Built in Revives in ArmA 2!?

[The_Captain 0]

Thanks for the clarification, Maruk.

Battlefield clearance == medical evacuation?

I should say, that I have a very similar system to what arma 2 has propsed in one of my own MP missions: teamswitch and group respawn within the same squad, and a rudimentary incapacitation/bandaging system, and it does make for good gameplay. Rescuing your incapacitated former-self in the middle of a firefight as one of the other squad members is good fun, and far more enjoyable than save-reload. I'm interested in seeing how Arma 2's system develops.

[OMG teamswitch *and* revive in the same mission! ]

[Heatseeker 0]

In OPF and Arma the battlefields quickly became seas of corpses, assisting and evacuating the wounded or dead never mattered, you had to do the objectives even if you were alone.

A whole new casualty/injury system would be rather nice, the old medic heals nearly dead to 100% health in 5 seconds doesnt cut it...

It would give great depth to the game if players and npc's could be critically wounded or incapacitated and the missions had this dynamic objective of evacuating friendly casualties.

Teamswitch on the other hand just plain sucks.

[The_Captain 0]

Okay, I think I know what battlefield clearance is now, thanks to the VBS2 VTK website:

"Handling of wounded and enemy

VBS2 now supports battlefield clearance (dragging wounded), and the ability to command POWs (who may surrender depending on their situation and morale)."

http://virtualbattlespace.vbs2.com/index.p....emid=79

This is sounding good.

[mr.g-c 6]

To give you more insight, let's stick with the following terms from now on that are more representative to our vision in this particular area for gamplay in ArmA 2:

- Injury Simulation

- First Aid

- Battlefield Clearance

Wording I used about reviving is a little bit confusing (despite in the context it really was primarily describing first aid system). And yes, this is primarily approach we use in the campaign because of our focus on coop gameplay.

That is very great to hear that Arma2 will go into such details of wounding/unconsciousness. Really great!

Regards, Christian

[Ferox 0]

(in the world of games i find healing severely wounds on the field acceptable)...

ah... well.. see.. I don't

i never even knew there WERE revive scripts for Arma... I don't like it, period... and I hope very much that this is a server/map option so that we don't have this forced on us.

Quote[/b] ]To give you more insight, let's stick with the following terms from now on that are more representative to our vision in this particular area for gamplay in ArmA 2:

- Injury Simulation

- First Aid

- Battlefield Clearance

Wording I used about reviving is a little bit confusing (despite in the context it really was primarily describing first aid system). And yes, this is primarily approach we use in the campaign because of our focus on coop gameplay.

now... this goes fairly far into helping us not feel freaked out about "revives"..... we will have to see how its implemented.

either way we should always have the option.

[CarlGustaffa 4]

Actually, I love the idea of revive, but BIS should take a very very good look at todays rivive to look for ideas, pluss this thread naturally

Basically, my ideas of a good revive system are these:

1. If shot you bleed. However, the bleeding rate for a "normal" wound should be very very long, in case a medevac system is being used.

2. If bleeding reach a certain level you fall unconscious and need "revival", lets call it going into shock if you hate the word "revive".

3. Bloodloss rate should depend on the severity of the wound when you were "killed".

4. The (what is now called a) "revive timer" should depend on the blood loss rate. This means a shot to the head would be very hard to get "revived" in time, and you'll need to respawn (which actually cost a life).

5. If unconscious, you need revive within a a few minutes or you're out or must respawn (if mission allowes it).

6. Missions may have limited number of respawns.

7. If you are revived, you don't loose a "life". Only a full respawn (if mission allowes it) makes you loose a "life".

8. Medics and aidstations can provide players with revive packages, say, i.e. you only get to revive one person before you need another revive set.

9. Mash and ambulances can provide an action which gives you say 3 firstaid packages. These can be used to enable you to walk again, and a small percentage of healing. I.e. only 10-20% heal per kit. It will not stop bleeding until you have managed to patch yourself up to about 80% health, but it will expand the time you have to find a proper aidstation or medic.

10. Medics can heal themselves as today; a benefit to choosing a role which can carry less equipment.

11. Number of revive kits available in a mission must be able to specify, even up to infinity if desired.

12. Those who revives are rewarded with a bonus life for teamplay.

13. Those who teamkills are punished by one less life, at least.

14. An array of "revive capable" units (class or player slot based) must be made with each mission, Maybe mission designer don't want to have revive.

15. If you are killed at sea, you're out cold since you will still be breathing water while out. Crashing an aircraft at high speed also qualifies for a full death. Maybe also other circumstances.

16. Naturally, drag body functionality.

17. After revival, you will start being severely hurt and still bleeding. This is useful since if everyone can revive, the revived player must now still seek a medic or risk loosing consciousness again.

