Which do you play more? Huge PVP MP battles or small coop missions?

[--DST-- Anth 10]

small pvp battles, cqb to honest but I voted for huge :)

[SASrecon 0]

well i like both :p

imo PVP is amazing in ARMA1 XR warfare and i can't wait for it to be ready for ARMA2.

I also like a bit of sahrani life (whatever category that would come under)

I would LOVE to play coop campaign with someone but i don't have the time and noone ever plays it. multiplayer is full of domination and evo which makes me angry right now :mad:

[Commando84 0]

I play huge pvp battles the most in Arma 1 atm since Im not home atm so it just some random internet play :P

If I was home with my friends It would have been more coop but still some huge pvp battles from time to time :)

The Xr server for Arma 1 rulez. Hope their Arma 2 server rules too! :)

Btw poll should have had a option with both.

[robs456 0]

If you're into PvP at all Charlie Foxtrot won't disappoint you.

I'd like to say that its strongest point is the teamwork though.

Personally, I just wonder what those who voted 'Coop missions with a small group of friends' would say if they took their small group of friends and joined Charlie Foxtrot.

'Fricken awesome!' is my guess.

[mad rabbit 0]

Perhaps this poll needs to differentiate between what people do play and what they'd like to play.

i.e. I'd prefer any PvP but have to settle for Co-op.

[hund 0]

I am really looking forward to the day whn you pvp gamers get your crap together and stop blaming us coop gamers for everything thats wrong with everything.

We are innocent! :D

[Redfield-77 10]

I like both but I have to laugh when people say that pvp is harder. And AI is to dumb.

The truth is, AI will teach you proper tactics better than human players. The AI cannot be reasoned with, it has no emotions, it will shoot you in the face from 600 yards with an AK all while your prone in the shadows in the woods. They shoot far better than human players.

PVP is a little more fun though :D

[mad rabbit 0]

@Hund:

It's not the CO-OP gamers fault at all! It's the PvP gamers who complain about the lack of PvP maps and don't do anything about it.

I somewhat fall into this category...if only we got payed to game...

The biggest problem I believe and based on the poll I started, is that the servers are dominated by CO-OP maps...regardless if the people playing want to play CO-OP or PvP.

http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?t=80103

'Supply-and-demand'?

This is why I asked if this poll is based on what people play more often, or want to play.

[galzohar 31]

AI can be tougher or easier than human players, it all depends on the scenario you give it. Usually though those scenarios require you to already have killed other AI, so you can say usually the AI is inferior ;) But yeah, you can't say (in an absolute way) who is better - humans or AI.

I wouldn't say coop teaches you proper tactics, though. They teach you anti-AI tactics, that's for sure. Whether those tactics are proper or not depend on how the mission was actually made - usually the result is rather weird tactics. Of course you can force yourself into using proper tactics and hope it works in the mission you're playing, and often it'll work, but it doesn't mean it was the best way to do things nor that the mission taught you that you need to use those tactics.

If I really liked COOP, rest assured you'd see me complaining about lack of good COOP maps as well, though I have to say for COOP it's not as big of a problem, considering making COOP missions is quite easier than making PvP missions.

[randir14 10]

Mostly co-op because those are the only things up. Although tonight I was on a really awesome PvP server.

[Arre 10]

Huge coop mission is teh' shit ;)

[Dead3yez 0]

I like to play PvP mostly(at the moment), simply because the big COOP missions seem to have a massive performance issue and are poorly organised. Small coops are also really good though as experienced in ArmA1, have yet to play some in arma2. I'd rather play single player than play Evo or Warfare on a random server. I've had some good times on Domination though before in Arma1.

[hund 0]

... considering making COOP missions is quite easier than making PvP missions.

The hell they are!

Making an adversarial mission is just slapping down two roughly equal forces. The hard part is trying to enforce some semblance of order and adding extra systems, which usually takes a bit of scripting.

Cooperative missions have the same need for scripting, but instead of just slapping in teams you actually have to make the AI do what you want them to do, and that takes time and effort.

