've never been fond of, it's MMOs.

By their very nature, MMOs deliver a watered down experience.  To make sure no one "ruins the experience" of others players, by design the developers have to severely limit the possibilities and thus the freedom.  Not to mention what happens once they "balance" everything.  It's akin to being neutered.

No, OFP/ArmA should forever remain open and mod-able with limitless editing possibilities...

edit:

There's a reason, after all, that OFP sold over a million copies.  Indeed, OFP/ArmA is more like the opposite of an MMO.