A.C.E. Advanced Combat Environment Mod 2

[Commando84 0]

I vote for modular so mission designers can run a init.sqs and choose wich features in Ace mod to disable.

I mean the whole mod could be in one pack but you could choose in mission editing wich parts you like to keep and wich to deactivate :)

I mean in that way everyone should be happy, the uber realism guys get their cake and the happy sandbox players get their piece of the cake.

[Alex72 1]

ace mod is cool but take out the heavy breathing you run 5 meters and you are laying on the ground getting air.That was the time i hated ACE mod so please take that out.

Simply not true. How come i can run all the time? Pack wisely and dont SPRINT so damn much. This isnt BF2 or CoD.

I pack the limit (for being able to move a lot and still have a lot of gear) a maximum of 15Kg vest and 15Kg backpack. Thats 30Kg (60-ish pounds i think). This is a lot of weight but if you run without sprinting plus stopping smartly to catch your breath you can basically run all the time (SHIFT run). Thats how it feels for me anyway. Sprinting i leave for the moment i need it, and with this weight i know i can at least sprint to get behind cover. I love how its done in ACE. Makes it feel real. And if you play with it for a while you get into it and youll know the limit for all things modded in ACE.

Cant wait for ACE2!

Alex

[Orton 0]

it doesnot have anything to do with that it is BF2 or CoD it has to do that sometimes you need to run. And even when i having only a m107 on my back it starting to breathing heavily.And i dont think a m107 is more then 70kg.

[CarlGustaffa 4]

Correct, a sniper team can also be lightly equipped I guess :D

Seriously though, you don't run much with an M107. Add a few magazines and some smoke and you don't even job much with it. As a long range sniper you shouldn't end up in situations where you have to run much. Don't know what kind of player you are, but I see far too many running around with M107 using it as an assault rifle. These calibers are heavily misused if allowed. Maybe their ammo should take up two slots?

Just for reference and reminder...

Edited June 12, 2009 by CarlGustaffa

[charliereddog 9]

I completely agree. Disabling such significant features should not be possible with a simple mission command. It has the potential to break too many public servers out there that wants the 'cheap play mode'. If such modes becomes popular (and they will), these servers might become populated with fast paced players who will never learn to play properly, leaving the deserted servers for the rest of us. I'd rather play with a fast player who is forced to think, than play alone.

IMO you're way out of line there. If a mission maker wants a mission to utilise less functionality, or more, and the server host/owner wants to use that mission, then it's down to you to choose somewhere else to go, not force someone to use something they don't like.

Popularity is a bitch ain't it.

Giving people an easy to use option to configure a mission to their liking is excellent. Not doing so would be like BIS saying "sorry, there is now no ability to mod or edit our games at all, because we want you to play it vanilla!"

Edited June 12, 2009 by Charliereddog

[CarlGustaffa 4]

I disagree. The 'take it or leave it' mentality seems to work good for Project Reality mod. Why shouldn't it here, in a default game that is more realism oriented in the first place anyway? The players who really can't live with realism in a realism based game/mod, should leave and start play COD instead of making it a bad experience for the rest of us that enjoys the realism aspect.

Too much freedom comes at a price. We saw that with plenty of game modes in Arma1 already.

It's like, "we want the rucksacks so that we can carry almost unlimited amounts of ammunition, but we don't want to be slowed down by a weight and stamina system". Sorry, but it just doesn't make any sense to me to allow this...

[Alex72 1]

but then again most things in ACE makes you slower. Sight adjustement = who needs it when you just run'n'gun? Injurys that needs tending to - not for a run'n'gunner that dont want to experience realism and either want to die or carry on. Stamina, weight etc etc. Why would one want ACE if run'n'gun is preffered? Some weapons? Vehicles? Units? Those can be aquired from other mods usually and in download time etc its the same.

Im not against modular i guess - just dont see why run'n'gunners start messing around everywhere these days asking for simpler/faster gaming. Why not leave to CoD and BF2 and those games where everything is set to run'n'gun from scratch? No bitching needed so to speak.

And empty servers... Most serious players play in teams - locked servers etc, and the gameplay and mood there is fucking awesome. But then again - if your a run'n'gunner around these parts of the FPS world i guess youll be left bitching about a lot and often. My tips: Get your shit together and join a team. Get to play some serious teamwork with a great bunch of people and you will never go back. Run'n'gun is a quick dirty fix while proper teamwork in ARMA is a cure for life. ;)

Alex

[afp 1]

All great (and latest) games are modable. Why? Because the developpers let configurability in the hand of players and there is where the progress comes from. Most of the software out there is configurable, people have different preferences.

Stop thinking that a game should be played your way, in the end the big number of players will find the best way to play it, somewhere in the middle of the scale. The lack of configurability leaded to a big number of "NO ACE" or "ACE->BAN" servers in ArmA.

What if being possible to play ArmA in "COD style", a big number of players will migrate from COD and Battlefield to ArmA, thus making ArmA servers more populated?

There are many reasons that a player may prefere both types of gameplay, including lack of time, where you may want to play half hour of shooting and not 4 hours of RPG...

