One question that MANY fans care about.

[Jensen1 0]

I see what the problem is. There is a general hostility from coop players towards the PvP community of ArmA.

They for some reason try to prove that ArmA is not suited for this type of gameplay.

WTF?! We never said that, what we said is

"It is of so much ease to do this kind gameplay in this game that the ONLY thing stopping your self ARE yourselves!!!"

[CyDoN 0]

I see what the problem is. There is a general hostility from coop players towards the PvP community of ArmA.

They for some reason try to prove that ArmA is not suited for this type of gameplay.

WTF?! We never said that, what we said is

"It is of so much ease to do this kind gameplay in this game that the ONLY thing stopping your self ARE yourselves!!!"

Why then all say to go and play BF CoD or whaterver?

Come on man... Do you want me to quote them for you?

You still don't get the point of the conversation which is ArmA2 needs to include official pvp maps for competitve play in styles of C&H or something like that so PvPers can play and focus on those maps.

Not wait for the community to make them.

[sparks50 0]

CyDoN, surely there must be one pvp mission for Arma that you like? If not, how exactly would your dream mission differ from Berzerk?

As previously mentioned, according to BI the script language is pretty much the same in Arma 2, so porting a mission shouldn't be any harder than porting a mission to another island is today(with some class name changes etc. of course)

There would be little if any waiting time.

[dr_eyeball 16]

CyDoN, I fully support the idea of PvP in ArmA but you will need to give an example (even from another game) of the particular game-mode you have in mind.

I would support most of the game-modes found in BF2 Project Reality mod, like AAS2, Insurgency, Command and Control (CNC) & Counter-Attack (CA).

I've identified about 8 common groups for PvP game-modes.  BIS's PvP designs fall into 2 or 3 of these groups.

Also, there are significant differences between designing missions suitable for public servers for regular nightly play versus private/competition servers played once a week.

The number one reason PvP is difficult to keep alive on a public server, is getting sufficient player numbers on at the same time. With coop, 1 player is sufficient to start any old mission and have more players slowly join over the following hours, (like with Warfare). But with PvP, if you don't have the required player numbers from the start, you have to just wait until sufficient players join.

As far as some of the PvP critic comments go in this threads, some are totally unwarranted and misguided and some are just forum agitators. Their reputations have now plummeted.

Devastation

There's also the Devastation PvP mission pack available too, which utilises the AAS2 game-mode design.

It has a few improvements over missions like Berzerk and similar game-modes, with changes to provide proper resource proportions & limits and a suitable balance to promote fair & regular play on public servers.

Quote[/b] ]<ul>[*]limited weapon availability (to prevent everyone having an MG, sniper or AT/AA weapon). Using specialist roles simplifies this issue.

[*]utilises AAS2 game-mode (not AAS1) to focus the conflicts but still provide a choice of objectives and create a front-line concept

[*]large spacing between zones (flags), encourages transport sharing and combined attacks

[*]large zone capture areas (markers), reduces camping

[*]provides better vehicle balance (like avoiding mixing tanks and jets and infantry haphazardously). Instead it uses 'Themes' (like Sea/air vs land).

[*]uses long capture times. There's nothing more boring than knowing a player can simply touch each flag or wait 10 seconds, then immediately move on to the next flag without any threat of opposition.

 - require the capturer to find a defensive position or seek out threats for the entire capture duration.

 - allows the defenders to react to the capture.

[*]removed spawn points at flags. It is afterall the objective.

[*]longer vehicle specific spawn durations (transport vehicles have low times, armour & attack aircraft are highest)

[*]multiple spawn options & protected bases to prevent inescapable spawn camping and spamming

It also has extended functionality, not just improvements:

Quote[/b] ]<ul>[*]mobile respawn vehicles for remote spawning. This also acts as a task (to deploy and protect) and a secondary objective (to destroy by opposition).

[*]deployable bunkers from trucks for armaments & spawning. This also acts as a task and a secondary objective.

[*]deployable assets from trucks: MG, AT, crates, fuel, etc

[*]airlifting cargo & vehicles (required for offshore island bases)

[*]team status dialog to enable joining groups

[*]field dressings concept

[*]ladders on small town missions, to change the normal CQB scenario from purely 2D ground based combat to 3D.

