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

[BeerHunter 0]

-Ziggy-;1379953']nerd alert ! :j:

wtf is a 41CV?

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

It's a bloody calculator...wth does that have to do with digging in a sandbox????:confused:

---------- Post added at 04:19 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:15 PM ----------

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

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

Bejeezus if you wanted to play things like that why did you get ArmA2?? It says right on the BOX that its the "ULTIMATE MILITARY SIMULATOR"

Sounds like you're looking for fast action rack up the kills run n gun which isn't what ArmA is about.

Some of have or are serving and kinda enjoy the realistic approach to planning and executing an attack vs pick the biggest gun and charge in cause you can respawn in a few seconds.

[cadmium77 16]

It's a bloody calculator...wth does that have to do with digging in a sandbox????:confused:

---------- Post added at 04:19 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:15 PM ----------

Bejeezus if you wanted to play things like that why did you get ArmA2?? It says right on the BOX that its the "ULTIMATE MILITARY SIMULATOR"

Sounds like you're looking for fast action rack up the kills run n gun which isn't what ArmA is about.

Some of have or are serving and kinda enjoy the realistic approach to planning and executing an attack vs pick the biggest gun and charge in cause you can respawn in a few seconds.

Exactly my point. the HP 41CV was more than just a calculator...it was a hand held computer...the first real computer commercially available. It was so powerful they brought a dozen of them on every early Space Shuttle mission as navigational computer for back up to the main computers...

http://www.thimet.de/CalcCollection/Calculators/HP-41/HP-41CV-M.JPG

I woke up thinking about this thread and really those of you who say I'm an idiot for asking the community to grow up and learn and see the potential of this incredible piece of software may be right. Maybe I should have just capitulated and bought Black Shark DCS and Steel Beasts Pro PE.

But I had to say it; I had to tell you what you were missing by playing like retards in their poo filled sandbox using a high end programmable calculator as a sand shovel. That is what you're doing when you insist on using this game as BF2 or COD or any other of those other worthless passtimes. Oh yeah and I downloaded the demo for Company of Heroes. It's garbage. Total waste of time for anyone over the age of 12.

You COD fanbois could have a gorgeous 10/10 woman laid out on a bed for you waiting for you to make love to her and instead of ravishing her, you'd take a magic marker and play tic tack toe on her naked skin for hours instead.

Look, I'm not a military expert but I've read enough to know what modern weapons systems should do and how they should be combined.

Let's look at Steel Beasts Pro PE (I only I'd known what the players of Arma II would be like I'd have spent $125 on it instead of $69 with tax on this). It's actually got a huge contingent of REAL TANKERS playing so they want to really play the game.

This doesn't mean driving an M1A into the middle of a narrow street with no infantry support to get wasted immediately. It means advancing on concealed enemies with powerful long range weapons behind a wall of artillery smoke.

THAT'S RIGHT...YOU ADVANCE BEHIND SMOKE, ARTILLERY SMOKE

Is this boring and tedious.

NO IT'S AMAZING...IT'S AWESOME..YOU WILL RIDE THE THUNDER.

This is what gets me about the BF2 COD CS bois...they don't even know what they're missing.

Let's look at what we're missing. A massive tank assault over open fields with smoke barrages called in from artillery;

MjdDHh5VCWs

And look at the range they're fighting at; it's measured in miles not 100 yards...that is how armour is supposed to be used...that's what it's for.

So why should Arma II be expected to to this? Because it can do it better...the graphics are better, the potential to mix A10s and Froggers and Hinds and Black Shark helicopters into the mix are there. And the infantry is way better in Arma II.

Imagine that massive tank assault with hundreds of detailed footsoldiers thrown into the mix.

Or even take large amounts of armour out of the mix and indulge yourselves in some MOUT...so go into a city with rifle squads backed up by LAVs...imagine the kind of firefights you could have with a dozen platoons fighting for a city inch by inch using proper MOUT tactics...

Now do it at night and wallow in the delicious confusion of fear and tracer bullets and mistaken identities and friendly fire f**kups...

The sound of the guns would be awesome. The action would be really exciting.

Edited July 25, 2009 by Cadmium77

[Redfield-77 10]

I still dont understand the point of your post. You are saying all this is possible in Arma 2 and I agree, so what is the problem?

Are you asking for somone to make a mission like this for you?

Are you asking for maybe a warfare type PVP where you control multiple units against another players multiple units?

I dont really get what you are asking for sorry.

