ArmA II: Operation Arrowhead discussion thread

[wolf[173rd] 10]

I think that was added in one of the patches... basically when he goes prone the grass layer is covering him... of course from distance you can't see the grass but it still provides the cover.

I could be completely wrong though. :)

Would sand do that too? I play Duala more than anything.

[cossack8559 10]

Possible, But doubtful lol

[Big Dawg KS 6]

;1643019']Would sand do that too? I play Duala more than anything.

No, unless you've got grass on that sand.

[Laqueesha 474]

No, unless you've got grass on that sand.

That could be interpreted in a different way. :p

[Michii 0]

Looked around and couldn't find an answer through search either, how is it going to work as a standalone? Can original players play with those who only have arrowhead? Restrictions?

The only answers i could fine are very very vague

Edited June 5, 2010 by Sess

[Fox '09 14]

no, the engine differences are too much. If you have the original game and ArmA 2 is "connected" you should be able to play arma 2 maps and missions with other OA players with the same content.

[EricM 0]

Looked around and couldn't find an answer through search either, how is it going to work as a standalone? Can original players play with those who only have arrowhead? Restrictions?The only answers i could fine are very very vague

The way I understand it :

- OA exe will replace the standard Arma2 exe, so it's not compatible with vanilla Arma2 (it's like you have different patch versions).

- Content on the other hand is compatible, so you can use all Arma 2 assets in OA.

[SASrecon 0]

afaik it's a bit like CAA1; patch-up then port the pbos ;) I reckon OA will come with something to allow you to do it more easily/you will be able to download something from BIS.

(for those of you that don't know, CAA1 is used to port ARMA1 content to ARMA2)

[wiggum2 31]

I too have a few questions about Arrowhead and ArmA2:

1. They sayed that the improvements of OA will affect ArmA2 too, will that mean that we have the better vegetation, the FLIR and the better Radio Sound in ArmA2 too if we install OA over ArmA2 ?

2. Content of OA can be placed on Chenarus and Utes too ?

This would mean we could use the new Units and Objects on the old islands too !

3. What Key is needed for playing online if you have both installed, ArmA2 and OA...lets say you want to play a mixed mission with stuff from OA in Chenarus.

[glowbal 13]

1. I thought there would come a patch for A2. Which includes bug fixes and AI improvements. I don't think we will get FLIR in A2.. just in OA.

2. Yes, if you intregrate AO with A2. And, you would need to use the AO start up (exe?).

3. With content from AO on Chenarus, I think you just need both games?

[wiggum2 31]

ARMA 2 + ARMA2: OA Combined

A2OA can also use the full content of ARMA 2 (if installed) to create an unsurpassed scale of modern military simulation.

* Maps of Chernarus and Takistan (5 maps in total) with their typical local civilian population - 440 square km!

* 9 different army factions: US Army, US Marines, Russian Army, Takistani Army and militia, Chernarussian Defense Forces, Chernarussian insurgents and partisans, Takistani Guerrillas

* 150+ different weapons (e.g. range of SCAR assault rifles, M110 sniper rifle, FN FAL, Uzi submachine gun, Sa-58 in many variants, Lee Enfield rifle, grenade launchers)

* 100+ different vehicles (e.g. M2 Bradley armored recon vehicle, AH-64D Apache gunship, CH-47 transport helicopter, UH-1H Huey helicopter, Stryker armored personnel carrier in multiple variants, T-55 main battle tank, old Soviet BTR-60 and BTR-40 armored personnel carries, variety of new civilian vehicles and many more)

Improvements In The Original ARMA 2 Game

* additional special effects (shaking camera, SSAO)

* more optimized engine

* brand new, more streamlined UI

* improved radio chatter

* improved vehicle simulation (top-down radar, flares, FLIR)

* integrated mod management

Will it be possible to use the original ARMA 2 content combined with new OA content?

* Yes. Users that already have ARMA 2 installed will be offered an option to install OA into it and run it as a combined, never seen before size and experience.

http://community.bistudio.com/wiki/Ask_Bohemia_%28about_Operation_Arrowhead..._or_anything_else_you_want_to_ask%29!

Just for info !

Edited June 5, 2010 by Wiggum

[Zipper5 74]

But that means those will be in the original Arma 2 only when you combine it with OA. There probably won't be anything from OA added into Arma 2 unless you buy OA apart from bug and AI fixes/changes.

[fabrizio_t 58]

I am probably the only one not impressed by the Takistan map?

Judging from shots and info looks like environment is smaller, repetitive and uninspiring.

