So can anyone tell me why everyone is playing coop

[The_Captain 0]

Quote[/b] ]PvP Players: You coop players only play evolution! It sucks!

Quote[/b] ]Coop players: Yeah, well you PvP guys only play Hexenkessel! And it sucks too!

Quote[/b] ]CTI players: Hey, CTI is way better than evo or hexenkessel! You guys should play CTI!

Quote[/b] ]PvP & Coop players (together): You guys shut up! CTI lags like hell and needs addons!

There are great PvP, Coop, and CTI style maps. And bad ones. And mediocre ones. Good players + good map of any sort, especially ones that leverage the best parts of arma, equal a fun game. That's my 2 cents.

(For the record, I maintain that Coop maps are often playable with 1 or 3 players on a server, so you're more likely to see lots of servers at once, as it's easier to get a game going. PvP maps with high player counts often attract browsing players to the same few servers, so while the player counts when compared to coop might be similar, the PvP maps are usually only on a few servers at a time.)

[{USI}_Zombie 0]

Me and my {USI} teammates were really anticipating ArmA, and while impressed by the new graphics and features, were disappointed at the playabilty for CTF's. OFP was particularly well suited for ALL game styles, but ArmA is more suited to the C&H and CooP style because of the new animations. They do not promote the so called "twitch" style of playing which is required for good ctf play, therefor, most ArmA ctf's on publics turn in to 1 organized team trying to advance and "capture the flag" and the other team, usually random publics, trying to "camp the field". Maybe it's a generational thing, but the established OFP clans know that to win a ctf, you have to capture the flag, not run up your personal kdr by proning somewhere.

I am not, nor have ever been, a fan of Hex or 'lil everon, but they WERE doable in OFP but not so for ArmA. A really good Castle Keep type of ctf for ArmA would be nice, but again, the animations don't really support it.

I think there is room for all the styles...I love a good ctf, really enjoy coops,(say what you want...evo is brilliantly scripted), can play C&H, enjoy dm/tdm and while I don't personally care for cti I hold nothing against those who do.

The biggest fix as I can see it is if you can't find a public server that isn't playing your particular style of game well......

what is stopping you from renting your own server so you can play whatever you want? Don't try to change what other people are doing, do something for yourself.

[walker 0]

Hi all

The simple answer is People vote with their feet, after they have been playing a while more people prefer Coops and PvP Coops to shoebox twitch play; they just do otherwise this thread would not exist.

If there is a community of people who want a version of ArmA that suits them; they can MOD ArmA to a twitch version and put it on their own servers. If peole like it they will vote with their feet dowload it and come and play on them or put it on their servers.

What I do not want to see is twitch put on ArmA it self unless it is with a server option to turn it off. It is as unrealistic as cross hairs and 3rd person. I do not mind them being there but I want the off button same as I want the Veteran mode.

That said people still do play the odd 5 minute DM or half hour of Hexenkessle same as they play the odd evening of Evolution or CTI or an hour or two of Berzerk but these are primarily on public servers.

Most people in ArmA are playing on the hidden and private addon servers creating their own missions for their clans and leagues; inventing new game styles which is where Hexenkessle, CTI, Berzerk, Evolution etc all came from.

That is the difference between ArmA and the shobox and corridor shooters. In ArmA it is your sandbox and it is damn big ever expanding sandbox; you can make of it what ever you want in ArmA.

Why are people playing Coop and on the hidden and private servers? Because it is more fun!

Kind Regards walker

[guerilla -MCY- 0]

This stuff was discussed over and over in the past year leading to nowhere. ArmA wasn’t designed for CQB at all, BIS seemed to have only big landscapes and the coop community in mind while creating ArmA, leading to the fact that there is no room for the once big CQB community. You guys should get over it and move on to games suited for such kind of gameplay like Cod4 etc. There are no moders who can change the whole anims, ballistics, tracers, bugs except BIS and they are working on ArmA2 hopefully with this in mind, but i doubt it. Remember, this is ArmA not OFP and its just a cookie for the sim/coop freaks…

[JeRK 0]

IMO, the PvP maps that are slightly popular are all crap. They don't advertise teamwork, they don't allow you to do anything really interesting, and and in the case of Berzerk, they don't concentrate the battle to a certain place, making it an annoying snipe-fest.

