One question that MANY fans care about.

[Viiiper 0]

Yes I too say go play COD & the other PvP games.

PvP players only look for exploits in maps and games and then take full advantage of them in every game I've ever seen. PvP gamers bunny hope, knife slash & generally play for only one thing the points/ kills, top killer, top waste of time.

ARMA is about team play & strategy, PvP players would say thats what they really want, but ever time you include a PvP based game style it turns into kiddie wonderland.

TEAM PLAY

If you mean PvP as in team against team, it's already there.

If you mean team play then that is TDM Team Death match which is a serious play format.

I associate PvP with Deathmatch, everyman for themselves.

If you want PvP build your own mod and add it and don't make excuses that if it ain't official it isn't going to work. Some of the best parts of ARMAI were/are NONE OFFICIAL MODS and every serious ARMA player knows it including B.I.S.

That's why those ideas have been incorp. into ARMAII by B.I.S.

ARMA is not a PvP game never was never will be, it is a Team game TDM & COOP.

[croc4 0]

I really don't understand why arma can't be both, why does it have to be only one way? (coop only), I have played both single,coop and pvp maps and they are all enjoyable IMO, for PVP I play cerberus 5 maps, and they are enjoyable, some have aspects of more team play, others are more solo, but they still add some fresh air to the stupid AI/evolution din.

I reject the notion that you have to change the base game for it to be PVP compatible, that is utterly and completely stupid.

Is it as fast paced as BF2 or COD, no, but I don't see a problem with that, each person in game has the same "slowness" and it adds an air of "game realism", and dynamic that coop will never have IMO, at not least until AI = human thought (for good or bad).

I also reject the notion that PvP = bunny hop, blah, blah blah, again very stupid, sure most PvP games use this crap, but it is NOT! a requirement, it is the "status quo".

So to sum up, there is absolutely no reason that both can't co-exist together, one type of game play does not threaten the other, you can have both without changing the base engine.

If you don't wish to play a certain map/game type, then don't its that simple, and Arma is a GAME!, so having multiple game types builds different aspects of the entire community, and not pigeon hole it to any one place.

Croc4

[4 IN 1 0]

the point is that while some of us think that ARMA can be both with its existing form, many others thinks it cant, or even worse, refused to accept the play style that it bring.

I am more then happy to see a serverlist full of populated server with people playing all kinds of mission so that i can have more choose, but sadily its not happening, and i am for sure dont want to play a dumped down game

[R4-P 0]

@Viiiper:

It seems you did not grasp the meaning of PvP correctly. You confuse exploiting game mechanics with typical PvP behavior and your general understanding of PvP is too narrow.

PvP players only look for exploits in maps and games and then take full advantage of them in every game I've ever seen. PvP gamers bunny hope, knife slash & generally play for only one thing the points/ kills, top killer, top waste of time.

What you describe here is not the meaning and core concept of PvP but the practical appearance of the "play to win" mindset. These people do not care about the means they use to accomplish victory as long as it serves them.

A very popular article is Playing to Win which is often referred to as an excuse for the poor behavior you mentioned. Nevertheless it holds interesting ideas and when your only aim is to win or be the best it pretty much hits right on spot. Whether this is good or not is a moral question and depends on your motivation for playing. Problems arise when two opposite interests clash.

This is no synonym for PvP or PvP players though. I do understand why you perceive it that way as PvP games very well deliver the environment for such behavior. On the other hand PvE games suffer/benefit from it too but because you play against AI there is no one with an opposite motivation to play against you and as such there are no clashing interests.

I associate PvP with Deathmatch, everyman for themselves.

[...]

ARMA is not a PvP game never was never will be, it is a Team game TDM & COOP.

And this is where you are fundementally wrong. That YOU associate PvP with Deathmatch is fine, but that is not what PvP stands for. As you know PvP is the abbreviation for Player vs. Player. This may very well mean Deathmatch but actually is a much broader term. It defines every kind of interaction between players in a competitive way, including TDM. It doesn't matter what you are doing as long as your counterpart is another human being. As such I would even include Coop to a lesser extend into the PvP category if the AI side has human players alongside them.

This opens up a very wide playing field for PvP game modes which are virtually limitless as much as PvE scenarios are.

