Operation Arrowhead: The questions and answers thread

[max power 21]

I thought Arma 2 was the enhanced engine!? Feels like buying beta products from this company, again...

It's a further enhancement of the same engine they've been building for a while. Does everytime they make an enhancement mean the previous version was a beta?

[Baxalasse 10]

It's a further enhancement of the same engine they've been building for a while. Does everytime they make an enhancement mean the previous version was a beta?

True, i stand corrected...

Edit: But why cant they enhance the current engine and bring that into AH, i mean just the AH content alone is worth my money (even if i just seen some glimpses).

Edited August 23, 2009 by Baxalasse

[max power 21]

I think what you're saying is that you want them to patch up the current engine to the OA standard, including the new engine features, and just release OA as an expansion pack. Well, I think that what they want is to make OA as attractive as possible for purchase, so they can see as much benefit as possible from all of the employee hours put into making it. They also have a good opportunity here to expand the brand. Personally, I like the idea of this 'medium priced expansion'. It seems to bring a few things a lot of people wanted to the game that I didn't expect to see.

[jackass888 0]

The only features i would like to see are those that were already said to be in Arma2 but left out. CQB AI like advertised... doing housesearches and taking cover in buildings. Also on several Arma2 screens AI were using armored vehicles as cover but this is nowhere to be seen ingame. And finally shooting positions in vehicles. Nothing more and nothing less.

[max power 21]

The only features i would like to see are those that were already said to be in Arma2 but left out. CQB AI like advertised... doing housesearches and taking cover in buildings. Also on several Arma2 screens AI were using armored vehicles as cover but this is nowhere to be seen ingame. And finally shooting positions in vehicles. Nothing more and nothing less.

Where did they advertize AIs ability to do house searches?

[jw custom 56]

The only features i would like to see are those that were already said to be in Arma2 but left out. CQB AI like advertised... doing housesearches and taking cover in buildings.

You could use Urban Patrol Script or HousePatrol script for that, work fairly okay.

[Deadfast 43]

there will have the Czech army : http://img8.imageshack.us/img8/8126/arma2arrowheadvehiclesc.jpg

why? :confused:

hurrah!, we will have new contents, no in fact only retextured models!! no need to create new contents?

we will still have a copy of the russian army and always the usa army/marines (tiring)

What the hell are you on about?

Maybe you should do a tiny bit of a research before you start blowing your throttle, Wikipedia would suffice.

Just because Czech republic was part of the Warsaw pact doesn't mean it's a copy of Russians.

In fact it was the only country that had their own rifle (read not AK) - the Vz 58 (still in service today, you will get to see it in the expansion) and the UK 59 machine gun (should get to see that as well).

The transportation is also not borrowed off the Russians either - Landrovers and Tatras among others.

Yeah, the rest might be the same, but it's definitely not a "lame" copy with a couple of reskins.

[GoOB 0]

Other equipment used by the Czech we might see is the Iveco LMV (super sweet), Dingo armoured transport and maybe the Pandur II IFV. Personally I look forward to seeing some of the Czech army in OA, they are definatley a unique force. And judging by their performance in Afghanistan, a highly professional one at that.

Edited August 23, 2009 by GoOB

[MehMan 0]

I wonder if the TAB-fire system will now be obsolete with the implementation of FLIR.

[--DST-- Anth 10]

OHH, BI dodges Codemasters punch and sends a right hook!

:D

Awesome, just awesome. I'm looking forward to the expansion now. And thanks for sending the questions Wolle!

Im pretty sure that Codemasters are shaking in there boots right now then again....

I for one wont be buying this your game engine is outdated and useless in the current era. The support is also similar to your game engine. I can tell straight away that bis is trying to make extra cash again the answers to the questions are exatly what I wanted to see.

Might aswell of just answered to everything:-

Jennik: I wouldn't expect anything to be changed "drastically"

Edited August 23, 2009 by [-DST-] Anth

[NoRailgunner 0]

I wonder if AI will still change weapon/ammo on their own - contrary to players order or even if its all set to "manual fire".

Will default AI (groups) be able to retreat and regroup if the chances to survive below 30%?

Will AI be able to drive vehicles in (mixed) convoys on roads/towns without chaotic steering?

Optimized road network for AI pathfinding for Arma2 and Arma2:OA?

[Alex72 1]

Anth;1416766']Im pretty sure that Codemasters are shaking in there boots right now then again....

I for one wont be buying this your game engine is outdated and useless in the current era. The support is also similar to your game engine. I can tell straight away that bis is trying to make extra cash again the answers to the questions are exatly what I wanted to see.

Ok cool. Bye bye.

Dont get why people go post in forums of games they dont like? Like i would go to DR's forum just to say im not gonna buy their childish game. Whats the point? Pff

Alex

[jw custom 56]

Dont get why people go post in forums of games they dont like? Like i would go to DR's forum just to say im not gonna buy their childish game. Whats the point? Pff

U don't.... i live for it :p

[Max255 59]

Maybe Operation Arrowhead should have some new vehicles such as Cougar MRAPs. ;)

Yes, +1 for this. I'm missing MRAPs so much... And now there is reason to put them in, so BIS, plese give us MRAPs!!! :rolleyes:

I think CougarH, RG-31 Mk5 LHM, RG-33 and Buffalo will make us happy...

Numbers 1, 3, 4 are in VBS2 so this is just simply port (excluding new shaders etc.), RG-31 LHM is a bit harder but still to make.

[Hunin 0]

Ok cool. Bye bye.

Dont get why people go post in forums of games they dont like? Like i would go to DR's forum just to say im not gonna buy their childish game. Whats the point? Pff

Alex

CM forums are awesome m8.