[CarlGustaffa 4]

@Alex[Dev]72: I'm confused. Was your reply directed at me? If so I'm not sure I understand how I'm a run'n'gun fan based on what I've written earlier...

I'm in a 'clan' (well, group of friends with a clan tag, but that's about it). We have one weeknight of playtime, the rest of the time I'm kind of lost out in the public servers. Our own servers 'public style mission' Dominatrix doesn't seem to attract that many due to not being free enough... Most other clans I've checked out either:

* Don't allow a player to be part of multiple clans.

* Play only/mostly without respawn, which is too hardcore for me.

* Participates in competitive 'clan wars'.

* Not oriented to coop only. I'm too old and slow against teenagers :p

* Often way too fanatic about heavy equipment. I'm more of an infantry guy.

Bascially, I haven't yet found a clan that suits me very well.

@afp:

The "NO ACE" or "ACE" was perfect. I could join any ACE server knowing that the rules would be the same. I don't have to find out half an our later that these guys are playing ACE without the fun stuff, and try to memorize the server.

Feel free to play COD style on the missions that support it. Personally I'd like so see these missions a little less popular. Also I wouldn't want that kind of gameplay into ACE whose taks is to make things more realistic.

I completly agree with Alex[Dev]72 on this point. If all these players wants is new weapons and hardware, use different addons instead.

Although I'm a big fan of Domination style using ACE, the freedom of Domination ruined the gameplay on public servers. Maybe it should have been possible to setup Domination in this fashion (setting all those parameters manually and pbo'ing a new mission out of it), but it shouldn't have done it by default, imho. I won't guarantee that it would have helped, maybe the players would have run off for Evolution again, I don't really know...

[sickboy 13]

I think it's clear that everyone has his opinion about how the game should be played and how ACE should be played, what freedoms users, missionmakers and server owners should have...

Afp and Gustaffa put's some good points forward in regard to why and how :)

I think choice is very good, especially these days, but as it seems, such choices might actually have bad influence on other parties of the Community :)

We will certainly take these things into consideration. Leaning towards an idea by kju; visualize the active systems and settings, so that you can either see them before joining the server, or just after joining.

In any case, the focus is on "CORE" which are all our systems. Models/Texture/Sound replacements and additions ("EXTRAS"), is a secondary.

Edited June 13, 2009 by Sickboy

[Hell_Toupee 0]

You can't force people to play one type of gameplay, best thing about ARMA is its variation. Better to have a varied community than the nearly dead one arma1 was.

Some of us like all games from unrealistic UT/Quake types to the hardcore realistic DCS Blackshark/Steelbeasts.

Modular approach using logics to enable features should allow mod to be used without breaking all the old missions like ACE for arma1 tended to do.

[CarlGustaffa 4]

If this new flesh from UT/Quake/BF/COD/Whatever is allowed to play like they're used to, they will. It adds nothing but chaos and disorder to the battlefield and is likely to make public games worse than they were in Arma1.

@Sickboy: Visualizing might improve things. But I see a potential problem. When someone sets up a server with 'loonitoon settings' and someone more professional joins, he could be mocking them ruining their day. This kind of "I'm better than you" mentality was also a problem even on TG: If i.e. someone had started a game with respawn, others could come in and mock them and force a restart with a hardcore norespawn game. It could have been a one time thing, I don't know. But I think now it might increase?

However, I will try to keep my mouth shut until I see what kind of options will actually be possible to turn on and off. I.e. I didn't really want the disposable system used in my mission since it interfered with my own single shot solution. But I was able to find some sort of compromise that appeared to work ok.

[jump artist 0]

You know the Stamina system in the ACE mod, I think was a real leep forward, however it may have IMHO leaped right off the cliff. I found myself playign the ACE mod less and less as an infantry troop simply because I couldnt run a100 ft with out passing out if I had any kind of AT weapon.

Now I have had the pleasure (or misfortune) to have to lug around a heavy weapon in RL a few times. And I never came close to passing out. The thing I couldnt do was keep up. Is it possible to, on top of making aim worse after running, make the player run slower based on weight? This I think would be more realistic and a bit less frustrating to play ACE.

[charliereddog 9]

Sorry Carl, you want "Realism", but then play with respawn because not doing so is too "hardcore" for you?

That comment just renders your arguments in my eyes entirely fucking useless.

I really don't understand what your problem with modularity and flexibility is. You seem to think you have the right to dictate how EVERYONE plays and make missions.

[*tcf*jackal 10]

I think due to limitations with the ArmA engine, making a player run slower based on load out (or at all in fact)is not actually possible, sadly. Maybe A2 is different though?

[cross 1]

You know the Stamina system in the ACE mod, I think was a real leep forward, however it may have IMHO leaped right off the cliff. I found myself playign the ACE mod less and less as an infantry troop simply because I couldnt run a100 ft with out passing out if I had any kind of AT weapon.

