Bayonet/knife poll

[jakeozzy 10]

I think there should be bayonet attacks but they should only be melee attacks that are realistic, not running around stabbing everyone then shouting "Owned lol noobs!" like a CS player..

[W0lle 1042]

Merged the three exisiting "we need knifes/bayonets" threads with this one.

Is it really that hard to do atleast a quick search before starting the same threads several times?

[Daniel 0]

As most engagements are made at long ranges... at least longer than knifes are useful for, I see no need for melee combat.

Same reason for why there's no CQB....

Who says all engagements are at long range? Who says there are no close quarter battles? Explain to me exactly how one uses an infantry unit to clear an enemy position without eventually entering the position at close range? You don't always have artillery, air support or chemical weapons to do all the work for you. More often than not you have to go in there and clear it yourself, and that is why bayonets are still used in modern warfare today.

Bayonets don't jam, ricochet, require reloading or indeed run out of ammo. Perfect for close quarter fighting.

If you want bayonets , knives , tasers , tear gas etc. mod them in for yourself and anyone else that wants them.

I've seen what knives can do to ruin game play..you either have some "uber" player running around saying .. "how about a knife fight" or some dolt stabbing you and you never hear the end of it.

Happy without them...

Seriously, we have guns in game and people don't go round shooting each other at random. I fail to see how attaching a knife to the end of what is already an extremely lethal weapon is somehow going to ruin gameplay. As with everything currently in ArmAII, it would be optional as decided by the editor.

Although we've seen extremely innovative mods in the past, it's got to be easier if BIS add to the engine's capabilities (FLIR for example) and the modding community make the content, i.e. guns, tanks, maps, missions, etc.

On the topic of realistic implimentation, i'd say something similar to, but a little more slick than, the OFP PUKF system (an animation when within "range" causing the attacking player to pause and thrust and the victim to die) would be sufficient.

Edited August 31, 2009 by Daniel

[flufball 10]

As most engagements are made at long ranges... at least longer than knifes are useful for, I see no need for melee combat.

Same reason for why there's no CQB....

Forgive me for saying so but I've obviously been playing a different game from you as often I find myself in close quaters. Considering all the time that is spent at close range, a pointy, edged weapon on the end of a rifle would be most welcome.

[TmanEd 10]

I would love bayonets. As long as it wasn't like a counter-strike "IM SO PRO" running around at high speed and killing everyone in one stab like a crazy person style of attack... The bayonets would have to be nice and realistic, so as not to spoil the gaming for tactical players.

Why does everyone think that adding something not traditionally in realistic games will instantly turn the game into Counter Strike? I mean seriously, when you play the game now, what do you do if someone's running towards you? You shoot him, right? If he's doing the same thing, but there's a sharp pointy thing on the end of his gun, what do you do? You shoot him, of course!

If you say that there's no CQC in Arma, then you tell me how the hell you're supposed to take a town/building? Snipe everyone? There's a good chance that you didn't get a lot of them. Bomb the shit out of it? What if you have no artillery/CAS? What if you need the town as a defensive position?

And even if a bayonet isn't useful to YOUR type of play, how is it going to hurt anything? All they have different is a (optional) last ditch tool to kill someone at extremely close quarters. That isn't going to change a thing for you if you're sniping them from a kilometer away.

A bunch of CS kiddies aren't going to flood the games either, just because there's a bayonet added.

[Whiskey Tango 10]

I just love the posts that say that Arma 2 has no CQB. Really?

I'm afraid to say it does have CQB and by the bucket load, so much CQB that you could build a mountain from it and have sir Ranulph Feines climb it for charity.

Fighting in urban terrain by it's very nature will put you into close proximity to the enemy. If the enemy are occupying any of those buildings in the urban terrain then you going to have to get really close to shift them from those buildings.

Fighting in heavy woodland/forested area's again will generally push you closer together as your visibility and range has been greatly reduced by the fact there are trees in the way. Add in some well placed bunkers and earthen fighting positions manned by the enemy, then your going to have to get really, really close.