[bogdanm 0]

Cadmium77, I completely agree with both this post and the original one. I’d like to see also people playing the game in a more tactical way on public servers, but you can’t just dictate other players how to play the game or you will get mean replies. I play online once or twice a week when I have some free time, generally when I’m bored, just to smile when I see how careless some players act. Like many users already said, if you want to play the game in a tactical way, either join a clan or do like me and just throw some units in the editor, at least the AI doesn’t ignore orders(usually).

A suggestion to clans/clan members. You could give live demonstrations on public servers… I’m pretty sure the average player will either be impressed by the effectiveness of tactical gameplay and try to do the same or get upset because their “well thought†tactics don’t work and never join a server again. Either way, it's a win-win situation.

And about the video you posted with the tank battle, like you said, the sim is played by many actual tankers. If ARMA players would be soldiers, you'd get the game experience you want, but they're not so get used to it. :)

Edited July 25, 2009 by BogdanM

[cadmium77 16]

Cadmium77, I completely agree with both this post and the original one. I’d like to see also people playing the game in a more tactical way on public servers, but you can’t just dictate other players how to play the game or you will get mean replies. I play online once or twice a week when I have some free time, generally when I’m bored, just to smile when I see how careless some players act. Like many users already said, if you want to play the game in a tactical way, either join a clan or do like me and just throw some units in the editor, at least the AI doesn’t ignore orders(usually).

A suggestion to clans/clan members. You could give live demonstrations on public servers… I’m pretty sure the average player will either be impressed by the effectiveness of tactical gameplay and try to do the same or get upset because their “well thought†tactics don’t work and never join a server again. Either way, it's a win-win situation.

And about the video you posted with the tank battle, like you said, the sim is played by many actual tankers. If ARMA players would by soldiers, you'd get the game experience you want, but it's not so get used to it. :)

There's a huge community of soldiers who play Steel Beasts because it's a sim used by thier militaries.

Guess what? Arma II is VBS2 and it's a sim used by even more militaries.

So where is the community of soldiers who are hooked on Arma II like the tankers are hooked on Steel Beasts?

[igeighty 2]

I woke up thinking about this thread and really those of you who say I'm an idiot for asking the community to grow up and learn and see the potential of this incredible piece of software may be right. Maybe I should have just capitulated and bought Black Shark DCS and Steel Beasts Pro PE.

I think you better make yourself a cup of coffee or two and read the thread again, i don't see anyone calling you a goose for wanting more, hell man, I agree with you.

But I am saying that what you require IS possible, you just need to get the correct balance of people involved, and the right missions. That cant be done in an impromptu gathering on some random public server. Its all about mission design and Group play/

As far as DCS or SB go, of course you can own more than one game. Go and grab them, I have DCS and love it. Although I have never played with more than 5 others as it is very hard to find a decent number of people playing that one in Australia, also it is purely a flight sim. As for steel beasts, that game is a blast too, although graphically unappealing. It is also a tank sim only. SB is geared towards servicemen and is used in some fields as training, as is VBS2, hell the two engines even communicate to each other if you have the bucks. And can be used in the same scenarios. But as a VBS2 owner, I can say that there is NEVER more than a handfull of non military guys playing that one in multiplayer. but we are talking about Arma2 here. A civilians game. played by both realism fans AND people looking for a quick kill.

Jump into the editor, and create whatever you like. Arma definitely has the scope to play huge battles, you just need the numbers on the day. Have you ever played a tanker battle in Arma1 VBS2 or Arma2? with the right set of chaps (and the numbers), that can be a 'blast' also. complete with volumetric smoke effects from arty fire, infantry AND air support.

Play it how you want to play it. Just find the right crowd.. it may take more than a week or two but you will get a good game out of it yet :)

As for COD fan boys, I'm not seeing many here at all, and who wouldn't pass up tick tac toe on a nekked nubile, hell I cant bang all day and night ?

Its ok cadmium, the things you wish for are understandable, but they aren't going to drop in your lap without a bit of effort on your part.

Sorry about the long post, And i am NOT attacking you. But I think your getting worked up over nothing. YOU make the game what it is and others like you, that's the beauty :) as you yourself call it a sandbox, exactly what it is.

...build it and they will come ;)

oh a late edit..

Guess what? Arma II is VBS2 and it's a sim used by even more militaries.

So where is the community of soldiers who are hooked on Arma II like the tankers are hooked on Steel Beasts?

No, Arma2 is a small fraction of what you can achieve in VBS2. and the people that are hooked on it are generally servicemen and woman in training centres 'playing' it, either that or on the front lines fighting it out for real..

There is a very small, [read TINY] set of civilian users of VBS2, and most of them I know are playing arma1 or arma2 because their keys do not match the military ones, who have access to a completely different set of data. And multiplayer events happen once in a blue moon with VERY small numbers.