I think a whole new set of PvP maps is needed, with squads, medics, vehicle-class restrictions (no snipers in tanks) and a much more concentrated battlefield. Stuff like a mission based off the gameplay of the Project Reality mod for BF2 (which is messed up since the latest version), or a linear C&H map in a town or only a small bit of one, rather than a boring Hexenkessel style complex.

I don't think that the movement is awful, in fact I actually think it's perfectly suited for CQB, you're just generally slower, but that actually might bring in some good teamplay.

I also think that PvP servers should have max realism on. Simply removing the crosshair makes players act more realistically, they think twice before they do silly things and it stops them from only using the G36.

[croc4 0]

This thread is just sad!, you guys make it sounds like coop players are cool headed "adults", then if they play PvP you suddenly turn into a fragin' teanager on speed. Sorry I just don't buy it, and it sounds like a very very weak argument. PvP != frag fest

The reality of all of this is that there will be less overall players, fewer players = less revenue for bis, less revenue = less development, etc, etc. And in the end we all loose out, so to dismiss part of the community with your coop "noses in the air" will only come back and bite you in the end.

There is absolutely no reason this game cannot cater to both game types, absolutely none!. The only reason it can't be used for both is the community, so instead of calling each other names, if that same energy was spent on making better maps for both coop and PvP things would be better for everyone

Or you could just stick your head in the sand and not change at all

[beta 0]

IMO, the PvP maps that are slightly popular are all crap. They don't advertise teamwork, they don't allow you to do anything really interesting, and and in the case of Berzerk, they don't concentrate the battle to a certain place, making it an annoying snipe-fest.

I think a whole new set of PvP maps is needed, with squads, medics, vehicle-class restrictions (no snipers in tanks) and a much more concentrated battlefield. Stuff like a mission based off the gameplay of the Project Reality mod for BF2 (which is messed up since the latest version), or a linear C&H map in a town or only a small bit of one, rather than a boring Hexenkessel style complex.

I don't think that the movement is awful, in fact I actually think it's perfectly suited for CQB, you're just generally slower, but that actually might bring in some good teamplay.

I also think that PvP servers should have max realism on. Simply removing the crosshair makes players act more realistically, they think twice before they do silly things and it stops them from only using the G36.

I agree.

I've been waiting for a serious PvP map for a while now. Doesn't seem like anyone is up for the task. So, with my admittedly limited scripting knowledge, (lousy Client-Server scripting ...) I'm going to give it a try. We'll see.

However, half the PvP experience is out of the mission maker's hands. If the server running it isn't running proper "PvP settings", it can ruin the mission. Like JeRK says, removal of the crosshair is vital, so is 3rd person, Auto-Report, and Kill Messages, IMO. You can try and make a mission as realistic as you want, but if the players can just drive that T72 in 3rd person, the infantry have no chance, or if the player randomly spots a sniper in the woods, from 500m, when they aren't even looking that direction, it can be frustrating.

One thing I think that ArmA PvP is missing is a revive system.

Yes, its not realistic, you can try and rationalize, but in the end, it isn't realistic. However, it is VERY helpful to build cooperation. As it is right now, other players around you are a liability instead of help. It is more dangerous to move as a group than it is alone, simple as that. With this type of atmosphere, it is nearly impossible to expect cooperation in the team, it is easier AND more effective to have 30 lone wolves than it is to organize into some sort of team.

I also do not understand when people say that the ArmA controls are unresponsive or "clunky". The ONLY thing I can see having trouble with is the aiming/movement of weapons. It is slightly sluggish, the weapon has weight, and trying to get the "feel" for that weight with a mouse is very hard, you will often "over steer" your sites and swing back and forth over your target without getting a good picture.

I think it only takes practice. Yes, it isn't as precise as OFP, BUT OFP was unrealistically precise, the weapons didn't seem to have any weight, IMO.

I really think that ArmA PvP should take a hint from PR. I play both ArmA and PR.

