So can anyone tell me why everyone is playing coop

[walker 0]

Hi Inkompetent

Nice to hear one of the people making new mission styles contributing to the thread.

Kind regards walker

[Inkompetent 0]

Heh. Well, I both got tired of the bitching between COOP/PVP players and inspired by it. I think more people should take the opportunity and try to find mapstyles that fits both sides and make something out of it, instead of just saying "Well, play ArmA your way then! I'll play it my way! Shoo!".

Oh, and if one side likes respawn in their maps and the other side do not, why not add the option to choose which you want when starting the map?

[RN Malboeuf 12]

If you guys are gonna complain how rigid the animations are and how they should be smoothed out go play a rambo game. This is one of the few more realistic games out there.

I have played all Delta Force games, America's Army, Battlefields, CoDs, ect...

In my opinion the rigid animation adds more of a realistic effect than the super smooth rambo game. I know that sounds stupid and some of you are laughing at me. I can't explain why it makes it more real for me but it just does. It adds to the dificulty of the game.

Coop is my favorite type of mission to play now. I use to be huge into CTF, TKOTH, TDM..... Then all you little kids out there kept callin me, and people like me, cheaters. I got sick of you little kids out there that can't handle an ass woopin.

Now, heh, no AI complains that I cheat. AI acts more real than all of you kids too. AI does not go around throwing grenades at nothing, shooting MG's at nothing, shooting of GL's at nothing, the list goes on. Simply put, the AI is a lot more realistic in this game than any real players. You kids out there while playing TDM/TKOTH/CTF don't want to make the game as realistic as possible. In most Coops you have 1 life, at least the ones I make. One, not 28 or 52, one life to complete the mission. And that is why we play Coop.

[beta 0]

Heh. Well, I both got tired of the bitching between COOP/PVP players and inspired by it. I think more people should take the opportunity and try to find mapstyles that fits both sides and make something out of it, instead of just saying "Well, play ArmA your way then! I'll play it my way! Shoo!".

Oh, and if one side likes respawn in their maps and the other side do not, why not add the option to choose which you want when starting the map?

Good to know the random complaining was useful for something.

I started making my map (which is just about to enter closed testing on a dedi server *crosses fingers and hopes for the best*) because I was sick of Evo, and was sick of the PvP options.

If all goes well on the testing, it might be out by Friday (haha, wishful thinking I bet).

[whisper 0]

-Ironman-[Maj] @ Feb. 13 2008,21:31)]If you guys are gonna complain how rigid the animations are and how they should be smoothed out go play a rambo game. This is one of the few more realistic games out there.

I have played all Delta Force games, America's Army, Battlefields, CoDs, ect...

In my opinion the rigid animation adds more of a realistic effect than the super smooth rambo game. I know that sounds stupid and some of you are laughing at me. I can't explain why it makes it more real for me but it just does. It adds to the dificulty of the game.

Coop is my favorite type of mission to play now. I use to be huge into CTF, TKOTH, TDM..... Then all you little kids out there kept callin me, and people like me, cheaters. I got sick of you little kids out there that can't handle an ass woopin.

Now, heh, no AI complains that I cheat. AI acts more real than all of you kids too. AI does not go around throwing grenades at nothing, shooting MG's at nothing, shooting of GL's at nothing, the list goes on. Simply put, the AI is a lot more realistic in this game than any real players. You kids out there while playing TDM/TKOTH/CTF don't want to make the game as realistic as possible. In most Coops you have 1 life, at least the ones I make. One, not 28 or 52, one life to complete the mission. And that is why we play Coop.

Yes, yes, you know better that any PvP player, who incidentaly appear to all be kids with no life (or some fallacy of the same kind), and only your way of playing an open game like ArmA is the correct one.

I think we got the hint.

And after that, people wonder why they get angry answers? :O

[benreeper 0]

I'm saying that the constant complaining doesn't help the discussion at all.

As a hypothetical, let's say the controls for Arma and Arma2 remain the same, will you then give it up and move on?

You see for those of us that don't play CTF/DM, it's not the controls that stop us, it's the gametype itself. Also, for the most part,we didn't play those gametypes in OFP either. To me the controls in Arma (beta 1.09) feel exactly the same as they did in OFP.