[*]minor features: CSS, artillery HUD, WP HUD, airlift HUD, HMD Heli HUD, mission HUD, laser designator HUD

[*]if scoreboard is visible, adds bonuses for non-combat roles (eg: transport, etc) and penalties for TK's, etc.

[*]menu system for: enemy spotting, common requests and squad command menus

[*]air-drops for crates & 4x4 jeeps.

A new update is due soon, with further changes in future. It will be ported to ArmA2 fairly close to release.

[KorpeN 0]

CyDoN, I fully support the idea of PvP in ArmA but you will need to give an example (even from another game) of the particular game-mode you have in mind.

I would support most of the game-modes found in BF2 Project Reality mod, like AAS2, Insurgency, Command and Control (CNC) & Counter-Attack (CA).

I've identified about 8 common groups for PvP game-modes.  BIS's PvP designs fall into 2 or 3 of these groups.

Also, there are significant differences between designing missions suitable for public servers for regular nightly play versus private/competition servers played once a week.

The number one reason PvP is difficult to keep alive on a public server, is getting sufficient player numbers on at the same time. With coop, 1 player is sufficient to start any old mission and have more players slowly join over the following hours, (like with Warfare). But with PvP, if you don't have the required player numbers from the start, you have to just wait until sufficient players join.

As far as some of the PvP critic comments go in this threads, some are totally unwarranted and misguided and some are just forum agitators. Their reputations have now plummeted.

Devastation

There's also the Devastation PvP mission pack available too, which utilises the AAS2 game-mode design.

It has a few improvements over missions like Berzerk and similar game-modes, with changes to provide proper resource proportions & limits and a suitable balance to promote fair & regular play on public servers.

Quote[/b] ]<ul>[*]limited weapon availability (to prevent everyone having an MG, sniper or AT/AA weapon). Using specialist roles simplifies this issue.

[*]utilises AAS2 game-mode (not AAS1) to focus the conflicts but still provide a choice of objectives and create a front-line concept

[*]large spacing between zones (flags), encourages transport sharing and combined attacks

[*]large zone capture areas (markers), reduces camping

[*]provides better vehicle balance (like avoiding mixing tanks and jets and infantry haphazardously). Instead it uses 'Themes' (like Sea/air vs land).

[*]uses long capture times. There's nothing more boring than knowing a player can simply touch each flag or wait 10 seconds, then immediately move on to the next flag without any threat of opposition.

 - require the capturer to find a defensive position or seek out threats for the entire capture duration.

 - allows the defenders to react to the capture.

[*]removed spawn points at flags. It is afterall the objective.

[*]longer vehicle specific spawn durations (transport vehicles have low times, armour & attack aircraft are highest)

[*]multiple spawn options & protected bases to prevent inescapable spawn camping and spamming

It also has extended functionality, not just improvements:

Quote[/b] ]<ul>[*]mobile respawn vehicles for remote spawning. This also acts as a task (to deploy and protect) and a secondary objective (to destroy by opposition).

[*]deployable bunkers from trucks for armaments & spawning. This also acts as a task and a secondary objective.

[*]deployable assets from trucks: MG, AT, crates, fuel, etc

[*]airlifting cargo & vehicles (required for offshore island bases)

[*]team status dialog to enable joining groups

[*]field dressings concept

[*]ladders on small town missions, to change the normal CQB scenario from purely 2D ground based combat to 3D.

[*]minor features: CSS, artillery HUD, WP HUD, airlift HUD, HMD Heli HUD, mission HUD, laser designator HUD

[*]if scoreboard is visible, adds bonuses for non-combat roles (eg: transport, etc) and penalties for TK's, etc.

[*]menu system for: enemy spotting, common requests and squad command menus

[*]air-drops for crates & 4x4 jeeps.

A new update is due soon, with further changes in future. It will be ported to ArmA2 fairly close to release.

Hey Dr_Eyeball hi..

I am pretty sure that CyDoN speaks about maps like the ones that use many leagues like ESL,ArmA Liga,VBL etc.

They are very nice optiized maps perfect for fights between teams of 5-6-7 players.

I wonder all of those ppl who hate the idea of official PvP tournament maps (not public) have ever

played once one of these maps?