That PvP games tend to be chaotic and self-centric is due to their nature: they do have lots and lots of humans who are not organized. If you had a Coop-only game with 60+ people without anyone organizing it you would witness the same chaotic and self-centric behavior and patterns PvP-only games and game modes have.

If you want PvP build your own mod and add it and don't make excuses that if it ain't official it isn't going to work. Some of the best parts of ARMAI were/are NONE OFFICIAL MODS and every serious ARMA player knows it including B.I.S.

This is flawed again. Of course a PvP focused player can create his own gaming content but this - and that's what the OP is saying - won't attract the masses at first. Without a massive amount of players you cannot have big PvP engagements like CTI scenarios with humans only. Coop Maps are different in this regard as missing players can be replaced by AI characters and especially opponents are. This means you can play your self-created content far more quickly and spread the word about it as you simply need far less players to effectively run it at first.

ArmA2 can be both: a great PvE/Coop game and a great PvP game. The latter needs a very high player count and that's why ArmA2 should have an appealing variety of PvP maps/missions/game modes from the very beginning. Otherwise it's more likely than not that it misses out a great deal of its potential imo.

ArmA2 could be among the greatest PvP games if done right.

As I'm a great fan of PvP and PvE I'd like to agree with 4 In 1 at the end:

I am more then happy to see a serverlist full of populated server with people playing all kinds of mission so that i can have more choose

cheers

R4-P

[whisper 0]

Yes I too say go play COD & the other PvP games.

PvP players only look for exploits in maps and games and then take full advantage of them in every game I've ever seen. PvP gamers bunny hope, knife slash & generally play for only one thing the points/ kills, top killer, top waste of time.

ARMA is about team play & strategy, PvP players would say thats what they really want, but ever time you include a PvP based game style it turns into kiddie wonderland.

Wrong on all accounts.

Though it sums up pretty well the ignorance from the I'm-so-godly-better-than-others Coop breed (fortunately just a minor part of them) about what is PvP gaming.

Public Coop playing is as disorganized as public PvP playing.

Competitive PvP playing is as organized as private squad base Coop playing.

You should have a minimum of knowledge of the games you're talking about before playing the "I'm better than thou" card. Something you clearly lack, sir.

[CyDoN 0]

Yes I too say go play COD & the other PvP games.

PvP players only look for exploits in maps and games and then take full advantage of them in every game I've ever seen. PvP gamers bunny hope, knife slash & generally play for only one thing the points/ kills, top killer, top waste of time.

ARMA is about team play & strategy, PvP players would say thats what they really want, but ever time you include a PvP based game style it turns into kiddie wonderland.

Wrong on all accounts.

Though it sums up pretty well the ignorance from the I'm-so-godly-better-than-others Coop breed (fortunately just a minor part of them) about what is PvP gaming.

Public Coop playing is as disorganized as public PvP playing.

Competitive PvP playing is as organized as private squad base Coop playing.

You should have a minimum of knowledge of the games you're talking about before playing the "I'm better than thou" card. Something you clearly lack, sir.

+1 Whispery lad niceone on all those Viiiiiiiper sayers

The bad thing here is that people from coop backround think that pvp is just shooting people at random and getting high score NO thats not orginzed pvp thats public games. The best part is this one from Whisper

"Public Coop playing is as disorganized as public PvP playing.

Competitive PvP playing is as organized as private squad base Coop playing."

Well people cannot understand that. Another thing that people dont understand is that people are not discouraged from playing ArmA at the beginning. And also the same mistage is made again and again.

NO WE DON'T WANT TO PLAY BATTLEFIELD OR COD THATS WHY WE TALK HERE!!!

That's what people do not get. Another thing, is ArmA THAT differant from BF2? NO ITS NOT its differant only in the small details that make the game differant from the other and make it better. For instace in BF2 and ArmA we have the same realism in using vehicles but in ArmA there are more roles for every vehicle.

I am SURE that if ArmA2 will have official PvP support it will succed in every aspect cause its a great game with great gameplay. It's fast and realistic at the sametime.

OH and something else to all of you there its NOT TDM OR DM its C&H

[Michael_Wittman 0]

Well lets say it what it is. In most of the games out there you can aim whyle running and jump in some cases...