ArmA2 AI is already capable (to some extents) to use cover, which was a giant step forward compared to ArmA. In such a barren map this improvement will be useless.

Takistan reminds to me Sahrani, which i hardly enjoyed.

So far i think Chernarus looks far better for any infantry based operations.

Of course we'll get "Zargabad" too, with its seemingly huge and detailed urban area.

ArmA2 AI does not work so well in urban CQB, should we really expect substantial improvements with that?

[Richey79 10]

I always read 'Improvements in the original Arma 2 game' as a mistranslation of 'Improvements over the original Arma 2 game' - i.e. the improvements listed will be in Operation Arrowhead only.

Prepositions tend to work rather more efficiently in Eastern European languages than English.

Having said that, if you load up Chernarus.pbo using the OA.exe, I don't see why you shouldn't get a few of the advantages of the new game engine. E.g. if they've improved the lighting shaders, possibly SSAO... .

[jw custom 56]

Of course we'll get "Zargabad" too, with its seemingly huge and detailed urban area.

ArmA2 AI does not work so well in urban CQB, should we really expect substantial improvements with that?

From reading reviews it sounds like AI should now navigate buildings without too many problems!

[wiggum2 31]

Another question would be if the new adjustable optics on sniper rifles will work with the weapons that are already in ArmA2 !

[Big Dawg KS 6]

I always read 'Improvements in the original Arma 2 game' as a mistranslation of 'Improvements over the original Arma 2 game' - i.e. the improvements listed will be in Operation Arrowhead only.

Prepositions tend to work rather more efficiently in Eastern European languages than English.

Having said that, if you load up Chernarus.pbo using the OA.exe, I don't see why you shouldn't get a few of the advantages of the new game engine. E.g. if they've improved the lighting shaders, possibly SSAO... .

Since it's under "ARMA 2 + ARMA2: OA Combined", I would say that list is a list of improvements when you have both ArmA 2 and OA, as in these improvements are applied to the ArmA 2 if you have OA.

[Petko 10]

I just hope one day the technical aspect will be "realistic"-zide of the AA franchise... this FLIR addon is great i love it, but looking closer the videos i can only assume that the technical side of the game is still just on a plattform-arcade game level.

How can you call it realistic when in real life radars, guidance systems, missiles, aircrafts etc. measure distance and speed in the scale of hundreds of kilometeres, sometimes thousands not in 100m-200m or so, like it exsist ingame.

I know its hard to merge an fps capable solder sim, with a mil-tech (aircraft, vehicular, naval etc. ) simulator, but i dont think its impossible, and the image of this franchise is the closest to it as it can get, but its still too short for tech sim fans to be able to adopt to it.

Edited June 5, 2010 by Petko

[jw custom 56]

I just hope one day the technical aspect will be "realistic"-zide of the AA franchise... this FLIR addon is great i love it, but looking closer the videos i can only assume that the technical side of the game is still just on a plattform-arcade game level.

How can you call it realistic when in real life radars, guidance systems, missiles, aircrafts etc. measure distance and speed in the scale of hundreds of kilometeres, sometimes thousands not in 100m-200m or so, like it exsist ingame.

I know its hard to merge an fps capable solder sim, with a mil-tech (aircraft, vehicular, naval etc. ) simulator, but i dont think its impossible, and the image of this franchise is the closest to it as it can get, but its still too short for tech sim fans to be able to adopt to it.

Ok.... :j:

[Petko 10]

Oh yea, and i forgot to mention that im also on the opinion that a guy has already raised on this board. Why not consider a cooperation with Eagle Dynamics? Im not exactly an insider in game industry but i dont think that this would be such a false idea. A modular game system combining the infantry aspect of ARMA and the air-technical of DCS would be something that would make a difference in this industry. It would rumble the whole sim gaming community.

And dont tell me its such an impossible task to interface the two game. ED easly managed to subsequently add the possiblity with and addon to their 7 year old LOMAC to work together with the new gen DCS. I know its a bit more complicated than that to combine two fully different product, but i dont think there is any natural law preventing it from happening.

I just hope one day the technical aspect will be "realistic"-zide of the AA franchise... this FLIR addon is great i love it, but looking closer the videos i can only assume that the technical side of the game is still just on a plattform-arcade game level.

How can you call it realistic when in real life radars, guidance systems, missiles, aircrafts etc. measure distance and speed in the scale of hundreds of kilometeres, sometimes thousands not in 100m-200m or so, like it exsist ingame.