Give them a try.

[[aps]gnat 28]

I am pretty sure that CyDoN speaks about maps like the ones that use many leagues like ESL,ArmA Liga,VBL etc

.....

.....

.....

I wonder all of those ppl who hate the idea of official PvP tournament maps (not public) have ever

played once one of these maps?

Give them a try.

Well how about we bridge the "gap" people think there is and;

Post a link to download "My idea of a TRUE PvP mission that BIS should make Official"

Your example, what you think PvP really is .....

Because if we don't understand, BIS have no friggin chance do they ......

[dr_eyeball 16]

I am pretty sure that CyDoN speaks about maps like the ones that use many leagues like ESL,ArmA Liga,VBL etc.

After reviewing some posts, it doesn't seem like he is. At some of the PvP tournament sites I visited, the missions were identical in structure to Arma's very basic CTF & C&H game-mode missions. But he said these "had serious bugs" and were "bodge".

As Pulverizer said on previous page, see his opening post, which says:

A PvP mode that will introduce the gameplay of Battlefield2 with the mix of the realism of ArmA.

which sounds like the BF2 Conquest game-mode with some sort of enhancements. So it sounds closer to what I described.

@Gnat: Already did

[KorpeN 0]

ok here are the maps I am talking about

If you want download them and try them.

Its only 5MB

http://www.arma-liga.de/index.php?id=277

Also there are some very nice 3on3 maps at the bottom.

[CyDoN 0]

CyDoN, surely there must be one pvp mission for Arma that you like?

ESL maps are my favourite maps. Are the maps that i mean for competitive clan level PvP but here noone seems to know about, guess what? They are not official, they don't come with the game.

http://rapidshare.com/files/181791533/esl_mappack_v1.zip.html

http://rapidshare.de/files/41317823/esl_mappack_v1.zip.html

Yes the maps I like where those that Ptolemaios mentioned.

@Dr_Eyeball

I saw your maps and we even had them in our server but there were not any people willing to play them, and I think the reason is that the werent official otherwise they were great. Another thing is that those specfic maps you created where those for many ppl and with great organization (cannot be achived in public.

[paragraphic l 2]

CyDoN, surely there must be one pvp mission for Arma that you like?

ESL maps are my favourite maps. Are the maps that i mean for competitive clan level PvP but here noone seems to know about, guess what? They are not official, they don't come with the game.

Yes the maps I like where those that Ptolemaios mentioned.

@Dr_Eyeball

I saw your maps and we even had them in our server but there were not any people willing to play them, and I think the reason is that the werent official otherwise they were great. Another thing is that those specfic maps you created where those for many ppl and with great organization (cannot be achived in public.

@CyDoN: You like BIS to have ESL Maps included at release? If so explain what makes those missions good, maybe point to one exact mission and describe the good features.

If not go on and explain what you like to see done by BIS cause PvP is so versitile.

Dr_Eyeball made a good post, but is that what you have in mind aswell?

[CyDoN 0]

@CyDoN: You like BIS to have ESL Maps included at release? If so explain what makes those missions good, maybe point to one exact mission and describe the good features.

If not go on and explain what you like to see done by BIS cause PvP is so versitile.

Dr_Eyeball made a good post, but is that what you have in mind aswell?

They are fast intense, need few people about 5 to 8 to throw the fun. I don't say that BIS has to include third-party works. I say they need to see them and make something like that.

They are based on skill and tactics. The scripting is great they are small and they have no need of addons. They are balanced and they have great objective systems. They can be played from 5vs5 to 12vs12.

http://rapidshare.com/files/181791533/esl_mappack_v1.zip.html

http://rapidshare.de/files/41317823/esl_mappack_v1.zip.html

Here you can have a look.

There are great maps with my favourite (and most popular) being

B2T, Two Sides, Die Ahnoehe, West Sahrani

[dr_eyeball 16]

I had a quick look at "ESL 12v12 C&H TwoSides", "B2T" & AL version of "B2T".

Quote[/b] ]Structure:

- There are 1 or 2 flags to C&H

- Civilian arbitrator for competition matches

- There is TK & base rape protection

- Crates have limited basic weapons

In ESL version:

- mobile respawn truck

- Flag at base has an action to teleport you to the respawn truck.

