I'm really baffled by the way people are playing the online multiplayer game.

[cadmium77 16]

It's like all they can imagine for this game is to play it as BF2 Project Reality Mod.

FPS with a big commute. Spawn at an airbase and hope one of the clan members who hold exclusive air vehicle rights will be kind enough to ferry you on the long trip to the hot spot of the moment, then disembark and run around like scattered turkeys in the woods for a chaotic shootemup.

Really guys, this teaches you NOTHING about modern warfare. Frankly it's a waste of your time. And scholarship for modern military tactics aside it's ultimately only 1/100 of the fun you could be getting out of this game. The skirmishes you're having truly suck donkey balls.

This is a not BF2, Project Reality or whatever mod you're thinking of, and it's not Counter Strike. I know you had fun playing those but they're sucked dry; they're limited constructs that have been sucked dry of any value they might have had by repetition if nothing else. And judging by the weird fetish for unrealistic load outs there's a big contingent of players here who think they're playing Soldner. :(:(:(

So what is so different about Arma II?

Well it's not a FPS...it has a FPS element to it but that is its minor component.

IT'S A SIMULATOR.

It allows you to command fireteams, a TOW rocket launcher Hummer crew or a tank platoon or an infantry squad or a mechanized infantry squad or a whole damn company. Who knows? It could be a whole battalion maybe.

So why are we being spawned on some remote airbase, with no command structure, without even the most basic unit formations?

And why are we being spawned alone when we could be spawned with our own infantry platoon or Mechanized infantry platoon to command? Wouldn't that be cool?

Ya think?

Do we have to cook up our own little private single player scenarios to get this? Can't there be at least one or two servers with some really big kickass combined arms battles that just rock instead of playing helicopter commuter for hours on boring end?

I've posted this before but I'm a nag so I'll post this again, because after you get over saying "who does this dipshit think he is?" I'd like you to just use your imaginations and try to think of the huge potential of this simulator, this marvelous program that has fallen into our hands. I want us collectively to "think outside the box", the box of all the other relatively primitive games that have proceeded this one.

This is a game to be played on a grand scale, and there's no reason why 50 or 60 online players couldn't be in command of 12 AI squad members each. 50 times 12 is 600...imagine 500 to 600 soldiers fighting a battle for a city with human intelligence leading the very sufficient AI intelligence squad members.

God I'd love to see that kind of a firefight erupt online.

Why hasn't it.

Trust me, this is the way of the future for Arma II. If it doesn't happen this game is going to suffocate from the uncreative boredom of its users.

This is what is needed;

Learn the editor inside out.

Then read recent military analyses of contemporary operations and military manuals you find online. Construct authentic operation models and play them. You won't be disappointed; the AI in this game is one of the best around. Play the same scenario a dozen times and you'll have a different battle every time..

Use Dunnigan as you model;

http://www.paladin-press.com/product/1015/53

http://www.alanemrich.com/CSR_pages/Awards%20Pages/CSR1975.htm

A QUICK AND DIRTY GUIDE TO WAR, 4th Edition

The Tools for Understanding the Global War on Terror, Cyber War, Iraq, the Persian Gulf, China, Afghanistan, the Balkans, East Africa, Colombia, Mexico, and Other Hot Spots

by James F. Dunnigan and Austin Bay

The first three editions of A Quick and Dirty Guide to War not only provided essential tools for understanding wars and hot spots around the world, they delivered remarkably accurate projections on the outcomes of each conflict. War-game simulation specialists James F. Dunnigan and Austin Bay have revised their highly regarded analyses, bringing up to date not only the many conventional conflicts around the world today but the new battlegrounds that have emerged since the previous edition was published more than a decade ago – the Global War on Terror, counterinsurgency struggles around the world and the latest frontier of modern combat: cyber war.

This fourth edition takes up where the last edition left off and analyzes the monumental events that have occurred since 1996 – September 11, the toppling of Saddam Hussein and the ongoing wars in Afghanistan and Iraq – while guiding readers through dozens of other significant developments around the globe, including the tinderbox situation with Iran and oil flow through the Persian Gulf; the final disintegration of Yugoslavia; the struggle for regional influence between Brazil, Colombia and Hugo Chávez's Venezuela; Israel's attempts to deal with a fragmented Palestine Liberation Organization; China and India's growing influence in Asia and beyond; ongoing chaos and suffering on the Horn of Africa; Russia's struggle to reassert itself on the world stage; and much more.