ArmA is great for the realism; accurate modelling of ballistics (you think ArmA is bad? LOL), realistic size and object density on the "maps", easily modified content, etc.

PR is great for the cooperation and teamwork. Some people have said that you cannot simple stick a bunch of "public" people together and hope they work together. This is proven wrong each and every time I play a PR map. Random people, most having never met each other, will work together to achieve the team's goal.

I think ArmA PvP is simply lacking a open-ended, objective oriented, BALANCED PvP mission set.

New game modes are VITAL. Evolution was great ... 2 months ago, Sahrani Life is great, but it isn't everyone's idea of an "ArmA mission". Playing the same thing, over and over, can be very tiresome.

Well thats a big enough wall of text for now

[sickboy 13]

@Beta; Take a look at the MP Scripting Guide link in my signature. I hope it can assist you in your journey

[walker 0]

Hi all

beta I am sorry to correct you but at Zeus and probably Shacktactical, kellys, 16RAB and 6th sense and all the rest of the big servers there are mass of coop players creating realistic quality PVPs.

At Zeus it is about a 50 50 split between coop and realistic pvp coop

Realistic PVPs are not about points. It is not about even sides, it is not about holding or stealing a flag. Speed of reaction can play a small part but most of all it is about scenario, tactical decisions, command presence, training, SOPs, actions on, planning and working as a team, and even individual flare; all bundled up with moments of insanity, stupidity and brilliance.

[CAVE]guerilla MODing to create a twitch version of ArmA would be a simple process just zero the anims and a few config changes. It is not rocket science or major Graphics heck it is not even addon model making or texture changing and no where near as hard as ballistics or AI programming. I just do think there is any one interested. I certainly have no interest in it nor do I think many moders are. If there are people interested the DM/CTF PvP game forms then they can MOD ArmA and make it work as they wish.

Heck I might even down load their addon play on servers running twitch DM/CTF for half an hour once in month.

But in the main I will be playing realistic Coop and PVP Coop 8 hours a week and looking to the newer forms of game play the ArmA community are creating now.

Kind Regards walker

[The_Captain 0]

QFT:

Quote[/b] ]I think a whole new set of PvP maps is needed, with squads, medics, vehicle-class restrictions (no snipers in tanks) and a much more concentrated battlefield.

Low density of Arma PvP maps is one thing that kills the fun. A company of troops on the offense IRL has something like an 800m frontage. In arma PvP map makers get two steps ahead of themselves, and expect 20 humans to fight over half the island. ~100+ troops in 1km^2 would be a proper density to encourage teamwork.

Quote[/b] ]As it is right now, other players around you are a liability instead of help. It is more dangerous to move as a group than it is alone, simple as that.

In a low density battlefield, sticking near other players is a great way to get shot and noticed. Being alone and stealthy is a better option when enemies could be hiding anywhere.

Quote[/b] ]Some people have said that you cannot simple stick a bunch of "public" people together and hope they work together. [...] Random people, most having never met each other, will work together to achieve the team's goal.

In many other games, including OFP, I've noticed that given the right set of incentives, random people WILL work together and cooperate. If the game doesn't encourage it, they won't.

Quote[/b] ]I think ArmA PvP is simply lacking a open-ended, objective oriented, BALANCED PvP mission set.

@Walker, what sort of MP do you play? How do you use CEX in your missions? How are the PvP coops organized?

I've read your SP battle reports, but just curious about the MP...

[walker 0]

Hi all

In reply to The_Captain

With regard to CEX

CEX is still in beta and not MP stable yet. Next release is going to fix many issues but it is still beta. There are still some other tools that are yet to be released that will be added to the project.

As to the game modes it will create, we are still not sure; the process is a discovery one via the beta testing.

I think a few new game modes are likely.

1) OPFOR control for more realistic and dynamic strategy and tactics in coops.

2) Two Player command duels. So lots of client based battles rather than using expensive servers. Dual and multi core processors come in here as the server can be run on one processor while the client runs on another

3) Command teams probably of 4 to 8 a side.

The above are all being experimented on.

PvP Coops are bog standard in ArmA and were in OFP especially after the release of realism Mods such as WGL and the release of UA.