That does'nt leave much terrain left to fight in if these area's are avoided and might aswell fight everything on Utes.

Close Quarter Battle drills don't involve any form of bunnyhopping rambo knife throat slitting shit but rather engaging the enemy with smallarms, grenade and bayonet at close range.

[NoRailgunner 0]

Missions depending on creativity of mission makers and existing addons.

Roughly guessing - there are far more non-CQC/CQB missions in OFP/ArmA and Arma2 than in most mainstream shooters. Dont know why people like to fight in close combat if they could use the great + open terrain. Maybe they cant play/think out of their little "CQB-box"? Seems to me that one clan + few other people are addicted to their own bayonet-fetish. How would S.Freud analyze this? ;)

Btw

Bayonets fade away and some armed forces will keep them a bit longer. Nothing to worry.

[Numptie 10]

Missions depending on creativity of mission makers and existing addons.

Roughly guessing - there are far more non-CQC/CQB missions in OFP/ArmA and Arma2 than in most mainstream shooters. Dont know why people like to fight in close combat if they could use the great + open terrain. Maybe they cant play/think out of their little "CQB-box"? Seems to me that one clan + few other people are addicted to their own bayonet-fetish. How would S.Freud analyze this? ;)

Btw

Bayonets fade away and some armed forces will keep them a bit longer. Nothing to worry.

Yes there are open fields, but what if there is a series of defensive positions that need to be cleared? What if artillery isnt available, how are you going to ensure that the enemy position is cleared without going into QCB? What about having to assault a town?

Not all missions in Arma2 are pitched battles.

[Whiskey Tango 10]

TBH I dont give a shit how freud would analyse this or any other argument and it would probably involve immense amounts of bullshit and nonsense.

And nowhere do we stipulate that every battle is fought using only CQB tactics and if the target happens to be in an extensivly wide open area then other tactics are utilised to complete the objectives. But if theres cover out there between me and my target and it's enough to get me to my target, then it will be utilised because common sense dictates that cover between me and my enemy means some degree of protection from being spotted/fired upon untill I'm ready to initiate contact with the enemy and make him react to me, and if that takes the form of a long range firefight then so be it but to be blunt a long range firefight is a tactic I'd use very little because it does'nt complete objectives. You can't take a hill from 500m away or patrol a town without being in the town. If you don't occupy the ground the enemy holds how on earth do you expect to push him out of it. A war of attrition result in massive casualties on both sides.

Your lots of missions not involving CQB may be very varied but your crappy long range shooting tactics are'nt. Infact their not tactics at all but a singular tactic. One. Less than two. Not even worthy of the extra S.

And you don't know why people like to fight close combat because YOU can't think out of your box. Your long range firefight box of yawn.

You just stick to those open area's of the map and ignore the rest while we utilise the whole map for our missions and use a wide range of tactics to accomplish said missions exactly because we don't get stuck in one mindset.

And finally bayonets don't fade away.You will fade away before the bayonet does. In this world of multi million dollar/pound/euro pieces of equipment, the very cheap to manufacture, easy to maintain, use and effective bayonet will be around untill a better alternative is made available, but seeing as it as knife on the end of a gun then I would'nt hold my breath.

[TechnoTerrorist303 10]

Should this not be a poll on "who has more imagination regarding possible combat situations"?

stabbystabbystabby please please please?

[NoRailgunner 0]

If there is a proper implementation of optional bayonet combat feature eg animations, bayonet fight (collision model,box), AI should be able to use bayonet... for sure no one will complain. ;)

How many time BIS should spend to develop and test such a bayonet feature beside bugfixing and improving other + more important things?

I mean this feature should be made very well - no robotic stabbing, no instant use, no CS or splatter&gore like "bayonet/knifefest" etc.

Btw:

What about using stun or teargas grenades or flashbangs for room/bunker clearing?

What about using PDW's like FN P90, HK MP7?

There are lot of things that would be nice to see ingame but somewhere BIS has to draw the line.