I believe most of those people that played CTF/DM in OFP have moved on to those types of games and who cares if they don't come back. If BIS really wanted THEIR sales as opposed to OURS, they would have made a Battlefield clone like everyone else.

--Ben

PS: There should be a sticky in this forum so that all of the PVP discussions (and those PVP discussions disguised as something else) can be contained.

[whisper 0]

If you don't see the difference between OFP anims and ArmA ones, then you won't complain if ArmA2 anims are like OFP, will you?

As making a X gametype is like 10x easier than redesigning the whole anims in a mod (gametype is "only" firing up mission editor and letting your imagination work), then BI has much to win in working on smooth anims for ArmA2. PvP people will only have to build their gameplay, instead of modding the game.

If, ofc, others share your opinion, which I bet is not really the case.

Losing a good portion of the OFP player base is imho a very bad thing. The more diversity, the better. ArmA engine is just made for that, if you ask me, more than purely made for realism and simulation.

[benreeper 0]

BIS did not make the controls the way they are to alienate certain players: they are what they are.

BIS is also not trying to cater to everyone either. If they were, they would have made a mainstream game.

The game is what it is. BIS does not make games based on our discussions. They want to make the best game they can with the resources they have. When things get improved in the game it's because they wanted those things improved and NOT because we yelled and screamed.

Whine, complain and threaten not to support them and you will be playing right into hands of the big studios (i.e. EA). If that's what you want then you might as well write-off Arma3 and save your money for CODXVI (will they be using Roman numerals in two years?).

--Ben

[celery 8]

Is it really so hard NOT to bring Call of Duty into the discussion and ranting about mainstream arcade shooters? The only people doing that is the folks who have no idea about competitive PvP in ArmA. The absence of competitive PvP boils down to unresponsive controls/anims that were not present in Flashpoint. OFP clan after another quits ArmA saying that the controls are clumsy, so why the fanatical denial of any problems if they obviously exist?

Try to see it this way: If the AI guys in ArmA somehow malfunctioned as a result of a bug or lazy developing (not doing anything or shooting everyone through a hill from another island), you sure as hell don't want to hear bullcrap such as "I'm happy with it, I play PvP anyway", "go play another game" or "that's just how ArmA is, live with it". Don't exactly sound like constructive responses, do they?

[RN Malboeuf 12]

Whisper obviously the only opinion aloud is yours. Did I say everyone was a little kid? Stop assuming.

I got tired of the little kids and I fully stated why I play a coop now. So bug off.

Plainly and simply, if you think the anims/controls are rigid or "clumsy" make your mod to better the game. If you do not know how to do stuff like that, then ask people that make mods how to do it. If you are to lazy for that.... is there any point of you talking in this forum?

I am not saying ArmA is a perfect game with no mistakes, it has improvements over OFP. The clans that go back to OFP after trying ArmA do so because they are use to OFP controls. Bottom line, most people strongly dislike change. I myself like OFP better because of the simple fact that there are a ton more missions for it, and it is comfortable for me to fly with my keyboard, which in ArmA is nearly impossible. However, ArmA adds better AI base improvements. So, I am making missions to better ArmA gameplay for myself and others.

This is my point, do something about it rather than talking a whole bunch of smoke, which eventually disipates. If you don't know how to do it, learn it. If you are to lazy to learn/do it, you really have no place to be talking. For all the faults ArmA has in it, its strongest concept is open ended modifications. So, get too it.... (this is more of an encouragement than put down)

*S*

[The_Captain 0]

At the moment I'm tinkering with a 17v17 mission where there are some jeeps, a truck and a light armoured vehicle for each side, then three four-man squads, only one sniper and medic per side, and only two guys with AT weapons. On top of that only the two crew members can drive the armoured vehicles.

With gear-whoring stripped away and some level of cooperation greatly beneficial, mission area being about 2x1km with four sectors to control, how does this sound to people?

2x1 km might be too much if all four sectors are active at one time. 17v17 would likely fill out the server, but most PvP missions need to be fun with low-ish player counts (say 4 or 5 per side) to keep players playing, to attract more players, to eventually fill out to 17v17. If you imagine 4v4 players, the 2x1 KM sounds like a stretch.

You might think about progressive respawn and moving the active sector when one side captures it. IE, when side A captures objective A, objective B becomes active and both sides' spawn points move accordingly.