Now I have had the pleasure (or misfortune) to have to lug around a heavy weapon in RL a few times. And I never came close to passing out. The thing I couldnt do was keep up. Is it possible to, on top of making aim worse after running, make the player run slower based on weight? This I think would be more realistic and a bit less frustrating to play ACE.

IIRC it was not a choice...they were forced to do it like that to force you to slow down...game-design-restriction.

Well you know when you'll pass out so you only need to stop and wait to catch your breath or not to sprint = cant keep up ;)

Games are as realistic as you want them to be...

[twan 0]

Hey guys!

I simply LOVED the WGL mod for OFP, and I wanted to try ACE for ArmA because I am sure it would be more great top quality realistic work, but my computer can't handle it, so I have not tried ACE yet.

I have a question: People are saying that the armor combat in ArmA 2 is not very good, what are you guys doing to improve it with the ACE 2 mod for ArmA 2? Are you guys implementing things such as penetration, proper shell ballistics, different parts of vehicles getting damaged (catastrophic explosion, gun stops working, individual crew members injured/killed, getting tracked etc...)? What about the ammo types besides just generic HEAT and SABOT? What about individual crew stations?

I would be very interested to hear what your plans are for armor combat with the ACE 2 mod for ArmA 2.

Oh my God, mods like this make me just want to go out and buy my new PC RIGHT NOW!!! Gonna be a little bit before I can try this awesome mod unfortunately, hopefully it will be ready by the time I can :)

Keep up the great work!

Edited June 15, 2009 by Twan

[CarlGustaffa 4]

@Charliereddog: You need to swear to put your point out? :raisebrow:

I play hardcore missions once in a while. And I enjoy it usually. But these are rarely missions, usually only some 'wipe out' objectives lasting 20 minutes pluss planning. It's usually over before you get started. You don't get to know the guys in your same squad. When the next mission starts it's something completely different and the same deal again with new people etc. That's the part I don't like about hard core.

With respawn missions you can do stuff that can take many hours to do. You get to know the mission and the people you 'work with'. Try a 52 hour single Domination mission (not even to its end). Now, obviously the respawn mechanics in the mission is bad since it have no repercussions whatsoever of being stupid, but you obviously couldn't have this in seagull mode? Plz note that the version was heavily toned down in difficulty, so surviving would actually be possible and feel realistic when played with nothing but infantry squads. I changed the respawn to two minutes so that nonserious players would quickly leave, and my own folks hated me for it. I wanted 20 minutes ;)

Why can't there be anything between norespawn and instarespawn? Why so binary? I want being killed *suck*. But I also want long games, and that warrants respawn to remain attractive. Nobody wants sitting around as seagull for several hours waiting for the game to end.

I'm not dictating anything. I'm strongly suggesting why such a highly flexible system would fail, and I've tried presenting good argumentation as of why. I'm sorry if you can't see it, but I don't see how 'playing with respawn' makes all of that "fucking useless" :(

[An Fiach 10]

I am of the opinion that modularity is good. It benefits a greater portion of the community while making updates actually less work for the mod makers and has the potential for helping to grow the community by making game types available that will appeal to a wider audience. Once you get your hooks into them, then you convert them to your style of play through peer pressure and influence and by showing them how enjoyable the 'hardcore' style of play can be.

Personally I will likely frequent the ACE pure servers but sometimes you just don't have enough time and want to toss some lead at somebody. You could then play a server that has most of the realism but then maybe a few things aren't present in order to keep a faster pace.

Honestly I see that any argument against modularity from anyone other than the people producing it is just a matter of wanting to deny features that you love from people that do not subscribe to your style of play.

[sickboy 13]

As promised and mentioned earlier, the CBA Mod has been officially announced: http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?t=74958

ACE Mod's participation, is one of the many efforts towards better compatibility and supporting the community.

[bravo 6 0]

are you combining 2 mods into 1?

[sickboy 13]

are you combining 2 mods into 1?

Not exactly. ACE Mod participates in a cooperation with others, to create and use a set of common base addons and conventions.

ACE Mod will exist out of CBA, ACE and ACEX (eXtras). More info can be found in previous pages, examples:

http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?p=1304379#post1304379

http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?p=1304504#post1304504

[no use for a name 0]

I agree that Ace2 should be modular. There's a lot of things in ACE that I love; but some that I don't. Also, the server I play on would have gladly used ACE, but we didn't want to use all the features cause they interfered with some of our gameplay, so they left it off

Modular = win IMO

Edited June 19, 2009 by No Use For A Name

[DrBobcat 0]

I too hope that ACE2 will be modular. Most of the features in the original ACE mod were quite useful, but having them on all the time interfered with the flow of a mission or simply annoyed me (weather & injury systems especially). I can only hope that the end user will have more choices in the future.

- dRb

[OrLoK 20]

Hello all

Its probably been covered already, but, why not make Ace as ONE package and have an in game screen allowing the Server Admin to turn on/off the features he/she wants?

That way only there's only one mod to download, which will save on confusion.

And adding a Selection screen for SP would make it perfect.

I assume this has already been thought of, but to me downloading ACE mini packs seems a little redundant to me.

Critique and flame away if i'm being daft.

rgds

LoK