What is "more" important:

working FLIR/cockpit MFDs or

vehicle interiors or

perfomance-friendly terrain/buidlings or

better AI or

hand command system or

volume of voices according to behaviour or

cows + sharks with lasers or

bayonet/knifes or

small explosives to breech (building) walls or

?

[nomdeplume 0]

100% agree with NoRailgunner, I think. So many people complain about the 'clunky' feeling of movement in the series and how hard it is to have proper CQB. As much as I respect BIS, I really can't see them implementing melee weapons in a fluid, natural manner. The people who complain about the movement for short- to mid-range gunfights would probably have an aneurism from the melee combat.

So my vote is still no. It would be yes if I thought it could be implemented in a worthwhile manner. Anything that would need a significant redesign of the engine can wait until Arma 3, and I think fluid melee combat is one of those things that would require significant redesign work. Make the current game experience brilliant and then add a new type of experience in the next game.

[Whiskey Tango 10]

I have no desire to see any form of COD/CS style of knife attacks in ARMA2.

Tapping a key for an instant knife slash is in no way real and would indeed retract from the overall uberness that is arma.

But a properly implemented bayonet that say, must be attached to your rifle before assaulting a posistion with an appropiate animation that takes several seconds to complete, so no instant out of nowhere attacks unless you made the conscious effort to attach to bayonet in the first place.

Has an effect on your long range accuracy so that you don't have it attached permanantly but just for those times when you get very close to the enemy and a bayonet is needed ie clearing trenches, bunkers etc.

And lastly a very limited range of say 1 metre max, so you physically have to be right on top of your target to perform the action which would need to be fired off similar to shooting.

The reason why you won't use any tear gas etc is because were not talking about counter terrorism team stuff here but frontline infantry stuff where the situation arises mid battle when coming across say a bunker with a .50 HMG and it needs to be neutralised very quickly. Not really got the time to be wandering off to the quartermaster and asking for specialist kit like tear gas. you use the standard things you use on the battlefield, ie your 556 assault rifle, fragmentation grenades and lastly the bayonet to finish off anyone unlucky enough to survive what you've thrown at them already. plus the QMS would tell you to fuck off if you wandered up asking for such pieces of equipment, squaddies don't get anywhere near shit like that unless your part of some counter terrorism special forces mob.

Some of the things you posted are infact going to be implemented with the arrival of operation arrowhead namely

working FLIR

better AI

but also OA is going to force people into close situations in the city map. there won't be the chance to engage everything at range as the tight twisting streets limit the range/visibilty on offer.

some others are tbh very low priority like vehicle interiors or are totally unworkable like hand signals. the situational awarness in any game is limited but to be able to pick up hand signals from the squad leader is going to be near impossible without your close to 180 degree field of view, your vastly superior graphics and your subconscious abilty to read and interpret human movement that you have in real life and holding the send key on TS/vent is far less time consuming and ofcourse bug free game wise.

breaching charges would be nice and are used to great effect for gaining access to compounds etc without mooching through the main gate which is likely to be covered and or boobytrapped.

Sharks with lazer attached to their head.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bQ88I1V_v5k

And to all those who find the movement clunky :o: learn how to play with the game and go with the flow, adapt and overcome. Seriously it's not that hard and I quite enjoy the movement of arma and have learned to use it even with it's limitations.

I'm not a pilot type and I find that piloting is awkward and clunky and very hard to use but then again I don't bleat about it in threads where people are asking for stuff to help pilots enjoy their game more and which would make very little difference to how I played. If it's something that helps more people to enjoy the game then bring it on.

[-Snafu- 77]

Voted Yes.

There have been many situations in A2 where I have needed a bayonet.

I use the bayonet many times in OFP with UKF and SLX.

In RO and its mods, the bayonet has gotten me out of very sticky situations.

[MrCyberdude 10]

Yes to Bayonets, using existing end of gun collision points.

I can't believe it was in Operation Flash Point but removed in ARMA2.