18. AI must also perform revive duties. Both those on the player side and the enemy.

19. The actual revive action, or animation, should take long enough time so that the reviver might not want to do it out in the field, but rather drag the downed unit into a safe location before revival. The animation must be breakeable though, hitting 'z' would cause the reviver to hit the ground, and revive must be reinitiated.

As I see it, you'll now end up with:

1. Players have to "work" to both obtain firstaid kits and revival kits, by getting to a medic or aidstation. No free ride here by automatically starting with it after start or respawn. This makes them more afraid for their life at least until they can get the equipment, because a game can be setup with limited number of respawns. Medics can do full heals as before, while both firstaid kits and revival kits should take one and two equipment slots each.

2. Medics now get a more satisfying role to play, since others depend on them and they can "revive", especially if mission has been setup so that only medics can do the revival.

3. Players doing Rambo playstyle will get hurt more since there might not be a medic nearby. This encourages teamplay and the desire to keep close as a group.

4. Mission designers can set and change these rules during the cause of a mission. This makes it possible for a single player to join a server as a loner, and still be able to have some fun if rules are reduced when playercount is low. Not everyone in ArmA community are hardcore realism fans, some (if not most) are "just" casual players out for some fun.

5. Even though you can revive at almost no cost at all, you'll still be afraid for your life because a server can be setup with very low number of respawns. In addition, the player slot could be set unavailable when the slot has been killed for good. A game can also be setup so that it is mission failed after a certain number of respawns in total, or when playercount is too low due to available slots being too low. But ithis systemstill allows hardcore players to setup the game "their way".

6. No "black magic" used. I call "revive" being incapacitated instead of fully dead.

7. It prolongs the firefights, which seem way too short in ArmA mostly because of insane AI accuracy and lack or proper supression and supression effects. Yes, in real life this sort of being incapacitated would require some time at a hospital. But this is also about having fun.

8. By limiting the number of revival kits available, you might be able to control where the kits are being used. You might prefer to have them with the front guys, while the back squads providing cover fire gets none, but a medic instead.

9. For those who enjoy having a medevac system going, this is now fully possible by limiting who can revive and controlling the blood loss rate. Giving the wounded first aid will heal him just a little bit to extend the time before he again falls unconscious, but it can not stop the bleeding. Everyone has to get the equipment at base before going to war, and if no medic or ambulance is brough out to the field, the medevac situation is going. Maybe someone even have to be present in the chopper just to help him prevent bleed to death by giving him first aid kits?

10. It increases the fun factor, also for those serious players. Being thrown out of the game because of that ONE unforgiving bullet that ruined your day, after spending several hours trying to play it SOOO safe. Well, THAT is no fun for me, and THAT is the reason I haven't joined a "serious" clan.

[gonk 0]

To give you more insight, let's stick with the following terms  And yes, this is primarily approach we use in the campaign because of our focus on coop gameplay.

interesting....so is it official that we finally have a Co-op campaign ?

[gsleighter 0]

Keeping in mind that this is a GAME, I'd love to see a built in revive system. I recall several times I died early in a mission, and being revived would be much more fun from a gameplay perspective than being a seagull.

Hey, if you don't want to use it, don't use it. Don't piss on my cheerios, though, I'm here to have a good time.

[Lamont 0]

People, people, calm down please!

There is something that will make us all happy. Its called "Operation Flashpoint 2" and its coming out in 09.

No revives, no teamswitch, quality campaign, you know, the things that made the original OFP good!

Quote[/b] ]Keeping in mind that this is a GAME, I'd love to see a built in revive system. I recall several times I died early in a mission, and being revived would be much more fun from a gameplay perspective than being a seagull.

Just as fun as turning godmode on.

This whole system works in real life but is useless in a game. Why? Because a wounded soldier in real life will most likely not see combat for a while and spent some days in a hospital.

In a game, you can't simulate that and being able to revive a soldier and see that soldier back on the front line in a matter of minutes is stupid. They might as well add a bunch of med kits around, it will achieve the same thing.

[NoRailgunner 0]

Maruk said above ArmA2 comes up with first aid system. Lets see if it fits more to simulation or closer to arcade shooters (instant quickclick-revives). In the end it depends on mission designer what gameplay he likes to play - arcadefun or simulation.

[dslyecxi 23]

(ridiculously trolling nonsense)

This is hilariously wrong on so many levels. If it weren't so blatantly obvious that you're hanging around the forums to be a troll, I (and others) might be inclined to inform you of why.