As this game tryes to be realistic thats no longer possible so I presume that most of PVP enthusiastic are simply "CAMPERS" as in every other game are called. And a battle of campers in very far from the commont taste of fun.

That said I allways scored top 3 on EVERY single battle of everyh single game I have played.

So I dont care as the day I switched I knew what was commming.

This game is this game....you will not have plenty detailed building interiors...or plenty detailed anything because its the game that goes into evything...and yes PvP can be "fun"for a whyle....for a WHYLE.

To play the game you must enjoy Coop otherwhile you will be very frustrated because its no way similar to any other clon of CoD...indeed I think you´d better path CoD untill it fits your requirement rather that asking BI to make it COD with huge maps....

I think ARMA I was a warmup to deliver the game they allways wanted....the true cruel real war simulator.

Sadly its not for kiddies..

[CyDoN 0]

Well lets say it what it is. In most of the games out there you can aim whyle running and jump in some cases...

As this game tryes to be realistic thats no longer possible so I presume that most of PVP enthusiastic are simply "CAMPERS" as in every other game are called. And a battle of campers in very far from the commont taste of fun.

That said I allways scored top 3 on EVERY single battle of everyh single game I have played.

So I dont care as the day I switched I knew what was commming.

This game is this game....you will not have plenty detailed building interiors...or plenty detailed anything because its the game that goes into evything...and yes PvP can be "fun"for a whyle....for a WHYLE.

To play the game you must enjoy Coop otherwhile you will be very frustrated because its no way similar to any other clon of CoD...indeed I think you´d better path CoD untill it fits your requirement rather that asking BI to make it COD with huge maps....

I think ARMA I was a warmup to deliver the game they allways wanted....the true cruel real war simulator.

Sadly its not for kiddies..

Hello MR. GROWN UP!! (as we are the kiddies I suppose from your wittings) When you play a match between 2 teams that have trained in a specific map CAMPING is a strategy and not something annoying (maybe if you know war is about camping so the simulating that is awosome realism) and I didn't ask building interiors as it would have been retarated for someone to think of it when C&H and ArmA is about an area and not a building. When playing in Clan level in tournametns noone looks in what position you finished but only who has won the match/tournament/league.

You haven't read any single post and you come here and post this? Say what? Well the game is nice but the only thing it lacks is MP maps tell me Mr. Michael_Wittman why should I play CoD when I don't like it and I like ArmA?

You should play coop in Doom 1 then and not ArmA.

ArmA is about teamwork, teamwork cannot be achived in public servers as its known even if its in PvP or Coop. So we want to play in orginzed clan level, as there are coop communities who aim in simulation.

We don't care about public PvP and we also don't care in what position you score in public servers in all the games you have played.

[bangtail 0]

Bottom line -

You arent going to get what you want unless you design the missions yourself. ArmA/ArmA 2 are not and will not be geared towards PvP players.

I'd suggest you grab PRMM (www.realitymod.com) as that is probably the most realistic PvP experience you are going to get (I love it).

I know its probably not what you wanted to hear, but it is what it is. You can't please all of the people all of the time and your thread title is very misleading.

I've been playing OFP/ArmA since the beginning and I come across very few people who care about PvP in ArmA. I dont think MANY fans care about it at all but I will grant you there is a vocal minority.

E

[SaBrE_UK 0]

I've been playing OFP/ArmA since the beginning and I come across very few people who care about PvP in ArmA. I dont think MANY fans care about it at all but I will grant you there is a vocal minority.

Indeed, I don't care for PvP in ArmA, but given the option I believe PvP (or TvT) can be highly rewarding and more satisfying that fighting flawed AI. A well-made TvT mission could be amazing with the right players. A more structured approach to TvT would be an excellent boost for multiplayer.

[wamingo 1]

You should play coop in Doom 1 then and not ArmA.

We don't care about public PvP and we also don't care in what position you score in public servers in all the games you have played.

Actually, Doom1 coop is awesome.

I'm all for BIS making awesome missions, but I don't think official pvp maps will make pvp or TvT more popular.

In my opinion, YOU are the only one that can make something popular. And by "You" I mean the people with the desire for it.