It's Just like the Muzzle flashes that are worse than this animation Have a look and you will see at least the flash changes.

No fancy animation from person charging but make the enemy suffer a little ;) ... Pool of blood , :don 14: intestines hanging out.... :292: Ok just the pool of blood. ;)

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=0bd_1249524865

British bayonet charge in BASRA.

Prepared by the U.S. Urban Warfare Analysis Center:

Executive Summary:

In May 2004, approximately 20 British troops in Basra were ambushed and forced out of their vehicles by about 100 Shiite militia fighters. When ammunition ran low, the British troops fixed bayonets and charged the enemy. About 20 militiamen were killed in the assault without any British deaths.

The bayonet charge appeared to succeed for three main reasons. First, the attack was the first of its kind in that region and captured the element of surprise. Second, enemy fighters probably believed jihadist propaganda stating that coalition troops were cowards unwilling to fight in close combat, further enhancing the element of surprise. Third, the strict discipline of the British troops overwhelmed the ability of the militia fighters to organize a cohesive counteraction.

The effects of this tactical action in Basra are not immediately applicable elsewhere, but an important dominant theme emerges regarding the need to avoid predictable patterns of behavior within restrictive rules of engagement. Commanders should keep adversaries off balance with creative feints and occasional shows of force lest they surrender the initiative to the enemy.

I. Overview of Bayonet Charge

On 21 May 2004, Mahdi militiamen engaged a convoy consisting of approximately 20 British troops from the Argyll and Sutherland Highlanders 55 miles north of Basra. A squad from the Princess of Wales regiment came to their assistance. What started as an attack on a passing convoy ended with at least 35 militiamen dead and just three British troops wounded. The militiamen engaged a force that had restrictive rules of engagement prior to the incident that prevented them from returning fire. What ensued was an example of irregular warfare by coalition troops that achieved a tactical victory over a numerically superior foe with considerable firepower.

The Argyll and Sutherland Highlanders are an infantry regiment of the British Army with a rich history. It is one of Scotland’s oldest fighting forces. It is best known for forming the legendry “thin red line†at the Battle of Balaklava in the Crimean War against Russia in 1854. It later fought with distinction in World War I and World War II, including intense jungle warfare in Malaya. After Iraq, it served in Afghanistan before returning home in2008.

Country: United Kingdom

Branch: Army, 16th Air Assault Brigade

Type: One of six Scottish line infantry regiments

Role: Air assault-Light role

Motto: Nemo Me Impune Lacessit

No One Assails Me With Impunity

Atmosphere Preceding the Attack

After a period of relative calm, attacks escalated after coalition forces attempted to arrest Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr. British soldiers in southern Iraq said they were “stunned†by the level of violence near Basra. In particular, Mahdi militiamen conducted regular ambushes on British convoys on the roads between Basra and Baghdad.Frequent, uncoordinated attacks inflicted little damage, although precise data is unavailable in open sources. Since the Scottish and Welsh troops arrived in Basra, Shiite militias averaged about five attacks per day in Basra.

The Bayonet Charge

The battle began when over 100 Mahdi army fighters ambushed two unarmored vehicles transporting around 20 Argylls on the isolated Route Six highway near the southern city of Amarah. Ensconced in trenches along the road, the militiamen fired mortars, rocket propelled grenades, and machine gun rounds. The vehicles stopped and British troops returned fire. The Mahdi barrage caused enough damage to force the troops to exit the vehicles.The soldiers quickly established a defensive perimeter and radioed for reinforcements from the main British base at Amarah – Camp Abu Naji. Reinforcements from the Princess of Wales’s Royal Regiment assisted the Argyles in an offensive operation against the Mahdi militiamen. When ammunition ran low among the British troops, the decision was made to fix bayonets for a direct assault.

