Petition for more Realism in Arma2

[JeRK 0]

i agree with almost all points mr gc made. some kind of simple targeting system for vehicles is necessary. its not about realism, its a gameplay issue. imagine the same system for infantry: press tab to lock on to another soldier and just click fire. not much of a challenge is it?

So suddenly manually aiming isn't realistic.

Wait WHAT?

[7 0]

i agree with almost all points mr gc made. some kind of simple targeting system for vehicles is necessary. its not about realism, its a gameplay issue. imagine the same system for infantry: press tab to lock on to another soldier and just click fire. not much of a challenge is it?

So suddenly manually aiming isn't realistic.

Wait WHAT?

do it again. do it right.

[LJF 0]

I'd like it if they'd implement realism like was in ACE-mod for ArmA1, but certain things to me seem stupid to implement, such as removing 3rd person, OK, not realistic, but if I want to use it I will, if I'm playing online then disable it in the difficulty settings.

Yes, magcheck, removing the STUPID "reload symbol" (!!!) etc etc etc. Little things that could really improve the experience.

[S!fkaIaC 10]

I usually support ideas like that, but since BIS is obviously not able to get the CURRENT features under control, I hesitate to ask for more. I rather prefer that BIS is concentrating on bugfixing. 200+ bugs should keep them busy for the next.....2 years.

[twisted 128]

i won't get involved in the rants or personal diggs that are spoiling this post.

but i will agree positively to the ideas of:

making parts of certain vehicles only able to be damaged by weapons of a certain power or above.

replacing the radar and tab-tab-tab.

that would be great to have BIS.

[SASrecon 0]

BTW: I think if you won't make those things as "standard", why not lay them into the "Veteran" mode or introduce a even harder "Simulation Mode" ?

+1 for simulation mode :D

[vshadow 0]

Know this was some time ago but:

I know that big explosions/fires do attract people, just like action movies do, but it could be very attracting to if you shoot for instance with Tracer/Incendiary-Tracers on a car and parts of it like seats/stuff made of "fabric" starts to catch fire on the first hit.

Or like mentioned leaked fuel when fuel-tank is hit, which starts with a small fire and eventually the whole vehicle is in flames and setting-up stored amunition/etc.

I’m sorry but as far as I know Tracer/Incendiary-Tracers (or least Tracers), still have trouble making fires in cars and other objects.

It was done to death in an episode of myth busters where they shot something like 20 rounds in to the fuel tank of a car and barley a flame appeared, this was after normal bullets in another tank, all to see if the Hollywood myth of the 1 bullet fuel tank explosion was true, along with car explosions. So as far as I know I don’t think a fire with one round would not be that realistic ether.

I think it was meant to be because tracers don’t generally generate that much heat Because of the chemical used to make the glow, meaning they were not hot enough to clause ignition, and as all ready stated I'm not too sure on the workings of Incendiary tracers.

Tbh I don’t mind how the game is more realism or less I play it ether way and now the game is out I think bugs are the main thing to be stamped on.

Disclaimer: nowhere am I claiming that my information is 100% correct for all type of rounds just ones tested on said factual TV shows.

p.s. this might apply only to Tracer rounds

[Curry 10]

Yes.

+1

Well I don't know why people want more "playability" than realism but at the same time, ACE is one of the most used addon even WGL for OFP was a real improvement to the vanilla OFP and a lot of people played it also.

And yes, I agree with all of your points and I fully support you!

Edited July 1, 2009 by Curry

[Cpt.Goose 10]

Well I'm deff no expert like the poster but he sure sounds like he knows his stuff. Simple for me I'm all for realism so if what he's saying is right I absolutely agree it should be changed in a patch if it can be!

[wipman 1]

Hi, one thing that's not realist, at least in the Demo, is to give the orders by hand with the

right hand instead with the left one, as it use to be; there're some orders that must be

given using booth hands, like the formation related ones, formation line... wedge... spread

the formation... etc; but orders like stay low, form up, raise your stance, advance or stop

are given with the left hand in the real life, but in the Demo... they are given with the right

hand, which don't makes sense. That will be good to change it. Let's C ya

[Balschoiw 0]

The hitpoint system has to die.

Smurf out. :pet7:

[142nd_Nomis 10]

indeed !

+1

[dindiface 10]

I am very new to ARMA (ARMA 2 because it is out for 2 days only and barely played ARMA 1 either).......

This is what confuses me after playing in 2-3 rooms: the "finder/scope" - the thing that comes up when hitting SPACE - finds enemies behind complete cover and even worse: behind buildings and hills, kilometers away.

I am not sure as of yet whether this depends on a server setting or it is all through the game, but it really makes the game extremely unrealistic for me.