Hard respawn limits, or a timer that increases the more players that have died might encourage cooperation: If one side can get an advantage by killing off the other team (reducing their respawns, equipment, local presence, whatever), and push towards a victory, the other team will quickly realize that to prevent losing they must work together. If by acting as lone wolves the team does not quickly lose against a coordinated enemy (like if respawn was effectively instant), they will see little incentive to work together.

I think the key to a realistic feeling PvP mission is intensity and duration of combat, and combat longevity. If the players are too dispersed and not focused (ie, all four objectvies are active, so few players are near each other at any one time), then any combat is going to be painfully short. If you can figure out a way to corral players into fighting over the same objectives, then everyone's fun will increase, especially if you've limited gear and 'whoring' as you've outlined.

Good luck

[RN Malboeuf 12]

To add even great cooperation between players don't instantly respawn someone, instead make them wait for about 5min and use the healing script norrin made.

[whisper 0]

-Ironman-[Maj] @ Feb. 14 2008,03:09)]Whisper obviously the only opinion aloud is yours. Did I say everyone was a little kid? Stop assuming.

I got tired of the little kids and I fully stated why I play a coop now. So bug off.

Plainly and simply, if you think the anims/controls are rigid or "clumsy" make your mod to better the game. If you do not know how to do stuff like that, then ask people that make mods how to do it. If you are to lazy for that.... is there any point of you talking in this forum?

I am not saying ArmA is a perfect game with no mistakes, it has improvements over OFP. The clans that go back to OFP after trying ArmA do so because they are use to OFP controls. Bottom line, most people strongly dislike change. I myself like OFP better because of the simple fact that there are a ton more missions for it, and it is comfortable for me to fly with my keyboard, which in ArmA is nearly impossible. However, ArmA adds better AI base improvements. So, I am making missions to better ArmA gameplay for myself and others.

This is my point, do something about it rather than talking a whole bunch of smoke, which eventually disipates. If you don't know how to do it, learn it. If you are to lazy to learn/do it, you really have no place to be talking. For all the faults ArmA has in it, its strongest concept is open ended modifications. So, get too it.... (this is more of an encouragement than put down)

*S*

In that case, please, simply STOP with the brushing of PvP people as "kids" all over your posts. That would be a start.

You're a bit too fast at pointing fingers and throwing "kids", "you're lazy" around, even if, ofc, to avoid any problem, you don't target anyone specifically. That's just flamebait if you ask me, and will bring nothing to a discussion.

As for you suggestion, I'm on various OFP/ArmA mission making and addons since... well, before I joigned this board :P

And yup, I recently got fully into anims tweaking, just to see what was possible and what not.

I already stated it may now be the time for a true anim fixer, now that other ArmA issues seems to get somewhat resolved.

My main problem is and always has been available time for this. But that's personnal.

[Inkompetent 0]

2x1 km might be too much if all four sectors are active at one time. 17v17 would likely fill out the server, but most PvP missions need to be fun with low-ish player counts (say 4 or 5 per side) to keep players playing, to attract more players, to eventually fill out to 17v17. If you imagine 4v4 players, the 2x1 KM sounds like a stretch.

You might think about progressive respawn and moving the active sector when one side captures it. IE, when side A captures objective A, objective B becomes active and both sides' spawn points move accordingly.

Hard respawn limits, or a timer that increases the more players that have died might encourage cooperation: If one side can get an advantage by killing off the other team (reducing their respawns, equipment, local presence, whatever), and push towards a victory, the other team will quickly realize that to prevent losing they must work together. If by acting as lone wolves the team does not quickly lose against a coordinated enemy (like if respawn was effectively instant), they will see little incentive to work together.

I think the key to a realistic feeling PvP mission is intensity and duration of combat, and combat longevity. If the players are too dispersed and not focused (ie, all four objectvies are active, so few players are near each other at any one time), then any combat is going to be painfully short. If you can figure out a way to corral players into fighting over the same objectives, then everyone's fun will increase, especially if you've limited gear and 'whoring' as you've outlined.

Good luck

Sectors are placed near each team's spawn, and then two parallell in the middle. You have to capture them in order (i.e. the closest before you can take the middle ones, and both middle ones before you can go for the last), and you will be able to respawn at any sector your team owns.