[Lamont 0]

(ridiculously trolling nonsense)

This is hilariously wrong on so many levels. If it weren't so blatantly obvious that you're hanging around the forums to be a troll, I (and others) might be inclined to inform you of why.

How about you disprove anything that I said instead of putting the wise guy card up.

Am I wrong that stuff like reviving and character switching will ruing the atmosphere and single player experience?

Heck no, look at ARMA for a very good example.

Being revived in seconds/minutes and getting back to the fight is different than grabbing a medkit HOW?

Is there even a point in playing if your team mate can revive you when you die? No matter how realistic they make it appear, players will abuse it to hell and back and it will turn into a very lame experience.

ARMA might as well come with a shock glove that will send an electric shock to the players when they get injured. That will sure add more to the simulation element

I don't understand why BIS doesn't learn from their mistakes. ARMA was a failure when it came to single player experience and they are doing the same thing again. Thats a bad idea, and it doesn't take a genius to see that.

[Maddmatt 1]

People, people, calm down please!...

Are you a complete idiot?      

First of all they have nothing to show. And they also promised similar features

If you're such a fan of a game that you haven't even seen a real screenshot of, then go to the correct forum and post your useless crap there.

You obviously don't have a clue how it works. How can you, it hasn't been publicly demonstrated?

Back on topic...

IMO as long as this is implemented well, then it could be a great change to gameplay.

I don't agree with the comments about it making the game more arcadish. It adds another element to gameplay.

As long as all units, including AI, have the same features then it will not give players an unfair advantage. Shooting an enemy AI and seeing him fall to the ground will no longer necessarily mean he's dead, he may have just collapsed (speaking from experience in ArmA mods here, but hopefully ArmA 2 aims for that kind of realism too)

Mods like SLX (and the unreleased ACE mod) try to do something similar, where you can drag your wounded men to safety to try to rescue them.

Don't be so afraid of gameplay changes. Face it, the gameplay needs an overhaul to prevent people getting tired of it.

Quote[/b] ]

Am I wrong that stuff like reviving and character switching will ruing the atmosphere and single player experience?  

Heck no, look at ARMA for a very good example.

Yes. In ArmA the way it is used is up to the mission creator. Not all missions even use those features.

Quote[/b] ]

I don't understand why BIS doesn't learn from their mistakes.  ARMA was a failure when it came to single player experience and they are doing the same thing again.  Thats a bad idea, and it doesn't take a genius to see that.

Then start a new thread to share your brilliant ideas on how to improve gameplay. Do you even have any?

[Lamont 0]

People, people, calm down please!...

Are you a complete idiot?

First of all they have nothing to show. And they also promised similar features

If you're such a fan of a game that you haven't even seen a real screenshot of, then go to the correct forum and post your useless crap there.

You obviously don't have a clue how it works. How can you, it hasn't been publicly demonstrated?

Back on topic...

IMO as long as this is implemented well, then it could be a great change to gameplay.

I don't agree with the comments about it making the game more arcadish. It adds another element to gameplay.

As long as all units, including AI, have the same features then it will not give players an unfair advantage. Shooting an enemy AI and seeing him fall to the ground will no longer necessarily mean he's dead, he may have just collapsed (speaking from experience in ArmA mods here, but hopefully ArmA 2 aims for that kind of realism too)

Mods like SLX (and the unreleased ACE mod) try to do something similar, where you can drag your wounded men to safety to try to rescue them.

Don't be so afraid of gameplay changes. Face it, the gameplay needs an overhaul to prevent people getting tired of it.

Quote[/b] ]

Am I wrong that stuff like reviving and character switching will ruing the atmosphere and single player experience?

Heck no, look at ARMA for a very good example.

Yes. In ArmA the way it is used is up to the mission creator. Not all missions even use those features.

Quote[/b] ]

I don't understand why BIS doesn't learn from their mistakes. ARMA was a failure when it came to single player experience and they are doing the same thing again. Thats a bad idea, and it doesn't take a genius to see that.

Then start a new thread to share your brilliant ideas on how to improve gameplay. Do you even have any?

I was going to write a whole rebuttal on why such feature will not add anything positive to game play, and how it will ruin aspects of the gameplay.

But forget it.... I'll just end my argument with a simple statement:

Putting all of the bugs and flaws that ARMA had aside, it "offered" awesome graphics, fancy features, and realism second to none, but that didn't stop it from having a singleplayer experience as fun as staring at a wall.

[Maddmatt 1]

I was going to write a whole rebuttal on why such feature will not add anything positive to game play, and how it will ruin aspects of the gameplay.  

But forget it....

Whether it ruins aspects of the gameplay and what it adds all depends on how it it done. You can't tell how it will affect gameplay because you haven't seen it in action. But the game is still being worked on so posting suggestions and comments can help.