I think a spotted enemy should be identifiable with a tool like this (e.g. depending on the distance the crosshair would turn color as it does now) but how it works now is really insane for me.

Technically I was behind total cover (kind of inside a pine tree) and I was shot and shot and shot over and over. I was also able to "see" enemies which is wasn't seeing at all, behind a vehicle, foliage or a huge hill.

My other issue is with audio (besides having the distortion issue) :

I was really expecting a VOIP system which is always on and is proximity based. E.g. you would hear a player naturally from your radio when standing next to him without him pressing any button and through your sound system (speakers).... upon him pressing the "comm" button would transmit THROUGH your headset. This would of course require a dedicated channel for comms, but for less than $10 you can get a logitech USB headset that works with a Mac, PC, or Playstation, so this would not be a problem.

If you ever played the new SOCOM game on PS/3 you know what I am exactly talking about. I do not like the game (run and gun, 3rd person, PS3 community sucks), but it feels sweet when you hear your enemy radioing because you are just a step away.

It actually happened that I heard a guy cough over the corner ... then confirmed (whispering) via the radio that the guys wasn't our teammate ... then you know what happened ......

Well, just my 2 cents.... maybe some of it is already in the game but since my audio has the same problems in 5.1 mode as most others' I might not see/hear it.

[Penfolde 1]

I've commented on stuff between my firends like your list. Penatrations physic engine would be good. Have to see wot OPF2 like.

[galzohar 31]

I like how you can run trees and other stuff off like they were cardboard, but 150 40mm rounds of mark 19 seem to leave them standing as if nothing happened. Also having a building collapse like a house of cards (or like some experienced demolition engineer placed some explosive charges very carefully) when firing a rocket/ATGM at it.

[Winkl_BOttOm 10]

Good format of the petition and covers a lot of details that would be very interesting to see implemented during the life span of this game. Would be new content and realism to look forward to , very well put together petition , i salute you sir. :)

[LJF 0]

+1 for simulation mode :D

Simulation mode for me too :D

[EricM 0]

I'd say gameplay over realism anytime. If a realistic features brings more fun, then ok, if it's just a limitation, then no.

And you don't need fancy "penetration physics" to improve the current system. A simple system of 2 values would do the trick :

1) Piercing/armor power : if the gun has a piercing power of 5 and the target a armor power of 7, then no damage incurs. If the gun has piercing power of 7 and the target has an armor power of 5, then there is a damage.

2) Damage points : Quantity of damage inflicted if piercing>armor.

[Vreid 10]

I'd say gameplay over realism anytime. If a realistic features brings more fun, then ok, if it's just a limitation, then no.

And you don't need fancy "penetration physics" to improve the current system. A simple system of 2 values would do the trick :

1) Piercing/armor power : if the gun has a piercing power of 5 and the target a armor power of 7, then no damage incurs. If the gun has piercing power of 7 and the target has an armor power of 5, then there is a damage.

2) Damage points : Quantity of damage inflicted if piercing>armor.

Ah.. But you know, for some people: realism = fun ;)

[Dallas 9]

If I sign this petition, I'm basically saying:

- That Arma2 seems just as "unrealistic" as OFP1 and Arma1 were?

- That Codemasters' OF:DR will be more realistic than ArmA2?

- That BI should discontinue the approach that made OFP GOTY and filled a void in gaming?

- That I believe BI and BIA is one entity, which should deliver an identical product, but at a seperate price?

- That ammo checks should be determined by a weight system?

Well I can't.

You're missing the overall picture, because you're starring yourself blind at some minor details. The realism comes from delivering an actual large scale fucntioning warzone, an worthy adversery and realistic military equipment. The realism also comes from supporting their community, although limited by some nature laws(engine limitations), have been given access and encouraged to push and break the boundaries for what a game is.

I was really expecting a VOIP system which is always on and is proximity based. E.g. you would hear a player naturally from your radio when standing next to him without him pressing any button and through your sound system (speakers).... upon him pressing the "comm" button would transmit THROUGH your headset. This would of course require a dedicated channel for comms, but for less than $10 you can get a logitech USB headset that works with a Mac, PC, or Playstation, so this would not be a problem.

I think it's somewhat already implimented ingame. VOIP already have six channels: Global, side, command, Groupe, Vehicle and dicrect. You also often hear opfor call out your position, when within hearing range. Due to barking dogs, screaming children, background music and nagging wifes, you can't have VOIP on all the time.

[-Paladin- 10]

+1

i would really like to see a game like ARMA with 200 page manual to learn how to use the vehicles it would be even for every one more fun, now its so that every tank is the same every Heli and plane the same nothing is different only different skins.

a game should be a challenge or it get boring and of Corse only this feathers on vet/simmode.

to downgrade something is much easy than to upgrade.

not 100% realistic but 50%/70%, its sorry to say but ARMA/ARMA 2 is like OFP with mods but with more bugs and better graphic but this dont make a good game for something that is calling him self the ultimate mili.sim.