And the steal beasts community, well they are in the steal beasts forums :)

Edited July 25, 2009 by your_mum
i missed a bit :)

[Redfield-77 10]

After reading the above post I think I understand. A2 is new so if Domination and Evoloution are not your thing wait until somone makes a game type like you are describing or even better just make and host one yourself. If its done well I would play it.

[FINALCUT 10]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cadmium77

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

nerd alert !

wtf is a 41CV?

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

kinda like a dennis miller joke,cant laugh at them if we cant understand them.lol.

[cadmium77 16]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cadmium77

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

nerd alert !

wtf is a 41CV?

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

kinda like a dennis miller joke,cant laugh at them if we cant understand them.lol.

The only way I can laugh at a Dennis Miller joke is if I laugh at Dennis Miller for making it.

[galzohar 31]

This is by essence a mission making problem. You can blame the players all you want, but with current missions, you can have the most team-oriented players with massive RL military experience, and you'd still get BF2/COD style gaming.

The main problem is that there are very few in the community that actually know mission making inside out, and even them don't know everything. There are also very few in the community that actually know RL combat, and even them don't know everything. Finding someone who can do both is like winning the lottery, which is probably why we don't have any "good" missions that would truly take advantage of this game.

I mean, just take a look at the "user missions" and the "mission editing and scripting" subforums and see for yourself where mission making stands. It does not look good.

If we want to have anywhere near realistic missions that will play in a way that will match what posters in this thread want, mission making needs to be more available to the public. Currently it's simply way too hard to make simple stuff.

On another note, when you want a whole battalion at your command (using an old sample US battalion task force structure as an example) you'll have ~275 soldiers in 14 tanks and 28 APCs/IFVs, possibly more depending on what kind of APCs/IFVs and how many soldiers in each. That doesn't include artillery and other kinds of support (engineering, supplies, AT, recon) which can add up quite a lot of personnel as well. Those kinds of support are also usually not present on a company level, standard support at the company level is generally stuff like a mark-19, M2HB and 60mm/81mm mortar - anything more is requested from the battalion level.

So yeah, having huge could be awesome, but the scale needs to be kept within playable levels as well. Like I always say - a lot of realistic missions would not have good gameplay, but to have good gamelpay you do not have to reduce realism. That is, you can't make any realistic mission you want and have it playable, but you can definitely make totally realistic missions that will actually be playable as well. It just takes more effort back at the drawing board phase of mission making, but considering how much dirty work it is to make a mission that phase usually doesn't get the attention it deserves, and the result is the missions we currently have.

[cadmium77 16]

This is by essence a mission making problem. You can blame the players all you want, but with current missions, you can have the most team-oriented players with massive RL military experience, and you'd still get BF2/COD style gaming.

The main problem is that there are very few in the community that actually know mission making inside out, and even them don't know everything. There are also very few in the community that actually know RL combat, and even them don't know everything. Finding someone who can do both is like winning the lottery, which is probably why we don't have any "good" missions that would truly take advantage of this game.

I mean, just take a look at the "user missions" and the "mission editing and scripting" subforums and see for yourself where mission making stands. It does not look good.

If we want to have anywhere near realistic missions that will play in a way that will match what posters in this thread want, mission making needs to be more available to the public. Currently it's simply way too hard to make simple stuff.

On another note, when you want a whole battalion at your command (using an old sample US battalion task force structure as an example) you'll have ~275 soldiers in 14 tanks and 28 APCs/IFVs, possibly more depending on what kind of APCs/IFVs and how many soldiers in each. That doesn't include artillery and other kinds of support (engineering, supplies, AT, recon) which can add up quite a lot of personnel as well. Those kinds of support are also usually not present on a company level, standard support at the company level is generally stuff like a mark-19, M2HB and 60mm/81mm mortar - anything more is requested from the battalion level.

So yeah, having huge could be awesome, but the scale needs to be kept within playable levels as well. Like I always say - a lot of realistic missions would not have good gameplay, but to have good gamelpay you do not have to reduce realism. That is, you can't make any realistic mission you want and have it playable, but you can definitely make totally realistic missions that will actually be playable as well. It just takes more effort back at the drawing board phase of mission making, but considering how much dirty work it is to make a mission that phase usually doesn't get the attention it deserves, and the result is the missions we currently have.