I know its hard to merge an fps capable solder sim, with a mil-tech (aircraft, vehicular, naval etc. ) simulator, but i dont think its impossible, and the image of this franchise is the closest to it as it can get, but its still too short for tech sim fans to be able to adopt to it.

Edited June 5, 2010 by Petko

[nodunit 397]

That is because the engines they use are very similar, it's not stitching together two seperate and completely different engines..besides people say you need a beast computer to run DCS well, just as with A2 and DCS doesn't use nearly the same fancy effects A2 does, now imagine the nightmare this would be on hardware, the amounts of 'behind the scenes' processing going is probably equivilant to Arma2's AI if not more and that is for one aircraft.

It would also be hectic on library, how would you sort the two out, what would price come to etc, and not to mention why love aircraft only? Tanks need loving too.

About the radar..it's all about frame rate and sadly balance, if tanks could engage effectively at 5000M and helicopters could destroy you without even seeing you (although that actually is possible in this game) then you pretty much have "instant win"

Radar can scan so far in real life but in real life land terrain is an astoungly vast expanse in which there is almost no end to, something you can't quit emulate here..or at least not without making it very bare.

Edited June 5, 2010 by NodUnit

[Petko 10]

That is because the engines they use are very similar, it's not stitching together two seperate and completely different engines..besides people say you need a beast computer to run DCS well, just as with A2 and DCS doesn't use nearly the same fancy effects A2 does, now imagine the nightmare this would be on hardware, the amounts of 'behind the scenes' processing going is probably equivilant to Arma2's AI if not more and that is for one aircraft.

It would also be hectic on library, how would you sort the two out, what would price come to etc, and not to mention why love aircraft only? Tanks need loving too.

About the radar..it's all about frame rate and sadly balance, if tanks could engage effectively at 5000M and helicopters could destroy you without even seeing you (although that actually is possible in this game) then you pretty much have "instant win"

Radar can scan so far in real life but in real life land terrain is an astoungly vast expanse in which there is almost no end to, something you can't quit emulate here..or at least not without making it very bare.

I have faith in human creativity, and i think every problem mentioned so far can be solved.

I agree that its unlikely for current hardware to bear such a vast space with the level of detail ARMA offers, but ive never told that this is the goal.

The two game(modules) can have a seperate engine, just the world coordinate system must be merged. That means there can be an only aircraft sim with a low detail but vast space capable engine like we are used to, and a high detail engine for the infantry simulation. The world can be handled in an onion layered manner, the vast low detail world of the aircraft sim has a smaller area in it, which is designated for infantry operations and it has a size around that we have in ARMA: the infantry module could view it with hight detail as we are used to. The air module would just handle it as any other part of the low detail terrrain.

Outside this grid there would be no point for the infantry to go out, it would be the same low detail as it is now in ARMA outside the main area.

Just the bearings, coordinates of entities and the basic terrain topography would be the main connection between the two engines.

And for the balance, i dont think this would be an issue. Infantry still has a role within modern warefare, and as far as i know ARMA is just about this. Infantry cant be just spotted on radar from hundreds of km-s away and hit with a rocket, especially in mountainous regions. Modern infantry ops are usually exactly about some kind of "filling the gap" for technical warefare. Like neutralizing an enemy radar station or anti-air battery for the air units to be able to strike, or spotting for them. They can be also defending the battery and operating it. And they can always hide deep within foliage against any tech units.

Edited June 5, 2010 by Petko

[EricM 0]

Petko, Arma is a game, not a pro simulator. What you are looking for is called VBS2 and already has HLA interface to connect it to Steel Beast Pro for instance.

[RobertJ 10]

1) ARMA is an infantry combat simulator as its primary, making maps 1000km by 1000km makes it 'too realistic'. People don't want the 'real experience', the real experience is spending 2 months in a camp per hour of fighting. Spending 8 hours travelling to the patrol zone, 8 hours back. People want firefights on detailed maps

2) ARMA 2 is 10 odd GB and takes a way above average computer to run, it's easily one of the most demanding games, you make the map 1 million square km and we're gonna need supercomputers to host our servers. What does it really add anyway, you lock and blow up something 80km that you can't see when you're in a F22, sure it's realistic but it doesn't lead to good gameplay. People don't wanna fly around at 40,000 feet 100km away from the action firing missiles at each other. It's all about getting a good balance.

[Fox '09 14]

From reading reviews it sounds like AI should now navigate buildings without too many problems!

they have to improve it, after all, whats the use of every building enterable and destructible if the AI cannot enter them?