They're composed of 90 % 15 year olds with the last 10 % beeing USMC vets ( many of them with sniping background ).

For the special kick I can also recommend the CoD4 forums ( not it's not a cliche ).

( ;) :D )

[abs 2]

;1416795']Yes' date=' +1 for this. I'm missing MRAPs so much... And now there is reason to put them in, so BIS, plese give us MRAPs!!! :rolleyes:

I think CougarH, RG-31 Mk5 LHM, RG-33 and Buffalo will make us happy...

Numbers 1, 3, 4 are in VBS2 so this is just simply port (excluding new shaders etc.), RG-31 LHM is a bit harder but still to make.[/quote']

I don't know about a Mk5, but you'll see a Mk3 for sure...maybe not from BIS, but there's one in the works.

Abs

[ahmedjbh 0]

It would be cool if you could play from both sides.

For example if the US mission was to capture a bridge, you could play as US and try to capture, or as insurgent and try to defend, would effectively double the game size, with minimal effort.

[bogdanm 0]

It would be cool if you could play from both sides.

For example if the US mission was to capture a bridge, you could play as US and try to capture, or as insurgent and try to defend, would effectively double the game size, with minimal effort.

This sounds good and easy to do on paper but its not if you put it in practice. This would work only if the missions won't any connection between them. If the objectives in different missions are related to each other, if one mission's result has been altered than everything that follows that mission must be changed also.

For example if you play the US campaign and your mission is to capture a bridge. If you succeed, your next mission might be to assault a town that's on the other side of the river. If you are the taliban and play the bridge mission and you manage to defend the bridge, your next mission can't be defend the town against the US assault since the US Army failed to complete their objective.

I haven't played the ARMA1/2 campaign so I don't know how much connection is between different missions but this might be an issue with playing exactly the same campaign with both sides.

[GoOB 0]

;1416795']

I think CougarH' date=' RG-31 Mk5 LHM, RG-33 and Buffalo will make us happy...

Numbers 1, 3, 4 are in VBS2 so this is just simply port (excluding new shaders etc.), RG-31 LHM is a bit harder but still to make.[/quote']

As I understand it, just because a vehicle is in VBS2 does not mean that BIS are able to include the same model and textures in OA. I beleive the developing of force specific content for VBS 2 is payed for by the buyers of that same content, and much of that is no doubt locked to the buyers by license.

[Max255 59]

As I understand it, just because a vehicle is in VBS2 does not mean that BIS are able to include the same model and textures in OA. I beleive the developing of force specific content for VBS 2 is payed for by the buyers of that same content, and much of that is no doubt locked to the buyers by license.

Yes, it may be not that easy... But we already have: AAV, LAV-25, MQ-9 Reaper, C-130J, UH-1Y and we'll have AH-64D - all this is from VBS2, so it's not so hard to port (including permissions) stuff. That's why i have hope for MRAPs, VBS have pretty nice setup of them already...

[Binkowski 25]

Well considering that it's US Army in this new expansion, they should include the MRAP's as well as the Stykers, the new 1151's, etc. If they don't come in the new expansion, we do have a very dedicated modding community. I've noticed from the screen shots it's 82nd Airborne with the ISAF patch which means NATO involvement. So, once this is released I'll hopefully have my base US Army units released.

[bogdanm 0]

As I understand it, just because a vehicle is in VBS2 does not mean that BIS are able to include the same model and textures in OA. I beleive the developing of force specific content for VBS 2 is payed for by the buyers of that same content, and much of that is no doubt locked to the buyers by license.

I don't think the US, british or australian army has any kind of license on VBS2 content. One example is that VBS2 is available to the public with all US, british and australian weapons and vehicles and I don't think BI shares profit with all these countries defence ministries.

The gear that will be available in OA depends on how the campaign designers think that kind of gear suits the mission. You won't see content in OA that has absolutely no role in the campaign.

[SASrecon 0]

A BIS made chinook and Apache, not just one but two islands and a newer and enhanced version of ARMA 2 engine

>My eyes feel nice and my pancreas just secreted :rolleyes:...

Oh and the best bit: HUDs for airplanes and helicopters!!!!! when i saw this picture [>100kb] http://dslyecxi.com/screens/ArmA2/Arrowhead/images/arma2_arrowhead_ingame_shot_05.jpg i froze up in excitement for about 5 minutes then got back to writing this message again.

This was also great

Is this actually some sort of top secret release thats going to be as groundbreaking as flashpoint 1, and Arma 2 was simply a distraction?

W0lle: LOL

My mini wishlist for OA is:

-a glider plane,

-a rideable donkey for poor insurgents/civilians [Jennik:"unsymetrical kind of war"] which could mean that the poor guys could use donkeys as transport :D"

-a civilian plane or two like the DC3 in ArmA QG or the cessna mod for ArmA1, the civvie mi17 is ok but its not really used in real life for civilian transport and this should be a realistic military simulator which includes all aspects of warfare right?

BIS i wish you the best of luck with this new project all i can tell you is that its looking good (and tell you to look at my wishlist of course:bounce3:)

[foxtwofive 10]

So...The US Army is going to be based on SBCT, HBCT, and IBCT. Just like the Real US Army structure? Is this correct?

[Steakslim 1]

Interesting. 70km square, is that significantly larger than Utes?

You know I pondered this question the last few days, and with the information we have I conjured up a rather shoddy chart to compare the sizes of the islands. Note, these are not exact, just to give people the idea of sizes of Takistan and Zargabad in comparison to Chernarus and Utes and hopefully they are somewhat correct.

http://img231.imageshack.us/img231/6419/arma2islandcomparison.jpg