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

[nkenny 1051]

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.

Yes, and yes. I've been thinking the same thing(s).

Personally I prefer small short and sharp missions. I like missions that have realistic objectives, that allow you to command small elements of no more than 6 or so soldiers. (the maximum I'm comfortable with)

Unfortunately Arma2 has changed commanding infantry quite a bit since Arma1 or even Operation Flashpoint. Whereas the former games had merely cumbersome interface, this latest one marries cumbersome interface with non-responsive troops. I'm not sure if this is 'micro-AI' interfering with my troops, but the AI has time and time again proven utterly incapable of engaging targets with any sense.

-K

[galzohar 31]

I still prefer no AI whatsoever, team vs team mission that doesn't last too long (so that it tests your combat and teamwork capabilities rather than your level of patience/impatience). The main problem with this, though, is the lack of human players willing to play such missions. I think the most I have ever seen on Zeus is 20, which is great, but not nearly as much as would be needed to play a lot of missions the way they were meant to be played, not to mention the missions that could be made if we knew we'd have more players.

[nkenny 1051]

Which leaves me much with a preference such as galzohar describes.

I'd love to see more games run using a "last man standing" or "Round based" (no respawn) type games.

Small, but sharp conflict zones. Using as highly thematic locations as possible.

One or two objectives. Or just a single objective, but with bonuses for completing secondary goals.

Assymetric Forces. None of this "all is equal" nonsense.

15-25 minute playtime for a map. 3-6 minutes per life.

- K

To date the most fun game of Arma2 I've played was a DM game set in a CQB environment. :p Why? Because making kills or surviving was CONSEQUENTIAL to the outcome (my personal score) Anyone who things Deathmatch is just a random frag-fest needs to open his eyes.

[sbsmac 0]

nkenny - check out TomAnger's Siege maps - short rounds (~10 minutes), no respawn. Sounds like the kind of thing you woudl like. http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?t=87786

[Arrowhead 0]

PvP hands down. I get the most satisfaction going against human opponents always. My favorite is CTI though when it's not bugged out. Sure there are AI involved, but many of them are led and managed by human players which is great. I get the greatest feeling of being on a living breathing battlefield when playing CTI maps. Pretty much all that Arma has to offer applies in CTI. It's the way to play. :cool:

[Rautatie 10]

I'd love to play small co-op missions, but I can't find any ;<

And I'd love to play huge PvP battles too, but none of them really is ''huge'', and the only one that is huge (BerZerk), sucks because the players just play their own deathmatch, and there is no co-ordination or teamwork.

EDIT: Oops, sorry for lifting this thread up, I accidentally thought that the last post was made on October 20th, not 10th..

[BLSmith2112 0]

Hmm... Actual thinking human players opposed to brainless bots... thats a hard one.

[gho-t 10]

PVP FTW

coop can be fun too.

hey guys can someone tell me the name of this mission? I played this PVP mission on kellys heroes server awhile ago. It was PVP and the blufor spawned on top of a mountain and at the bottom was a lighthouse. and one of the objectives was to destroy a bridge. anyone got the name of this mission?