Trolling on the other hand (like your first post in this thread that I replied to) is useless and annoying.

Quote[/b] ]I'll just end my argument with a simple statement:

Putting all of the bugs and flaws that ARMA had aside, it "offered" awesome graphics, fancy features, and realism second to none, but that didn't stop it from having a singleplayer experience as fun as staring at a wall.

True, stock ArmA has a boring singleplayer.

But mods, addons, and multiplayer can make it very enjoyable.

[gsleighter 0]

I've got the solution. Lamont, every time you die in Arma2, hit Alt-F4. Problem solved for you, and my parade goes on as scheduled.

[CarlGustaffa 4]

Another neat thing would be if the downed unit waiting to be revived, was on a special channel that only downed units were on. Let them chat with eachother as much as they want to avoid boredom, but they shouldn't be able to inform live players on what took them and from where -- as I see it: downed units don't talk.

Upon revival, you got back on whatever channel you were on.

[gsleighter 0]

Or be stuck in direct comms mode.

[SaBrE_UK 0]

I've got the solution. Lamont, every time you die in Arma2, hit Alt-F4. Problem solved for you, and my parade goes on as scheduled.

+1

[Maddmatt 1]

Another neat thing would be if the downed unit waiting to be revived, was on a special channel that only downed units were on. Let them chat with eachother as much as they want to avoid boredom, but they shouldn't be able to inform live players on what took them and from where -- as I see it: downed units don't talk.

Upon revival, you got back on whatever channel you were on.

That would be good for simulating unconscious units. However, a man may be down and unable to move but still conscious. So in that case he should be able to talk and have limited vision.

That way he can also call for a medic.

Maybe after a while he can pass out.

Although, waiting around while your character is unconscious could get boring. This is a pretty important issue IMO

[kernriver 4]

What if we had two options in action menu when incapacitated:

Option 1:

Wait for revive (call medic) - you wait for someone/medic to revive you

Option 2:

No revive - this would mean that you're dead

a) SP - load last saved position (if you don't want to use team switch)

b) MP - turn into seagull/respawn

Just an idea, but I guess something like that would keep everyone happy.

[lwlooz 0]

Hello there,

Don't get me wrong , reviving and its "realistic" brother "Advanced Medical Systems" can be a lot of fun ,

but I really fail to see why one version of this has to be forced hardcoded on all players.

I again would like to express that I hope BIS in this case just implements engine changes and extra and enhanced script commands so people ,

including the chaps that make the BIS campaign, can come up with their own systems of how to handle wounded and seriously wounded(also called unconscious).

That would include advanced eventhandlers , a more elaborate system of getDamage and setDamage and a way to move units more easly around when they are put into a state of "seriously wounded"(=Battlefield Clearance).

In fact you could apply the same to vehicles

All in All,no hardcoded versions please , especially if they are silly

[Deadfast 43]

(ridiculously trolling nonsense)

This is hilariously wrong on so many levels. If it weren't so blatantly obvious that you're hanging around the forums to be a troll, I (and others) might be inclined to inform you of why.  

How about you disprove anything that I said instead of putting the wise guy card up.

As you wish:

There is something that will make us all happy.

That's just your personal expectation .

Its called "Operation Flashpoint 2" and its coming out in 09.

Like if you could believe the release date...

No revives,

Says who?

no teamswitch,

Says who?

quality campaign

And you know this how?

[Second 0]

I've got the solution. Lamont, every time you die in Arma2, hit Alt-F4. Problem solved for you, and my parade goes on as scheduled.

+1

+1

Same conserning OFP2 in case of our beloved trolly Lamont

[Lamont 0]

I don't know if any of you know, but in OFP, many custom made coop missions had revive scripted in them. Those missions were fun and very long. But for the average coop, think what such a feature will do....

So I'm a troll because I criticize? You guys ever wonder what happened to half the community? You ever think about why the only people left on this board are people who never criticize, never question, and are loyal no matter what?

Back in the day, you guys made a huge fuss about ARMA being on steam. Anyone that dared to mention steam was flamed and called a troll. A year later what happens? Arma goes on steam.

The good thing about OFP coops is that when you died, you stayed dead. Now they want to hard code a feature in that basically gives you unlimited respawn. You will end up seeing coops full of Rambo's because they never die.

I have to agree now that I think about it, that teamswitch was a really good feature that saved BIS from investing in a good campaign.

Teamswitch was the perfect excuse for a poor story, no character building, no atmosphere, nothing that will make you remember anything from the campaign a month after you play it.

And now they are focusing on ubber medics that will revive a dead soldier in a matter of second. I see they learned a lot from quake wars. Good for them!