So what I think you ought to try is to pick a day or two per week for several straight weeks, advertise it on forum or so, get all your friends to sign up and play exclusively tvt or whatever.

And if it's true that there are "many caring fans", then it should be easy as cake?

[Frantic 0]

There will be PvP in ArmA2!

The question is only, if it will be any good or not...

In ArmA the PvP part was strong at the beginning, but ended up in being very little.

Now i think there are just a few servers left with DM and Berzerk missions.

Compared to OFP and the many PvP servers there, ArmA has nearly no PvP at all.

Most PvP players recognized that the controls and movements of the infantry soldiers were just not good enough for PvP games, so they stopped playing at all or tried out other games.

Now we are all waiting for ArmA2 and i hope the controls and movements of the infantry soldiers wont be as clunky as it was in ArmA.

A good PvP community in ArmA2 wont disturb anything. It would even help to have more games sold and so more money for BIS.

I prefer PvP, but i also like nice COOP missions.

However, im definitely going to make some PvP missions for ArmA2, but only if ArmA2 will have smoother controls and movements for the infantry soldiers.

And as far i heard, BIS already said that they overworked it.

Here a little quote:

Quote[/b] ]Animations (more fluid and realistic, hand signals, ability to reload while walking, climb over smaller obstacles)

So im really looking forward to the release of ArmA2 and im also looking forward to have a lot of fun with self-made PvP missions!  

[DVD 0]

I didn't brother reading all here, because this topic was counteracted from the start by bigoted people who never played the great PvP maps for years in OFP.

Just wanna say, if ArmA II has the same stiff animations, movement and aiming, the PvP part of the game will fail again.

And it has noting to do with the quality of maps.

The problem is the controles and the aim.

OFP is still the reference here.

[Zenga 1]

will be there Mortars.??? .. it would make it more intensive.. and it opend more tactical solutions..

[Maio 293]

will be there Mortars.??? ..  it would make it more intensive..  and it opend more tactical solutions..

MLRS artilerry will be present in the game , much more fun

[KorpeN 0]

will be there Mortars.??? ..  it would make it more intensive..  and it opend more tactical solutions..

WTF?

[Second 0]

will be there Mortars.??? ..  it would make it more intensive..  and it opend more tactical solutions..

MLRS artilerry will be present in the game , much more fun

Yeah. All those duds which will then become landmines would also be major fun

[Michael_Wittman 0]

Regarding artillery I would love to see this.

ARCHER

[CyDoN 0]

what do all these have to do with pvp?

[-Total- 0]

There was a much different mindset of gamers in 2001 when compared to now.

FPS's such as Battlefield 1942, Tribes2, OFP, etc would not have worked as well these days.

FPS gamers are generally after one thing these days - kill stats.

There's no kill glory in a support role no matter how vital it is. People are not going to flock to a game where they can't immediately pick up a weapon and start shooting things. The patience just isn't there anymore.

I would absolutely love large scale pvp battles in ArmA and ArmA2, but it would not fly. Coordinating more than 6 gamers these days is, well, short of impossible. Each person seems to have their own idea of what is going to make their team win and everyone branches off to do their own thing - and boost kill stats while they're at it.

Look at AA 3.0 coming up. In 2001, AA was the only game of it's kind. It took skill and teamwork. Over the years, it was developed and degraded into a fast-paced, kill-centric game. Videos of the new, 2009 one show the weapon staying totally centered while the player is running down stairs.

Due to it's complexity and reliance on coordination and teamwork, ArmA and ArmA 2 will be more successful in their roles as large scale coop missions. And that's pretty sad considering the potential that is there.

[CyDoN 0]

There was a much different mindset of gamers in 2001 when compared to now.

FPS's such as  Battlefield 1942, Tribes2, OFP, etc would not have worked as well these days.

FPS gamers are generally after one thing these days - kill stats.

There's no kill glory in a support role no matter how vital it is. People are not going to flock to a game where they can't immediately pick up a weapon and start shooting things. The patience just isn't there anymore.

I would absolutely love large scale pvp battles in ArmA and ArmA2, but it would not fly. Coordinating more than 6 gamers these days is, well, short of impossible. Each person seems to have their own idea of what is going to make their team win and everyone branches off to do their own thing - and boost kill stats while they're at it.