Excellent points. I couldn't agree more. Excellent post. I'd love to put my money where my mouth is and produce my own multiplayer games for communal use according to my own principles but frankly the mission making editor is opaque to me. I have a certain amount of time to invest in learning it but not when it's in this state; I've been publicly defeated here just trying to figure out how to integrate artillery into my scenarios...

http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?t=80731

(If anyone here can help me with this I'd be deeply grateful)

BI has got to step in here and make mission making a priority; the graphics are more than good enough...it's got to be about the quality of the missions and games they define from here on in.

Edited July 25, 2009 by Cadmium77

[Defunkt 431]

Blame, blame, lame.

The game you want to play is perfectly possible and largely exists within several established ArmA communities but rather than go find it you prefer to come here and run down everybody else because it didn't bother to seek you out. Then, rather than make it yourself you prefer to blame the tools (there's a saying about tools and blame) when you simply haven't invested enough in mastering them.

I for one resent the tone of your post, for me personally gaming either with or against A.I. is boring and tedious. I might think many things about the prevalence of that (or your) style of play but wouldn't make the type of post you have attacking anybody who subscribes to it.

[galzohar 31]

Just take a look at the editing forum before you blame people who don't manage to pull off mission making. It may be all possible but it's simply way way too hard. I'm not sure how much you actually tried yourself, as you have practically no posts in either the user missions forums nor the editing and scripting forums.

The facts speak for themselves - missions are lacking, and the result is that you only see ~4-6 different missions that get played on servers, and only 2-3 of them are pvp, and still need massive tuning.

[cadmium77 16]

Blame, blame, lame.

The game you want to play is perfectly possible and largely exists within several established ArmA communities but rather than go find it you prefer to come here and run down everybody else because it didn't bother to seek you out. Then, rather than make it yourself you prefer to blame the tools (there's a saying about tools and blame) when you simply haven't invested enough in mastering them.

I for one resent the tone of your post, for me personally gaming either with or against A.I. is boring and tedious. I might think many things about the prevalence of that (or your) style of play but wouldn't make the type of post you have attacking anybody who subscribes to it.

link to those communities so I don't have to wade through thousands of dead ends?

[galzohar 31]

link to those communities so I don't have to wade through thousands of dead ends?

I'll second that.

[hund 0]

Seriously dudes, just take a look through the squad pages - it won't take you more than ten minutes. You may not have so much time on your hands, but neither do we.

My personal faves are GOL clan, Tactical Gamer and Zeus Gaming Community, in no specific order.

And whats wrong with the mission editor now?

Edited July 26, 2009 by Hund

[galzohar 31]

Try making a good multiplayer mission and you'll see what's wrong with the editor.

I'd look for a clan but currently there really aren't any good missions to play with a clan even if I was in one. Unless there are some awesome pvp missions that clans run privately, which I highly doubt unless they're very roleplay-based in which case I'm not really interested anyway.

[mrbiggles 10]

Excellent post

You know what I discovered about myself?

I am a follower! I dont want to order people round, I dont want to command a team, fly people in helicopters or any of that other stuff....yet!!

What I want is to do what I am told and be able to work in a small or large team of people together AGAINST OTHER REAL PEOPLE

This is the average mission for me on the only servers that are operating where I live:

1) Wander around a carrier for 5 mins watching other people wander round waiting for transport.

2) Get in chopper for 10 min flight.

3) whilst waiting on 10 min flight check mission orders

4) Ah surprise, there are no mission orders

5) Check various red circles on the map that look like they might hold some promise of action.

6) Try and talk with people on the boring ride to the drop off, nobody has teamspeak....

7) Get told off for carrying out a DSOT on the chopper machine gun because I am bored

8) Land at the red circle and watch as the entire group of passengers on the chopper scatter in every direction with absolutely no co-ordination.

9) Find that there are no enemies at the red circle because 2 mins before we landed it went green.

10) another 10-15 min wait for a transport to the next red circle where there seem to be no enemies either.

11) all of the above is best case scenario that the chopper we fly in does not get shot down or the pilot crashes killing everyone on board.

12) My wife comes in and tells me I have used my computer game quota up for the weekend and all that without firing a shot in anger.....

This game fails to easily organise groups of people who want to work as groups and who may not be experts yet at the game from doing so.

Its such a shame because it really has huge potential, it has more potential than any game I have ever played which makes me so annoyed.

I think the majority of people playing this game want to do the right thing and dont want the hemmed in BF2 experience that Xbox fans love.

We do want a proper simulator that simulates the exciting parts of battle and not the boring parts.

Honestly, I reckon train simulator is more exciting than this game at the moment for most of the people playing.

[hund 0]

Try making a good multiplayer mission and you'll see what's wrong with the editor.

OK, I'll try and make a good multiplayer mission, so I can see what the problem is. :D

But seriously, what seems to be the problem? I don't see much of a change in the editor from the previous titles, to be quite honest.