Dunnigan and Bay present an enormous amount of information in a series of concise, insightful briefings coupled with their shrewd projections of potential outcomes, making A Quick and Dirty Guide to War a thought-provoking reference on the face of war in the 21st century.

James F. Dunnigan and Austin Bay are U.S. Army veterans, acclaimed military historians and analysts, and designers of war-game simulations. Dunnigan has been a lecturer to the U.S. State Department, CIA and U.S. Army War College. Bay writes a syndicated national security column and has appeared as a guest commentator on CNN, C-SPAN, Nightline and NPR.

http://www.alanemrich.com/CSR_pages/Awards%20Pages/CSR1975.htm

FireFight (1976)- Done under contract for the Infantry School. To be used for training Platoon Leaders and senior NCO's. Tactical level, units represented vehicles and fire teams. Contract allowed for commercial version, which became a best seller.

A tactical game of modern (late 1970's) mechanized combat, partly funded by the US Army as a training tool, to show the effects of the long range and lethality of modern weapons on the techniques and tactics of the modern battlefield.

Game components: 400 die cut counters, two 22" x34" geomorphic maps, rules booklet, briefing booklet.

BTW the briefing booklet for Firefight is one of the best essays on modern mechanized warfare ever written. A must have for any real wargamer.

Trust me; if we took this approach to the online game we could have some battles that would blow our collective socks off instead of the feeble minded skirmishing that's going on now...and we might even learn something about modern tactics, real tactics. It might even be educational..

Edited July 25, 2009 by Cadmium77

[Petko 10]

Whats the point of this post?

You are not really thinking to change the way thousands of players think and play with one forum post? I dont think you will even change one.

Instead of this, the game itself should be changed, to hardcode a better simulation, to help, control and motivate players to act as real military unit.

Remember that you can never, and you should never try to change the user of a product, instead redesign the product to work with the user. The user itself even if he/she is dumb or lame, its a predefined constant attribute that cant be changed.

[bigduksixx 15]

Cadmium77, Good post.

[mr.g-c 6]

The Problems and Questions you describe are fully related to the mission designer, the Server and last but not least the people you play with....

I can tell you about totally different experiences i had on Servers like "Tacticalgamer" with Arma1+ACE-Mod.

HERE is a old Video in good quality i made from a game on their servers: http://www.megaupload.com/?d=A327YPY0

Or look at the clans like GOL, Shacktac, 6ThSense, etc. They play very team-play focus wise, with proper formations, long briefing and planning phases and much more.

If you want to play Arma2 in such a way, it is advice able not to play on the usual public servers running Berzerk, Evolution and Domination, etc.

Those are just "fun-Missions" like i would call them, totally letting the teamplay possibilities of Arma(2) down.

I don't want to insult these missions here and i don't want to say that it wouldn't be possible to play (some of) them in such a realistic teamplay way, but they are neither specifically designed for that, nor are the majority of players "ready" or even "aware" of playing them in such a way on a public open server.

Edited July 25, 2009 by mr.g-c
Added link to Video

[cadmium77 16]

Whats the point of this post?

You are not really thinking to change the way thousands of players think and play with one forum post? I dont think you will even change one.

Instead of this, the game itself should be changed, to hardcode a better simulation, to help, control and motivate players to act as real military unit.

Remember that you can never, and you should never try to change the user of a product, instead redesign the product to work with the user. The user itself even if he/she is dumb or lame, its a predefined constant attribute that cant be changed.

Wrong.

The game is superb, it's ready to be played on a grand scale.

And why should we have to "form units" when we could be spawned with units, with a fireteam, a squad, a platoon or even a company already attached to us just like our gun or ammo load out or our night vision goggles are spawned with us?

The failure is the lack of vision of the users.

It's like watching a mentally retarded child digging in the sandbox with a Hewlett Packard 41CV as his sand shovel...

Edited July 25, 2009 by Cadmium77

[Petko 10]

Wrong.

The game is superb, it's ready to be played on a grand scale.

The failure is the lack of vision of the users.

It's like watching a mentally retarded child digging in the sandbox with a Hewlett Packard 41CV as his sand shovel...