The two middle zones aren't even 500m from each other and even though there are some trees in between you can see from one to the other, thus snipers and machinegunners can wreak some havoc) to support the attack/defense of the other middle objective.

Good idea about increasing respawn delay the more your team dies.

[walker 0]

Hi all

I think the attempt by CTF DM players to wrap themselves in the PvP flag is misleading. They then go on to attempt to place anyone who is not a CTF or DM player as members of a mythical coop cabal. This is a "Straw Man Argument" look it up on the web if you do not understand.

If fact the majority of PvP ArmA/OFP players have not and do not play CTF or DM. CTF and DM have always only accounted for about 2% of PvP players.

Even in the OFP days on public servers River Battle, Mini AirField and the rest of the C&H games always outstripped the minority of players playing CTF or DM.

What the CTF crowd assume is Coop is the vast majority of ArmA servers which are locked and private servers often running modded versions of ArmA. In fact these servers play a range of game styles some are PvP some coop and some experimental game types.

The majority of ArmA and OFP clans were never interested in CTF or DM other than for a mad half hour. Most clans did not compete for points; fun and realism have always been more important in OFP as in ArmA. Even among the points based ladders and leagues most competitions were C&H with no respawn.

ArmA and OFP have always been about the realism they are capable of hence the vast numbers of Mods.

What use is a red sports car in Hexenkessel? Or a Jumbo jet? Or scuba diver? Or the whole of the Finnish army's equipment? Or 50 different kinds of helicopter? Or 10 versions of the same uniform in different camo patterns? Or a propeller driven ski car? Or a steerable parachute? Or 100s of tanks? Or 10 different bushes? What use is realistic ballistics? Or indeed the whole concept of realism? Etc. Etc.

I could go on for pages but it illustrates the point CTF and DM have always been a minority of PvP in ArmA as in OFP.

Fun and Realism have always been the driving force behind OFP and ArmA. That is why ArmA remains popular with its players.

Kind Regards walker

[whisper 0]

And? That doesn't mean there is no animation issue for many people.

Anyway, this convo is the 100th repetition of what has been said, and said , and said again.

The bottom line is : you'll see public server running 90% coop because the public PvP scene players have left for the most part. The 10% left are on the 1 or 2 berzerk server still up.

There is definitely some PvP organisations here and there working perfectly (see my sig for one of them). Being private initiative, not the public playing you'd see in OFP day.

Public PvP back in the OFP days accounted for half the servers online in terms of player population. There were clan ladders and competitions running for years.

All this has disappeared in ArmA.

Quote[/b] ]If fact the majority of PvP ArmA/OFP players have not and do not play CTF or DM. CTF and DM have always only accounted for about 2% of PvP players.

I beg to differ. Immensely . The CTF crowd was way larger than you put it to be. At least for the 1st year and half.

All the competition in OFP revolved around CTF, for example.

[Frantic 0]

...

Fun and Realism have always been the driving force behind OFP and ArmA. That is why ArmA remains popular with its players.

Kind Regards walker

you missed the point.

ArmA isnt as popular as OFP was.

ArmA wasnt even able to hold most of the OFP fanatics.

ArmA has only a few players left compared to other 1 year old games.

Look at the server list and you see how popular ArmA is!

Look at the leagues and you see how popular ArmA PvP is!

now you see what we are talking about.

I guess BIS wanna make money with their product and so they want that many people plays it.

In my point of view, ArmA was just a place holder and a way to get some money to continue the work on Game2 which is ArmAII.

BIS already said that they were working on both games (ArmA and Game2) at the same time.

After they lost the rights on the name OFP they needed to establish a new name and they just overworked the OFP:Elite engine with a few Game2 features.

Thats it! They still continued their work on Game2 and gave the BIS fan community something new to play with. Nothing more.

just hoping that ArmAII will be as great as OFP was!

[.kju 3240]

People that have no clue about PvP, leagues and the reality better

keep their mouth sealed ... its really embarrassing what crap

certain people in here not from the PvP nor the public OFP (or

ArmA) scene are writing.  

BI needs to make money and have happy customers.

And NOT follow your senseless failed idea how the game has to look like.

So please for the love of god, spare us with your nonsense!

[oChaos.DNJ 0]

just hoping that ArmAII will be as great as OFP was!  