As to: How are the PvP coops are organized

It is by a mixture of human systems and technical methods.

Human Systems

According to the mission makers desire team sizes are assigned. Players chose their spots but each commander has the last say. In large missions you may be controlling a team.

In Zeus any player can be overall team commander, certain people gravitate to the role other prefer to be grunts. In Shacktactical I understand it is a formal command structure. Other clans use everything in between and out to the sides or even off at a tangent to those approaches

That said there is a tradition in Zeus that everybody must take the lead role once in a while. So if some do not do it often they can get drafted in to the role. It has some good effects as it forces those who want to be grunts to realise why commanders tell them to do something they think is stupid at times.

Technical Methods

Team-speak or some such is often mandatory.

A set of SOPs are created trained and followed.

Control is through SOPs, training, planning and actions on.

The tools used vary from clan to clan but can include command manuals, the map and markers, mission planning time. Some even go so far as to issue weekly Warning Orders (WARNO) with PDF maps and commanders intent and the overall plan.

Read dslyecxi's arma tactics techniques and procedures guide

http://dslyecxi.com/armattp.html

Most of the big clans impliment a form of it or something similar.

At Zeus a manual is included in the mission template and the commander can refer to it and usually does for Actions On as it comes in a bulleted list and thus ensures a procedure is understood and the commanders intent vocalised via Team-speak.

Some new things that have appeared in the template are:

A team Commanders Map Notes section is created in an area of the map away from the AO linked via a hypertext link in the notes. It is set up like a coloured page with typical areas you might see in a a Fragmentary Order (FRAGO) or commanders briefing.  Using the markers, the commander can place at mission start time, these parts can be filled out as required. Things like: order of march, Actions On, commanders intent, mission phases etc. can all be placed using this.

On Map Key features and buildings are marked or numbered as are kill-zones, missions stages, individual and squad areas of operation, aid stations, LZs, Rally Points, waypoints, ERPs, etc. Good commanders delegate many of the minor marking tasks and good players do it off their own bat.

In mission an automated marker system reports unit positions for commanders. Where this is not available units mark their own position.

Dead people do not speak.  The odd expletive is often an indication though not good for game play but announcing "I am dead!" is frowned upon. So if a commander or indeed any one dies some one only notices when they stop receiving commands or communication. In the case of the commander dieing at that point a senior person asks 3 times clearly "command are you there?" if there is no reply; next in command assumes command of the team (dead people can speak then just for social and fun aspects)

I could go on for hours; join a good clan and find out.

Kind regards walker

[Frantic 0]

This game is made for COOP and not for PvP.

I only dont understand why there are PvP missions within the game.

BIS should release ArmAII with the subtitle: Cooperative battles at its best!

And maybe write at the backside: Dont fear human counterparts, there are only dumb AIs!

That way nobody will be wondering why there is such a small PvP community.

Whatever, i had fun with ArmA for half a year and now im having fun with better PvP games.

Its just sad to see a game with such a huge potential being played by such a small number of players.

Some PvP players have written the main problems often enough and nothing changed.

One guy even tried to mod ArmA to solve the problems, but sadly without success, cause only BIS can solve the problems.

Normal players dont own a motion and capture studio.

ArmA is the best war simulator out there and i guess war shouldnt be fun even as a computer game.

So BIS made all perfect.

[whisper 0]

ArmA is the best war simulator out there and i guess war shouldnt be fun even as a computer game.

So BIS made all perfect.

Tbh, they explicitely explained they wanted to show how war was NOT fun

[Pulverizer 1]

Quote[/b] ]This game is made for COOP and not for PvP.

Slow animations, sluggish aim, ballistics etc doesn't exclude PvP, only twitch shooting CTF, DM and other such run & gun nonsense.

But why would anyone even go through the trouble of making ArmA into another competetive online twitch shooter, when there are literally dozens of great games built from the ground up to be exactly that out of the box. Those engines have the net code, responsiveness and other properties needed to make a good twitch shooter, ArmA doesn't.

[whisper 0]

Quote[/b] ]This game is made for COOP and not for PvP.