Well, i hear that all the time...

I will be here on the forums watching you, while you are giving the users vision and fixing them up. Good luck and have fun.

[randir14 10]

I thought this was already possible with Warfare mode. I played it in the demo and you could command anything as long as your leader built the right building for it. For some reason I haven't seen any Warfare servers in retail though.

I think the "realism" servers are pretty fun, even if I'm limited to being a grunt. I had a nice experience earlier where helicopter pilots would pick us up, A-10s would attack lased targets, drivers in tanks and APCs would rescue us if we were under heavy fire, etc.

[LJF 0]

Yeah, pretty much agree with what you're saying there, though I'm not sure about AI, in my opinion AI is just not good enough, I'd prefer to have only Human players.

Gametypes are boring to me, I want to do some realistic battles/firefights, scenarios and that sort of thing.

I'm just waiting for some Gulf War mods/addons, to me that would be much more appealing than Europe.

[Bad Pilot 0]

Food for thought :).

[no use for a name 0]

I play on a co-op server and the AI is a hell of a challenge. And with the Ambient Combat Module, every time we play it's something different...sometimes we get thru a mission with minimal losses, and sometimes we get our asses handed to us. I don't think people give the co-op (or the AI) enough credit, and just assume that PvP or Warfare is the best way. I myself can't play the game like that...too repetitive after only an hour or so (spawn, run around, kill/be killed, spawn, etc.)

If you can find/make a good co-op mission, it's some of the best fun you can have IMO

[thr0tt 12]

Depends on what server you play on and if you are able to get like minded folk to join in with you. Most of the time I manage to get a squad together or at least have 2 or 3 of us working together ignoring the remaining cannon fodder that blindly runs at objectives.

Only guaranteed way to get some sort of tactics together however is to join a private server with like minded folk.

[cadmium77 16]

And another thing; BI, fix the artillery. It's indicative of how difficult it is to master that very few of the online games employ it. You shouldn't have to have a masters degree in computer science to employ radio calls for artillery. Either post a proper in depth tutorial for artillery or fix it with a new simplified interface so that a chimp could set it up and run it.

And if anybody knows of a good server or clan I could join that'll give me the 500+ man tactically realistic battles I long for please post the links here or PM it to me. I'm not an egomaniac and fit well within a command structure as long as it's reasonable.

Edited July 25, 2009 by Cadmium77

[Bellum 10]

Tacticalgamer.com

If you're tired and fed up with Domination and Evolution type game play I highly suggest playing there. I have been playing there for close to a year and it's exactly the type of game play and experience you describe. They have a Coop and a TvT server.

During the day (in the US) they may be playing Domination, but when they are, they are playing tactically. Usually in the afternoon and evening time is when they start up the squad/platoon/company based Coop missions.

Edited July 25, 2009 by Bellum

[bigduksixx 15]

The Problems and Questions you describe are fully related to the mission designer, the Server and last but not least the people you play with....

Well, not entirely. I was on on a berzerk server the other day in the M1 TC seat. I told the driver not to enter the town due to the lack of infantry support. Within in a minute someone stuck a mine on us. Later, in another tank, I told the driver not to drive down a road or we would get taken out by a lurking T-90. Still later, I asked a heli pilot not to go into a hot LZ - boom.

Seems like an attitude problem to me.

[walker 0]

Hi all

Still a few people who have not grown out of Rambo-Cannon-Fodder (RCF) mode. The negative training of games like COD is amaizing.

RCF seems to be very persistant in a few players, some kind of lack of immunity to being brain washed I think.

I think more of the clans need to step up to the plate and run training classes. When Zeus gets the new server running they hope to be running such classes. I know some of the other clan servers are running training classes already.

Also people need to read the manuals.

Kind Regards walker

Edited July 25, 2009 by walker

[BlackLord 0]

Yeah, I agree people on public servers are pretty much clueless and do really annoying stupid stuff but you guys are going to join clans and communities who play the game the way you like it so there's no reason to rant about public servers. I mean if you managed to find a community you enjoy playing with then why do you care about how others play? Just get over it.