- Vehicles: 1x Stryker ATGM, 2x Vulcan, 3x HMMWV MG, 1x truck

My opinion is that these are essentially the same as BIS's C&H missions, simply tidied up to make them suitable for competition plus having a large selection to choose from.

I suspect BIS has already prepared 10 variations (at different locations) based off their updated "C&H" game-mode template for Arma 2.

A few days work & it's done. So I wouldn't be concerned. The only part BIS need to focus on to match your missions is a few competition tweaks (arbitrator & base protection).

It seems you want "fast intense" small 30 minute missions for competition play, which is the opposite of what I want, being "slow & unpredictable" 2 hour missions with many tasks (but still with intense battles) on a large scale for public servers.

[KorpeN 0]

@Dr_Eyeball

I agree with you.Also I think that BIS have to release some unbugged maps cause in ArmA in every map you could find some bugs.I wish at the end we will be happy with ArmA2 maps either it is Coop or PvP.

[gnrnr 0]

I've noticed that various people seem to keep refering to missions as maps, at least my compehension of some posts reads that way.

@ptolemaios

When you mentioned maps in your last post did you mean bugs in the island map itself or bugs in the missions?

I only ask as I've encountered heaps of mission bugs, but no island ones with missions on any of the default BIS maps (at least none I've noticed).

I'm just trying to improve my understanding of what everyone here is saying.

Am I wrong or do some people refer to maps when they mean missions?  I'm sure i did it myself when I started playing Arma having come from games like Quake where it's not a mission but a map.

Regards

Gnrnr

[KorpeN 0]

I've noticed that various people seem to keep refering to missions as maps, at least my compehension of some posts reads that way.

@ptolemaios

When you mentioned maps in your last post did you mean bugs in the island map itself or bugs in the missions?

I only ask as I've encountered heaps of mission bugs, but no island ones with missions on any of the default BIS maps (at least none I've noticed).

I'm just trying to improve my understanding of what everyone here is saying.

Am I wrong or do some people refer to maps when they mean missions?  I'm sure i did it myself when I started playing Arma having come from games like Quake where it's not a mission but a map.

Regards

Gnrnr

Hi gnrnr

There is an official mission PvP called Sector Control.

There are 5 flags if I remember correctly that you have to control so you can gain points.

A bug I have noticed is that the opfor side cannot respawn correctly.

I mean you respawn,you hear noises but your screen is black.

I am very surprised that this bug never refered or fixed.

When I say map I mean mission.I know etimologicaly is not correct but I used to call them maps.

[gnrnr 0]

Yeah,

Was fun trying to find "Maps" for Arma when I first got it.  Had much better success searching for "Missions"  

Regards

Gnrnr

[KorpeN 0]

Yeah right

A little off-topic but the maps in the community refered as ''islands''.And missions as ''maps''.

What a mess eh?

[andersson 285]

Not really, maps are what you look at when you are playing a mission on an island

I agree that the support for missions wasnt the best for arma. I havent played any SP, MP or campaign fully yet because of quality.

I do believe in arma2 as I read in some interviews that they are making an effort getting it right this time. We have to remember that arma was a 1.5 bonus between OFP and, at that time, OFP2.

Still its sad that the missions arent updated.

[gnrnr 0]

I enjoyed the original Arma and the QG SP campains. I've played a couple of others that i thought were good. "White Wolf" from memory was OK, been a while since i played them though.

I'm trying (and largely failing) to learn how to create missions and the scritping needed for that. This is taking up much valuable actual game time. So far I've only ever released one mission, and it is really just tweaking of the WACO warefare mission, with some different units added.

[Michael_Wittman 0]

Looks to me that the pink elephant is still invisible for most of the people...c ´on guys....of course PvP can be fun but it did never take-off because this game in ment to be extremely moddable wich makes it piece of cake for hackers to ruin any efford to make it popular. Warfare was awesome when they first released it but since the game any-cheating protection is almost like using windows xp firewall as your actual firewall that kind of gameplay and the rest of PvP were all born death.

Many people have suffer the cheaters in too many games for too long. They are specially unaceptable on a game that can take so many hours to meet the goal.