Slow animations, sluggish aim, ballistics etc doesn't exclude PvP, only twitch shooting CTF, DM and other such run & gun nonsense.

That's the very core of the problem between PvP and coop.

Twitch shooting run&gun is not incompatible with teamplay, tactics and such, hell even maybe not with realism, at least to an ArmA acceptable level.

OTOH, maybe too much PvP twitch players are unwilling to play ArmA on its strengths compared to other titles and want to restrict it to what others do better.

ArmA would make for a very bad COD4 replacement.

[celery 8]

Twitch shooting my hairy ass. First of all if you go all "run & gun" in ANY game mode, be it CTF or DM, you will get shot and laughed at by every noob on the server. Secondly the same "twitches" apply to the whole game because you play the same game all the time regardless of the game mode.

How difficult is it to understand that the pariah PvP game types are the exact same Armed Assault you play in other game modes, except with different rules in winning the game. The reason why playing against other players is a pain is laggy aiming (yes, it is a bug because it was fixed in 1.09 beta) and very clumsy animations. The AI is a much more forgiving opponent than another player, which is why the non-pvp community just can't see the problem: they never need to be at par with real life agility because AI soldiers move like whales on a beach and don't use animation bugs to their advantage.

[whisper 0]

Some find initial recoils & anim perfectly fine, that's why I oppose them to "twitch run & gun" (ie faster aiming/shooting & smoother moving)

Ofc, I'm not talking about Quake-like fighting....

Anyway, we say the exact same thing

[zaphod 0]

Berzerk v2.0 beta4 - Corazol

don't cry kids...

open betatest on [MSD] Truppenuebungsplatz this week - final test of respawn/gps issues left...

ArmA required version: v1.09b

[Pulverizer 1]

Quote[/b] ]Twitch shooting my hairy ass. First of all if you go all "run & gun" in ANY game mode, be it CTF or DM, you will get shot and laughed at by every noob on the server.

My point exactly. That's the reason why some people like it the way it is, doesn't allow the classic OFP G36-übercharges.

Quote[/b] ]The reason why playing against other players is a pain is laggy aiming (yes, it is a bug because it was fixed in 1.09 beta)

Following that logic, it was a bug that the recoils where so strong before 1.09 beta. I'm not saying you're wrong though, maybe they fixed some lag-inducing stuff in the code or maybe it's just due to the better overal performance that the controls feel better. Maybe they just changed some weapon aiming lag values in the game config. Who knows, who cares.

Quote[/b] ]The AI is a much more forgiving opponent than another player, which is why the non-pvp community just can't see the problem

The game is the same for both sides on PvP, no?

Also, there's a part of the so called "PvP community" that is just fine with ArmA controls, myself included. Could be better but it's playable.

[benreeper 0]

Don't try to make this game into something that it isn't and then complain about it. Ply the game that more suits your style.

Since 2001 I've only played OFP and Arma just about everyday day with the odd COD and Dungeon Siege thrown in. My nephew plays only COD2 in MP and that game is 4 years old. My son will play every single SP game that comes out until it's beaten (usually in a day or two) and then move on. My point is that if you played the game for more than a week, you got your money's worth and if don't like it anymore move on to something else. Your complaints (suggestions) aren't going to change anything and will probably only make you more frustrated than you are now.

--Ben

[beta 0]

@Beta; Take a look at the MP Scripting Guide link in my signature. I hope it can assist you in your journey

Wish I would have seen this sooner!

That was VERY helpful, answered all the questions I had about locality (so far).

Now I just need to get around these "unwritten" limitations ... like how addAction doesn't work so well if you execute it just after a player enters a vehicle (apparently).

Slowly but surely, I am learning.

Quote[/b] ]Low density of Arma PvP maps is one thing that kills the fun.

I agree.

However, you have to be careful.

Some people seem to equate high density to a small play area. You can still have a large environment to move around in, and yet keep it high density battle. Simple things like terrain and forests provide natural obstacles and are a great way to "softly" enforce a restricted play area.

Another great tool for doing this, albeit slightly "harder", is minefields. There are some scripted solutions out there, and you can always make your own the "hard way". Minefields are an excellent deterrent. However, they do not completely restrict the player, you can still move through a minefield, VERY slowly in vehicles, but at a regular pace on foot (until you get some APERS mines in an addon that is).