[Petko 10]

Excellent post

You know what I discovered about myself?

I am a follower! I dont want to order people round, I dont want to command a team, fly people in helicopters or any of that other stuff....yet!!

What I want is to do what I am told and be able to work in a small or large team of people together AGAINST OTHER REAL PEOPLE

This is the average mission for me on the only servers that are operating where I live:

1) Wander around a carrier for 5 mins watching other people wander round waiting for transport.

2) Get in chopper for 10 min flight.

3) whilst waiting on 10 min flight check mission orders

4) Ah surprise, there are no mission orders

5) Check various red circles on the map that look like they might hold some promise of action.

6) Try and talk with people on the boring ride to the drop off, nobody has teamspeak....

7) Get told off for carrying out a DSOT on the chopper machine gun because I am bored

8) Land at the red circle and watch as the entire group of passengers on the chopper scatter in every direction with absolutely no co-ordination.

9) Find that there are no enemies at the red circle because 2 mins before we landed it went green.

10) another 10-15 min wait for a transport to the next red circle where there seem to be no enemies either.

11) all of the above is best case scenario that the chopper we fly in does not get shot down or the pilot crashes killing everyone on board.

12) My wife comes in and tells me I have used my computer game quota up for the weekend and all that without firing a shot in anger.....

This game fails to easily organise groups of people who want to work as groups and who may not be experts yet at the game from doing so.

Its such a shame because it really has huge potential, it has more potential than any game I have ever played which makes me so annoyed.

I think the majority of people playing this game want to do the right thing and dont want the hemmed in BF2 experience that Xbox fans love.

We do want a proper simulator that simulates the exciting parts of battle and not the boring parts.

Honestly, I reckon train simulator is more exciting than this game at the moment for most of the people playing.

Im saying exactly the same stuff, adding that its mainly the games fault that it cant achive in multiplayer what it should. And every smartass calls me an consol-boi or cod-fighter who doesnt understand what a sim is, if im saying that their precious game is not perfect. Well sure im an arcade maniac who doesnt know shit about sims. I mostly do arcade stuff like terminal airspace control on VATSIM or playing with ultra arcade games like dangerous waters.

[walker 0]

Hi galzohar

Hund is faily experienced with missions in the editor. ;)

I am sorry galzohar but there is not a better editor than the Real Virtuality engine editor in any other game.

It takes literally a couple of minutes to make a mission in the editor.

You also have the mission wizard that works very well and is easy to use.

Just click on Scenarios

Double Click on My Missions

Double Click on New Mission

And the wizard guides you through the process easy as pie.

You can also down load others missions in both editor and PBO form and you can De-PBO user missions to see how they are made.

There is a mission editor section in the manual.

There is a BIS community wiki with a wealth of information on how to make missions and script.

There is OFPEC

And there are many user made manuals and guides to specific editor topics.

The editor and ArmA II is largely backwards compatible with previous content going right back to BIS's OFP days. Scripts from one need no or little adapting for ArmA II though advances in scripting in the Real Virtuality engine mean most modding teams are re writing their code to make it more efficient.

And there is a mission editing and scripting section of this forum where experienced members of the community spend their time passing on their knowledge to others including people new to editing.

Kind Regards walker

Edited July 30, 2009 by walker

[An Fiach 10]

it isnt the game, it is the players and the OP was pointless, you cant tell people they are wasting their time because they dont play the way you want them too. they are only wasting their time if they dont enjoy playing. Mission design is a huge factor in how things play out too but players is the number 1 influence on game play. If you want better game play, step up and lead and organize other players. If you arent playing 'correctly' why expect others to do so?

[hund 0]

I'd have to say that Mr. Anfiach hit the nail right on the noggin there. That is the very reason why arma (and ofp before it) was so community-centric - You found a good group of blokes and then you played with them.

The worst of mission may be fun if played with the right crowd, and even the best of missions will be ruined if played with the wrong crowd.

[walker 0]

Hi all

As I keep saying join a clan.

Kind Regards walker

[whisper 0]

Just a few points :

1) stop trying to force your personnal way of playing this game on every other players throat. You don't like how it is played on certain servers? So what? If people enjoy playing there, why moaning?

2) I see a disturbing trend here, it's to equal "teamplay" and "realism". Both concepts are totally independant

3) the mission editor is difficult? Perhaps, but personnaly I would not expect in any game to shape the gameplay I want in any form I want, this in terms of minutes of work. It takes time, yes. Perfectly normal. I better have it this way than to have to recode gameplay in C++. At least with ArmA2, anyone can try to do it.