[EricM 0]

It's a rather patronizing and condescending thread and most of those issues are mission or server related anyway (domination/evolution/public server)

With all due respect, to think that Arma is all about "realism" or "learning war" is being short sighted. Arma is a sandbox game platform based on freedom of movement and acts. It allows you to play hardcore military stuff if that's what you're into, or go BF2/Zombies/Starwars/Hunting/farming/sightseeing/Biking/Roleplaying. It's up to you and your friends.

If you don't like the way other people have fun, change of server. When they will be bored of BF2 gameplay, they will change. Until then, let the kids experience by themselves...

There are enough games that tell you how to play, there's no need to tell other people how they should enjoy this one.

[richardg 10]

I agree with everything the original poster said.

I've given up trying to find the kind of real battles I'm interested in. I use the editor, and the High Command module to set up company sized battles.

[--DST-- Anth 10]

Dont agree at all with anything you just said the game is what you want it to be modded or not its how you want to play it not how it should be played.

If I want to run and gun I can and will, ofp the game made before this and bf2 was a run and gun game, played by many me included. If I want to run and gun like I did in that I will in this.

Im also looking for people who have the skill to mod the game like ofp any one doing this please contact me.

[BeerHunter 0]

Being more of a simulator than a run of the mill FPS IMO the emphasis is on the PLAYER to role play rather than run n gun.

For example , climb into a Boeing 747 simulator and you have 2 options.

Role play and treat it as a simulation by going through the pre flight check list , following ground control directions , mix fuel , set flaps etc. etc. then take off and follow ATC instructions.

Simply play,treat it as a game and just hop in , fire it up take off and do a high speed low altitude pass over a densely populated area.

Which one will get you certified? Which one is the "simulation"?

It's the players that make the type of game YOU want to play. Tactical Gamer for example insist on realism and expect you to follow orders and try to stay alive.

Others servers treat it as a glorified version of BF2.

You aren't going to change the years of BF2/CoD style of game play carried over by so many to ArmA. YOU are going to have to find the type of gaming environment/server that suits you and you wont find it very often by simply "pubing".You'll have to dig a bit.

[SnR 1]

Join a Team

Simple;)

[igeighty 2]

Join a Team

Simple;)

I have to agree 100% with SnR, As this will be a life changing experience.

@Cadmium,

I understand where you are coming from but you do have to realise that there is a 'hard core' element who do play this game. It may be tricky finding them but when you do, make friends there and you will have the type of experience you are after.

There are public servers - serious public servers - and closed clan servers, the latter usually being where the 'realism' is at, and the former being where the 'casual' gamers go for a giggle.

When people say to you that 'it is the players you play with that make the game', this is one of the home truths. Hunt down a group that you like to play with. One that plays in your style and everyone is a winner.

In Australia their are several serious groups of gamers, XDF, AEF, ZSU and many more who play with a large amount of 'preperation and realism' I am not familiar with the rest of the world, as i rarely venture beyond Australia for a game due to high pings. But i am told that they do exist :) Each with their own groups and communities.

Arma2 is in its infancy and a lot of people are just finding their way into the series and recently joining the forums. And as such there is not much organization on 'public' servers. This will certainly change over time, it was the same with arma1. As time hoes by, people develope the skills and friendships that keep them coming back again and again.

You see many posts like yours stating how people 'should play' but in reality people play how they want to play. And no amount of 'suggestive posts and tutorials' can change that. You will find that most of the newer people that play dont read the forums all day and night. And most 'serious gamers' just play the game. Then again some do both :)

I have made more online buddies through bohemias games than any other series. sometimes we play 'super serious' and sometimes just for ''shits and giggles' thats the beauty of this fine series.

Seek the teamworking clans and youll be rewarded :) Good luck with it. I hope you enjoy it like you want it to be enjoyed. But dont forget to have a laugh. After all its only a game.

(a bloody good game)

regards./

[hannibal636 11]

i hope operation flashpoint 2 inst going to be like this same boring nonsense..

Battlefield Bad Company 2 and Battlefield 3 FTW !!!!!

[-DirTyDeeDs--Ziggy- 0]

It's like watching a mentally retarded child digging in the sandbox with a Hewlett Packard 41CV as his sand shovel...

nerd alert ! :j:

wtf is a 41CV?

we cant laugh at your analogies if we cant understand them. :confused:

[Redfield-77 10]

Not picking on you Cad but I prefer to just control 1 unit in A2. When I want to control lots of Units I just go play Company of Heroes.