The British soldiers charged across 600 feet of open ground toward enemy trenches. They engaged in intense hand-to-hand fighting with the militiamen. Despite being outnumbered and lacking ammunition, the Argylls and Princess of Wales troops routed the enemy. The British troops killed about 20 militiamen in the bayonet charge and between 28 and 35 overall. Only three British soldiers were injured.This incident marked the first time in 22 years that the British Army used bayonets in action. The previous incident occurred during the Falklands War in 1982.

II. Why the Bayonet Charge Was a Tactical Success

The bayonet charge by British troops in Basra achieved tactical success primarily because of psychological and cultural factors. It also shows that superior firepower does not guarantee success by either side. In this case, the value of surprise, countering enemy expectations, and strict troop discipline were three deciding characteristics of the bayonet charge.

Surprise as a Weapon

The Mahdi fighters likely expected the British convoy to continue past the attack. Previous convoys of British vehicles had driven through ambush fire. British military sources believe the militiamen miscalculated the response of the convoy and expected the Scots to flee.

• Although the raid is a well-honed tactic practiced by jihadist and Arab irregulars, the surprise raid has been an effective tool against Arab armies, both regular and irregular.

Irregular fighters usually are not trained in the rigid discipline that professional counterparts possess, and the surprise attack exploits this weakness.

Enemy Expectation that Coalition Troops Would Avoid Combat

Propaganda by Sunni and Shiite jihadists regularly advertised the perception that American and British soldiers were cowards. Similar rhetoric increased after the battles of Fallujah in April2004, perhaps to steady the resolve of militia fighters in the face of aggressive coalition attacks.

In addition, British convoys did not engage significantly during previous ambushes, which probably validated the narrative for many Mahdi militiamen. Because many of the Mahdi fighters were teenagers, it is also likely that the Mahdi army used these ambushes for training and recruiting. The attacks were an opportunity for young fighters to use weapons in combat with little risk of serious reprisal.

• In short, the bayonet charge not only surprised the Mahdi militiamen, it also debunked the perception that coalition troops were reluctant fighters seeking to avoid conflict.

"I wanted to put the fear of God into the enemy. I could see some dead bodies and eight blokes, some scrambling for their weapons. I’ve never seen such a look of fear in anyone’s eyes before. I’m over six feet; I was covered in sweat, angry, red in the face, charging in with a bayonet and screaming my head off. You would be scared, too."

Corporal Brian Wood

Princess of Wales’s Royal Regiment

"There was a lot of aggression and a lot of hand-to-hand fighting. It wasn’t a pleasant scene. Some did get cut with the blades of the bayonet as we tumbled around, but in the end, they surrendered and were controlled. I do wonder how they regard life so cheaply. Some of these Iraqis in those trenches were 15 years old – against trained soldiers."

Colonel Mark Byers

Princess of Wales’s Royal Regiment

Strict Discipline

A crucial distinction during the bayonet charge was the professional discipline of the British troops in contrast to the disunity and confusion of the militia fighters. Irregular militia often fight with passion and benefit from knowledge of the local terrain. Professional soldiers, however, formally trained in tactics and squad unity can often overcome these and other obstacles. During the bayonet charge, the soldiers rarely lost their nerve and not a single soldier lost his life.

Many of the militiamen fled. Less..

Sorry its Big...... it is relevent.

Sounds perfect for over running noob camps.

[nomdeplume 0]

This incident marked the first time in 22 years that the British Army used bayonets in action.

The story definitely makes it sound like it was a very extraordinary event, and that bayonets aren't very commonly used. So I'm still not all that convinced, although if it was done it would be a welcome addition.

It's also made me even less convinced that it could be done well within the Arma 2 engine. It would be exceedingly rare for 20 soldiers in Arma to be able to launch a coordinated bayonet attack, given how rare it is for them to launch a coordinated attack with firearms.

Also it does suggest that AI accuracy should perhaps be reduced, at least for the units that are supposedly poorly trained. It boggles the mind how 100 troops can open fire with assault rifles and RPGs at enemies 100 metres away and not inflict serious casualties. You certainly wouldn't be charging 100m at an enemy position in Arma 2 and expect to make it alive!