So I'd say that you have it ass-backwards, but then again I have to disagree on everything :D

[galzohar 31]

I can make a playable coop mission in 5 minutes, but I can't make a playable PvP mission in 5 minutes. Of course both missions would be pretty dull, but at least the COOP one will not be totally boring while the PvP one will be unplayable.

For PvP you have to make sure 2 sides are having fun, for COOP you only have 1 side and can do whatever you want with the other side.

Sure making a very complex coop mission is harder than making a very simple PvP mission, but that doesn't really say much now, does it?

I think the sheer number of nice coop missions (too many for me to count) compared to the number of nice PvP missions (which I can count on 1-2 hands as long as you agree moving around some markers doesn't make it a different mission) speaks for itself.

Edited July 29, 2009 by galzohar

[hund 0]

If it speaks for itself, what does it say exactly?

The lack of PVP missions isn't because of complexity. Of that I am sure.

But yeah, if we are talking half-arsed missions, there isn't really much difference. And I could do either in 3 minutes because I am two minutes faster than you. :D Not much sense in talking about half-arsed missions either then, is there?

I will still stick to my guns and say that people don't make pvp missions because they are not interested in making pvp missions. And the only thing I have to back that assumption is my own attitude towards to topic. Why would I make a pvp mission when I don't really want to play pvp? So yes, the number do speak for themselves - they're just not saying what you're interpreting them to say.

I do enjoy a good pvp match at times, but for that I usually go to other games that were made specifically for that game mode. I think Project Reality is rather fun sometimes (even tho you get to run around even more than in arma) and lately I have been experimenting with the profoundly buggy Americas Army 3. But for arma I prefer coop.

Edited July 29, 2009 by Hund

[el_muerko 0]

i love large scale mayhem like you find on the OCUK, SES and Kellys Heroes COOP servers but i play small scale coop with between 4-10 people on out passworded server 2/3 times a week for several hours

[jeza 5415]

I prefer the large scale coop tbh, have had great times in well organised structured coops. never really enjoyed pvp, I agree with walker, although i like the human & ai the best, i did enjoy mods such as Sahrani Life. Either way ArmA2 online is a fantastic experiance, as Ofp and ArmA1 was.

[Binkowski 25]

I've always been a fan of Coop since OFP, PVP in Flashpoint was pretty good but, once ArmA1 came out I lost interest. Even more so with ArmA2. I'll just stick with Coop for now.

[FRidh 0]

I play large PvP battles more often however I prefer Coop. Same as above, I actually lost interest in PvP since ArmA, partly because of grass at long distance, and also since the type of players has changed

[CaptainBravo 0]

I like missions which are unique and usually they do not fit in one single category. Such as hunt missions where 2 steahlth competing teams of human players huting one human player while AI is hostile towards all of them!

[Flightster 10]

My clan usually runs 30player domination, with PvP (aas most of the time) on tuesday and thursday against anyone that joins (for training purposes).. Soon, we'll offer two 100 player servers (1 COOP, 1 PvP) :)

[TechnoTerrorist303 10]

I voted for huge PvP battles, basically because I'm creating a massive scale c&h game for PvP purposes and to vote for anything else would be daft :)

[R3MF 0]

need a poll option for both.

[galzohar 31]

A>B and B>A cannot be true at the same time.

[terox 316]

My favourite style of gameplay is

Platoon v platoon or larger 2 sided coop/pvp with AI under your control

Utilising air and armoured assets

Group respawn at most

fighting against each other to achieve a realistic objective in an organised and methodical manner

Each side working as one team following orders from their overall commander and trying to minimise casualties

Not a repetitive cycle of retaking a town or flag with at most small isolated groups of players working together as a team with no interest in how many times they have been killed or what other players on their side are up too.

The engine was designed for player controlled ai large scale battles using all arms and it's rarely used that way

One slight problem though, AI since OFP don't do as they are told. If you ask them to hold fire, whether they do or not is all down to how they feel

The developers could recode their fsm's to actually follow orders to the letter on a clientside machine and leave the server side AI just as they are, then the use of AI ingame would improve quite dramatically.

As it is right now, trying to approach a position with AI, unseen is nigh on impossible.

Edited October 5, 2009 by Terox