Look at AA 3.0 coming up. In 2001, AA was the only game of it's kind. It took skill and teamwork. Over the years, it was developed and degraded into a fast-paced, kill-centric game. Videos of the new, 2009 one show the weapon staying totally centered while the player is running down stairs.

Due to it's complexity and reliance on coordination and teamwork, ArmA and ArmA 2 will be more successful in their roles as large scale coop missions. And that's pretty sad considering the potential that is there.

Well lad you are wrong. When playing in a clan fighting other clans in a match every player has his role. The way things are going to roll is about tactics and strategy, in public games of course things cannot be organized.

[-Total- 0]

Well, if 37 years old is being a lad, then I'll take the compliment

I've competed in team-based online gaming since 1998. Been  to the invite level in both CAL and TWL in several games....just not CS or CSS. Never liked those two lol!

Yes, there's teamwork in a clan match depending on the game, but more often than not it centers on killing the other team rather than the objective.

America's Army was beautiful for competition, but over time the larger outdoor maps were dropped from the leagues in lieu of the smaller maps that could be accomplished faster with a more smash heads style gameplay. Maps that used to have league round times of 8 mintues are now down to 4 minutes to make it "more tense."

Even Tribes2 and Battlefield 1942 both saw this. BF42 saw the inevitable camping of the spawn flag, turkey-shoot to burn down the kill tickets.

Competition in ArmA never took off. In TWL, I submittted the first mission pack using the AA Template. I was a competition manager at the time, so it wasn't some random name putting this out there. The missions were made for the 5v5, 7v7, and 10v10 team sizes. Put up on our server and advertised as Player vs Player. Scantly populated, it never took off. I could put Evolution on though and it would fill up in a heartbeat lol!

I am speaking, primarily, of US-based gaming too. The European leagues had a bit better luck with the more complex games.

[Rocco 0]

Sorry, but you play the wrong game, if you want ArmA to be similar to BF. In RL there is no instant spawn 20 sec walk to headshot an enemy.

[-Total- 0]

Whoa!

Where did I even imply that I wanted it to be anything like BF?

That's the last thing I want lol! BF42 just one of the games that I competed within in my past. I never did play BF2 past the demo. That one ruined the franchise by nubbing the game down to death.

I would LOVE for ArmA to have some great PvP pubs and competition venues, but the sad fact is that it will not likely draw anough participants to justify any sort of league or ladder. God knows I tried to get it going at TWL, but the interest was too low because ArmA's gameplay is too "slow"

By "slow", people mean that they just wanna rush in an kill things rather than use their heads.

In no way though would I ever want ArmA's gameplay to even come close to some arcade atrocity like BF2!  

[Frantic 0]

=- @ Feb. 11 2009,08:57)]Sorry, but you play the wrong game, if you want ArmA to be similar to BF. In RL there is no instant spawn 20 sec walk to headshot an enemy.

lol...the good old "In RL" argument.

ArmA is still a game, so if you want RL go and join the army!

Furthermore, ArmA can be similar to BF.

Just start the mission-editor and create it.

The greatness of OFP was and still is the possibility to create every game-mode you want and which you can imagine.

So in OFP it was able to be done, also in ArmA and for sure in ArmAII.

BIS already mentioned that the controls of the infantry soldiers will be more fluent compared to ArmA and so we all hope that the robotic movements of the infantry soldiers will be no more existent in ArmAII.

The downfall of ArmA with PvP was the terrible movements of the infantry soldiers and if BIS gets rid of these then we will get a great game with ArmAII, even for PvP action.

About your statement with the non existence of respawn in RL, just create a mission with no respawn and be happy with it. Many others like to have a respawn and so i would propose you to let us alone with our respawn missions and for yourself just dont go on servers or missions with respawn! I hope thats not too hard for you.

I also tried to get some league action going with ArmA, but sadly i failed too.

There were enough people for league action at the beginning, but after some patches most people recognized that BIS are happy with the controls and movements of the infantry soldiers and so many people moved on to other games and stopped playing ArmA.

Lets all hope that BIS has learned something out of the dropping online player numbers in ArmA and will show us some nice fluent movements of the infantry soldiers in ArmAII!