[TechnoTerrorist303 10]

The story definitely makes it sound like it was a very extraordinary event, and that bayonets aren't very commonly used.

They weren't commonly used in combat up to that point due to the lack of situations requiring them I would think. There are several posts in this thread stating that since then they are and have been.

I agree with your other points though, ai would be too accurate and kill you on approach unless something could be put in to make them **** themselves when charged, especially for insurgents. Would be good in pvp though against noobcamps if you had limited respawns. They really would be trying to run.

[-Snafu- 77]

Yes to Bayonets, using existing end of gun collision points.

I can't believe it was in Operation Flash Point but removed in ARMA2.

It wasn't in OFP but mod teams eventually implemented it.

Edited September 4, 2009 by Snafu

[Jimmy the Saint 10]

It wasn't in OFP but mod teams eventually implemented it.

Indeed, there haven't been any bayonets in the original OPF!

[jungleboy1 10]

Obviously a knife/bayonet could be used for other circumstances such as cutting trees/bushes to give a better view especially those long grasses in ARMA 2 now :j:. Yeah i would like to see at least a close kill feature, however the AI in arma are quite different to that in other games because they can detect you even if youre prone and moving behind them so there is no guarantee for a close kill knife to the throat. Probably a bayonet charge when out of ammo seems more likely.

[Ludovico Technique 0]

They weren't commonly used in combat up to that point due to the lack of situations requiring them I would think. There are several posts in this thread stating that since then they are and have been.

I agree with your other points though, ai would be too accurate and kill you on approach unless something could be put in to make them **** themselves when charged, especially for insurgents. Would be good in pvp though against noobcamps if you had limited respawns. They really would be trying to run.

This is the thing though, the AI, even at the lowest skill level, has really good control of their weapons. Even the scrunty insurgents handle their weapons like professional soldiers. By and large untrained fighters handle their guns extremely poorly, especially under pressure. They'll fire blind, they won't aim their shots, they'll use full auto without a steady grip on the weapon and so forth. Spray and pray, particularly with rifles, consumes lots of ammunition and tends to only cause casualties by luck.

Because this sort of ineffective fire is not represented in Arma 2 the AI is much deadlier than their real world equivalent. For example as the article mentions, there's no Arma 2 equivalent of a terrified teenager with no formal training.

Despite that though in the right circumstances it's not too uncommon for the opportunity to arise when stabbing is appropriate, even with the AI as skilled as it is.

The thing I think is that there's no middle ground between charging and shooting. You can't run and shoot, so you have to slow to a walk or stop if you want to kill defenders, rather than being able to be really aggressive. So say your first man into an enemy position sees an enemy, he has to stop to shoot him, which blocks up the movement of the team, whereas with a bayonet he can just run in, stab the guy up and move on without slowing the team.

[gho-t 10]

i dont think a bayonet is needed. maybe a knife would be cool. but there would never be a time when you will need it.

[nmdanny 22]

knife should be used for more things except combat, like cutting stuff like wood,thin trees, making holes in stuff like gas tanks to make leaks, sabotage and combat. i don't think armies use bayonets .

[Pathy 0]

No, no modern army uses bayonets....

http://news.bbc.co.uk/media/images/46029000/jpg/_46029145_dmoccct-2009-004-i-050_copy-1.jpg - whoops, over 100kb

"Military cross for bayonet charge"

Edited September 13, 2009 by Pathy

[Blake 0]

Bayonet issue is probably discussed to death already but in my opinion why not, if there is also some negative effect of having bayonet attached like some effect to aiming (having extra weight attached to the muzzle) and resulting clumsyness when moving in narrow spaces (getting stuck when long weapons are raised like currently in ArmA 2).

Troops should also not be seen to move about all the time with their bayonets attached as they are not used that often IRL. Also moving around in counter-isurgency operation with bayonets flashing would also send strong negative message towards local population. Definately bayonets should not be attached by default, they can be dangerous also to fellow servicemen as well as the enemy.

Edited September 13, 2009 by Blake