Im just hope that it will really be a big improvement over ArmAI, and not pretty much the same thing with new models and maps....because if it is, I couldnt justify buying it.

[sickboy 13]

@Whisper;

Could you describe what kind of work it would be to fix the animations/transitions between animations etc?

I'm a cooper, but I also enjoy a happy Community Maybe we can spread workload?

@Q; I know what you mean but I also know where others are coming from. My experience with PvP is what most of the 100% coop lovers here say also. But after talking to you for instance, a whole new door and view on PvP etc opened.

People seem to go on Public PvP servers, have a bad time (or a couple of bad times), and suddenly fully oppose it and become coop lovers :P

Maybe they got lucky on the coop servers, as you can find the same problems on those servers aswell, but I guess ppl just dont realise.

[whisper 0]

From what I've seen so far (but I'm really beginning in the anims department), 1 thing could be to speed up a bit stance transitions and movement transitions. I've not yet tested (worked on the anims themselves first in O2PE).

Then for the delay in transition stop, I'm really wondering how to. What I'm afraid is that we'd need to cut each animation into smaller parts and give exit transitions for each part. Quite a nasty job if you ask me. Moreso considering that the transition from a sub-part of current anim to stop stance does not exist atm, it would be either to have a not-so-polished result, or have to redo the anim by hand.

It seems BI already have done it for the grenade throw anim fix, cause now throwing a nade is a 3-parts animation (start, throw, end) that can exit at any part to a death animation.

so it's partly a cpp thing (most of the anims speeds are cpp defined) + a O2 editing thing.

[.kju 3240]

To all these people who say the anims are 'not bugged' for the zillion th time:

Very buggy sprint (fast forward) transition..., What about a workaround?

Yeah ... its supposed to be that way - right?

Sprint and Animation fixer, smoothes things out a bit

Well BI wants to ban CQB players and fast movement - right?

Oh BI took some of the fixes of Sakura and integrated them into

1.09... well they must have done this by mistake - right?

Laughable.

To Celery, Frantic et al

PROPER_Anims_Fast_Forward_Transition

Quote[/b] ]Sprint transitions are quite broken in ArmA. The idea is

to replace sprint with run gameplay wise. This addon doubles the

diagonal forward and straightforward run speed to make it equal

to the sprint speed. In addition the diagonal forward and

straightforward walk is accelerated by 150 percent to make it

more useful.

You guys didn't wanna support the use of addons on your

servers like this one .. so you are in the same boat here.

Complaining but doing nothing about it..

Ive made loads more other tweaks to make ArmA more OFP like.

You didn't want those ..

Good job overall here.

[celery 8]

To Celery, Frantic et al

You guys didn't wanna support the use of addons on your

servers like this one .. so you are in the same boat here.

Complaining but doing nothing about it..

Ive made loads more other tweaks to make ArmA more OFP like.

You didn't want those ..

Major faults such as those should be fixed on the developer side. Mods would have been a good solution if they could be distributed as an automatic download when connecting to a server. Using mods on a public server would have been a death blow to visitor numbers.

As a side note, I don't agree with your attitude "got complaints? do it yourself or shut up". BIS deserves all the complaints it gets about bugs and lazy developing solutions and it's their product that we have paid for. Modders don't get paid.

[walker 0]

Hi all

So cellery wants everyone to play his style and his style only.

Nice of him to be clear about his view point.

Kind Regards walker

[.kju 3240]

nice comment Walker...

Celery these addons are ALL client side only!

So it would stop no one from joining.

And it is your job to make people download a small addon for

your server to have the same advantage as you.

Via verifySignatures and a key file you can easily select what

is allowed on your server and what not.

I agree that this issue should have gotten way higher prio from

the start. Yet the PvP scene didn't involve enough in 'getting

attention by BI in various ways' aspect all from the old days in

OFP until today in ArmA.

I think its a cool trait of the players part of the scene. They

don't talk trash all day in the forums here as long as the game

is well playable. Unlike the realism dudes and other weirdos..

You can very well see this behavior again and again. Gamers

just come to the dev once serious issues stop them from playing:

game destroying cheats, broken transitions, no stability, bad fps,

mouse lag etc.

In my view BI should concentrate way more on gamers.

Easier life, more fun, more money.