So instead of forcing players to do what you want, strong suggestion allows for more replay value as you can try new (and strange) tactics on the same mission.

Quote[/b] ]The reason why playing against other players is a pain is laggy aiming

I agree, it is a little wierd, it tends to "skip" around instead of flow smoothly. It seems like the sampling rate for detecting mouse movement is a lot slower than in most other FPS'.

Quote[/b] ]Berzerk v2.0 beta4 - Corazol

don't cry kids...

open betatest on [MSD] Truppenuebungsplatz this week - final test of respawn/gps issues left...

ArmA required version: v1.09b

Thank you.

Maybe now SOMEONE will play some sort of public PvP on a 1.09b server. The VON works sometimes, and when it is working, the possibility of teamwork grows by about 1000%.

[JeRK 0]

@Beta; Take a look at the MP Scripting Guide link in my signature. I hope it can assist you in your journey

Wish I would have seen this sooner!

That was VERY helpful, answered all the questions I had about locality (so far).

Now I just need to get around these "unwritten" limitations ... like how addAction doesn't work so well if you execute it just after a player enters a vehicle (apparently).

Slowly but surely, I am learning.

Quote[/b] ]Low density of Arma PvP maps is one thing that kills the fun.

I agree.

However, you have to be careful.

Some people seem to equate high density to a small play area. You can still have a large environment to move around in, and yet keep it high density battle. Simple things like terrain and forests provide natural obstacles and are a great way to "softly" enforce a restricted play area.

Another great tool for doing this, albeit slightly "harder", is minefields. There are some scripted solutions out there, and you can always make your own the "hard way". Minefields are an excellent deterrent. However, they do not completely restrict the player, you can still move through a minefield, VERY slowly in vehicles, but at a regular pace on foot (until you get some APERS mines in an addon that is).

So instead of forcing players to do what you want, strong suggestion allows for more replay value as you can try new (and strange) tactics on the same mission.

Quote[/b] ]The reason why playing against other players is a pain is laggy aiming

I agree, it is a little wierd, it tends to "skip" around instead of flow smoothly. It seems like the sampling rate for detecting mouse movement is a lot slower than in most other FPS'.

Quote[/b] ]Berzerk v2.0 beta4 - Corazol

don't cry kids...

open betatest on [MSD] Truppenuebungsplatz this week - final test of respawn/gps issues left...

ArmA required version: v1.09b

Thank you.

Maybe now SOMEONE will play some sort of public PvP on a 1.09b server. The VON works sometimes, and when it is working, the possibility of teamwork grows by about 1000%.

I never get laggy aim, but I have a bad habit of "slipping" past the enemy with my sights and missing, but that's almost realistic because of the sick amount of ammo fired at the avarage soldier in real life :P

[The_Captain 0]

I played berzerk 2.0 on [MSD] Truppenuebungsplatz yesterday.

1- It's very slick. New interfaces and overall smoothness

2- It runs fast. The code is highly optimized!

3- New features like mobile HQ, HUD, smoke launchers on tanks, etc

4- I wish people would have joined while I was playing... No addons needed! Come on, 1.09 PvP people!

[Bunkers 0]

I played berzerk 2.0 on [MSD] Truppenuebungsplatz yesterday.

1- It's very slick. New interfaces and overall smoothness

2- It runs fast. The code is highly optimized!

3- New features like mobile HQ, HUD, smoke launchers on tanks, etc

4- I wish people would have joined while I was playing... No addons needed! Come on, 1.09 PvP people!

This is great news! Will it be up&running this weekend? If so count me in

Oh, and does that server allow the FDF soundmod? I'm kinda in with that, playing default sounds now is a killer.

[leckig 0]

Berzerk v2.0 beta4 - Corazol

don't cry kids...

open betatest on [MSD] Truppenuebungsplatz this week - final test of respawn/gps issues left...

ArmA required version: v1.09b

played with my bro today (plecki) and this must be the best server online these days, we had tons of fun, I hope you guys will keep it running!

gj!

very, very good job!