I really hope the PPL in BI HQ take this thread to there heart we like you and we are trying to help you :-)

[dindiface 10]

If I sign this petition, I'm basically saying:

I think it's somewhat already implimented ingame. VOIP already have six channels: Global, side, command, Groupe, Vehicle and dicrect. You also often hear opfor call out your position, when within hearing range. Due to barking dogs, screaming children, background music and nagging wifes, you can't have VOIP on all the time.

Actually you can. I tell you why: because in the mode I explained only people around you would hear your "noises" because to transmit over the radio you would need to press a button.

In fact most games on Xbox live and PS3 have always-on VOIP and it is usually good (if you play with decent people) .....

In SOCOM it actually adds some laughs to the game because on the spawn people seem to make fun use on the system ... so you need people bark behind you and so on. But then again, it does not affect the game as

1. they are not on comms

2. if they make/have noise they will get shot because the enemy hears them...

Just my experience .. i do not like Socom that much but the feature is GREAT to add realism

[Dallas 9]

ArmA2 has two VOIP options.

Press to speak and a toggle.

Plus you can assign keys to all six channels.

So the VOIP already delivers what you asked for.

[janh 0]

Indeed, I will wait till the Arma series gets some substantial progress in the realism and the physics sections. I already passed on Arma 1 because I felt too little improvement over OFP, which I still am addicted to. Unfortunately, although Arma 2's new enviroment graphics is really great, and also the soldier AI is very nice, it misses "simulation" improvements.

Somehow I got the impression that BIS focused too little on the vehicle simulation and realism. However, they are crucial parts of an integrated battlefield -- 70 years ago as much as today.

Arma 2 doesn't have to be such a hardcore simulation as Jane's Longbow, any hardcore flightsim like IL2 mixed with F-16 Falcon, plus an M1A1 Tank platoon, but it should still represent the cores of such simulations.

I would have hoped that Arma would be better than OFP in the following:

1.) hit point system: Switched to a realistic damage modelling, in which penetration depends on impact angles, (relative) impact speeds etc. Damage model with more parts, that more realistically affect player vehicles (throwing tracks, specific electronics failures, etc.).

2.) the IR+Radar issue...: no comment, realistic sensors and their representation in the player cockpit should definitely be there! Radar (forward focused for fighters!), active, passive, SAR, IR, residual light enhancing equipment, etc. Of course countermeasure such as Flares, Chaff, or electronic suites should be there too! On air vehicles as much as on some ground vehicles.

This also extends to observation suites on choppers, i.e. I always missed on the Apache in OFP to have my FLIR and the two cameras with different zoom settings, etc. Generally, a better cockpit design with the MFDs, sensor displays, the damage displays...

3.) Realistic "smart" weapons. Most passive laserguided weapons such as the Hellfire on Cobras are not fire-and-forget! The AH-64D Longbow used MMW guided Hellfires, which were. Such differences should be modelled, too. MMW weapons suffer from electronic countermeasures, laser from stray effects (vegetation!)

Similar issues for the Mavericks (TV or IR?), LGBs, Air-Air weapons (active vs. passive seekers)...

4.) Possibility to change weapon-loadouts of helos and FW aircraft before mission...

5.) Yes, generally correct the weapon effects! APFSDS, or Sabot are long-rod penetrators that fragment if they penetrate something really hard, but a wall of a building they just cut through. Indeed they are also quite useless against soft vehicles unless hitting the engine block! That sort of links to the improvements of the damage models...

Well, those I think are core features that make out a "simulation", though not overly burdening the typical gamer with details. I hope some of these things still make it into Arma 2, or hopefully all. I would really not like to wait for Arma 3...

[b00ce 160]

I fully agree with doing away with the HP system. By all rights the standard RPG-7 rocket is anti-armor, because of the shaped charge stuff that I wont go into. Yet it seems only suited to killing unarmored targets. The system that the one WWII sim uses would be optimal.

If the HP system isn't dropped there need to be two different types of "health", Mechanical (For vehicles) and Medical (For People). Each weapon/ explosive would have a blast radius and "damage" for each type of damage. Lets go back to the RPG-7, the standard rocket would have an extremely small blast radius for mechanical damage, but do a significant amount of it. (Shaped charges only work on contact and one way.) The medical damage radius would be slightly bigger and do less damage. This sounds simple, but it would probably be a pain in the ass to do.

Those are my two cents. But we all agree that ArmA II needs a serious face lift in terms of realism, after all it IS a war sim.