Try this: play for 3 hours completely inmersed in the game...a bad arse match in wich your team almost lost but after a frantic efford had made a awesome comeback and is in the edge of victory...then some random KFC son of ·$%·&/ joins the game and starts spamming buildings, changing hand weapons for the 20mm guns....etc...

Taste that bitterness 20, 30, 50, 100 times!.

Yes of course...to even thinking about any try to relaunch the PvP gameply its imperative to get a proper-updated-state-of-the-art-anticheating.

[[aps]gnat 28]

Bunch of those sample missions require a heap of addons, hence I didnt test.

But the ECL maps look and feel very professional.

And those C&H are fairly typical of may I have played and enjoyed in ArmA, but the ECL ones seem a little more polished.

As for BIS making "bug free" missions, I'd go as far to say all missions have bugs, and how many times did many of our favorite non-BIS mission get revised during their releases, many times.

So BIS would have to be working REAL hard to get a Battle tested bug free C&H for the first realease ....

.... I guess similar to how Warefare got done

[4 IN 1 0]

If you think BF, CoD or Quake-style competition scene is about individuals fighting each others instead of teams, I'm afraid you're wrong.

Taking for example ETQW, playing as team is cornerstone of being effective.

That doesn't mean the 1vs1 part should be overlooked

clearly not, in fact i have seen teamworking many times in my time playing DoD that works very effectivily to a point that can take the hold map within mins, but 70% of time those teamworking effort is non-exist because most ppl only care about shooting the enemys, oh well

what BI have to do, is to creat PvP mission simple that WORKS in the first place, i think there should be enought example 3rd party mission out there to give BI ideas on how to make a pvp mission, the only thing is to make it as bug free as possible

[CyDoN 0]

If you think BF, CoD or Quake-style competition scene is about individuals fighting each others instead of teams, I'm afraid you're wrong.

Taking for example ETQW, playing as team is cornerstone of being effective.

That doesn't mean the 1vs1 part should be overlooked

clearly not, in fact i have seen teamworking many times in my time playing DoD that works very effectivily to a point that can take the hold map within mins, but 70% of time those teamworking effort is non-exist because most ppl only care about shooting the enemys, oh well

what BI have to do, is to creat PvP mission simple that WORKS in the first place, i think there should be enought example 3rd party mission out there to give BI ideas on how to make a pvp mission, the only thing is to make it as bug free as possible

Well you dont follow the conversation. We are talking about organized PvP for instace maps that can be played at matches but at the same time being enjoyable in public servers, without addons and anything else.

[-Total- 0]

Three words:

Advance And Secure

(aka BF-style play of taking objectives)

The template has been out since 2006 and it's easy as heck to use.

When a few teams at www.teamwarfare.com were trying to get and ArmA league/ladder going, I submitted the first three "missions" of AAS for TWL as soon as the template kit was released. I put them on my server and even put Player Vs Player in the server title. People didn't join.

The answer to "why not?" is simple. ArmA is a co-op haven. Large scale battles where you can organize a few and play with many (ie each player with AI).

AAS in ArmA takes for more teamwork and coordination than the avergae gamer is willing to put forth. It's incredibly difficult even with the layout being easy. While I was hoping it would have taken off, I haven't seen an AAS in a very long time and my missions that I created have been on DVD of miscellaneous backup files for the past 2 years.

I don't blame BIS for this. It's the nature of the majority of gamers out there who want (as mention before) a fast-paced run n gun. BF2'ers who bought ArmA said it was too slow and stopped playing it. You can't speed it up, otherwise it drops the realism that makes ArmA what it is - ArmA.

[4 IN 1 0]

Well you dont follow the conversation. We are talking about organized PvP for instace maps that can be played at matches but at the same time being enjoyable in public servers, without addons and anything else.

hum? use correct mission structure, choose correct location on map, place correct objects into to map, using correct scrpits, and above all creat a game that is as bug free as possible for the things above to work

isnt all these is needed to creat enjoyable mission(AKA mission that works)??

anyway i really dont think BI will creat many of these organized matches in the final release, they may be able to creat 10 to 20 of them, but any more will required a lots of time and man power which is unreasonable for business, also new ideas may comes up, new script may created, mission makers may still have to creat a lots of things themself