Why are public games in ArmA II so terrible?

[Chunk3ym4n 10]

Playing public games is a mess in ArmA II. First of all there is like 90% domination servers. What happened to the old fashioned co-op style games? When ever I join in it's a mess. People are running around everywhere and you just get in the chopper, get out, walk 2 miles to get to the place where AI is shooting everywhere, and then die. Why does no one stick in their squad? Inside Project Reality it's all human players and the public games are fine. Everyone seems to know what they are doing and no one is just running around. The players even *GASP* stick in their squad unlike ArmA II. I just don't understand how public games in ArmA II are an absolute mess while in Project Reality it's all nice and tidy.

[Gunter Severloh 4067]

sounds like your in the wrong game, i played project reality while back and it is a bit more organised like.

but thats another reason why i edit and play my own missions, and play coop with my unit.

if you want coop and great gameplay join a squad, clan or unit.

[katdogfizzow 13]

Indeed. Co-op rocks.

[Murklor 10]

Administration and gameplay functions, simple as that.

The first part is hard to find and the second depend on the mission. A key flaw IMO is the many different versions, rather than making something more uniform. Xenos Domination offer plenty of choices, which is great... But a function like revive changes the gameplay completely - it makes people stick together so you dont have to make the trip back from the base. Yet few domination servers run with revive. On top of things, Evolution and Domination doesnt even use the same version of revive.

All in all, its rather confusing and you join a server not expecting anything.

[nkenny 1057]

Multiple reasons.

Like you note a plethora of Domination servers spew out the equivalent of “Fast food†game experiences. Delicious and readily available but leaves you fat and lazy.

Arma2 suffers from a remarkably low level of internal communication. Very few tactical messages are written using in game text. That the VOIP system is despised by so many server admins doesn’t really help either.

None of the most popular game modes really encourage teamwork. Project Reality, or even Battle Field 2 are rifle with game mechanics that encourage (force) team play. The vast majority of “public†arma2 players seem perfectly content to move around using unlikely combinations of DMRs, SMAWs, and sometimes MGs. Every human soldier is therefore more akin to a force of nature and perfectly capable of dealing with any real threat by himself. All in the name of freedom.

Few servers/map really take ‘Death’ into practical GAME DESIGN account. Norrins revive script has the potential, but few public games design their mission around dying.

The Solution?

I’ve been thinking quite a lot about this topic lately actually. I’d be willing to pay (in part) for a server hosting short, sharp and sweet coop missions. With a focus on high replay value and unified design. 15-20 minutes per map. Well designed and varied missions. (that don’t need to emulate MMORPGs)

What I have in ideas, I lack in research. Are there mission designers willing to make missions like that? Has it already been tried? Are there already servers like it? The only thing I’m certain of is that threads like this pop up every second week; there is bound to be a crowd for that sort of thing.

-k

(PS: Don’t get me wrong. I enjoy domination. WBG server is excellent at it. Warfare is fun, evolution not so much. My personal preference is just as valid as someone else’s. I prefer coops (or TDMs) with asymmetric teams and varied strategies. )

[[asa]oden 0]

I made this City Fight series for small fast experiences, no block buster so I guess people aren't that interested in this kind of gameplay

City Fight Series

But indeed, MP gameplay in Domination is more or less playing singleplayer online.

Best coop is organized from you local IRC channel I guess :p

[Alex72 1]

Get along with a team that plays like you. That gives you the best you can get. It IS hard to get good games out of random people joining a server especially if you want organization and teamplay. You dont know how long the random people will stay for or what they like (team play or not) etc. It happens that good games are played, but usually not in my experience. But i also understand why. Someone needs to step up and lead to get a good game, and the rest need to be willing to follow. This is a very open and free game, and withough leadership it will just be a boring mess.

Joining a team or going on pub games with Tactical Gamer etc where leadership excists will give you awesome games.

[zyklone 1]

It's the same thing plaguing every JIP game in history. Check QuakeLive now for example.

The public games are horrible due to people just beeing assholes and then quitting. :)

JIP is the responsible party. There is no time invested in setting up a game so there is no incentive to actually play.

Everything else lack of communication etc. all comes from this. You need to enforce organization on the chaos before the game, you can't expected a game to become organized after it has begun.

[Halli~SPARTA~ 0]

You just have not played on the right servers, Look at gametracker and join in on one of the top 10.

After you play on some servers and they get to know your not a 10 year old Dennis the menace they will invite you into true or semi true tactical ran coop play...... ;)

[-GCA- Salah ad Din 10]

Yes, MP on most servers is horrible and Teamwork in PR is normally much better. Squad coherence is virtually non-existent because there are no drawbacks if you go lone-wolf.

Most servers insist on people joining their Teamspeak to participate in anything resembling an organized game, which is ridiculous if you have a look at the rather nice VOIP system that ArmaA2 offers. If you don't want to join their TS, you're practically forced to lone-wolf.

BUT, the main and IMHO most significant difference between Arma2 and PR public play is this:

PR is TvT whereas most Arma2 servers run Co-Op missions. Playing against humans is much much more difficult than to fight against AI bots. Any team that doesn't get organized will loose against humans.

Also, to encourage teamplay, mission designers must restrict availability of equipment, just like in PR not everybody can be a Sniper. Restrict vehicle access to specific crew slots. Introduce some sort of kit system like in PR. Another thing. While revive scripts are nice, it is ridiculous that every soldier can revive anyone. That should be restricted to Medic slots.

So, I call for more PvP / TvT missions on public servers.

While it is possible to have a nice evening of gaming when playing Co-op missions with your little clan/band of brothers on a closed server like TacShack does (AFAIK they never engage in PvP games with other organized units) the real fun and thrill comes from engaging and conquering a human enemy (even loosing can be fun).

Edited November 6, 2009 by [GCA] Salah ad Din

[enforcer1975 0]

Try playing in a clan and in a league. You will have tons of teamwork and stickiness it will literally flow out of your ears. You can't expect teamwork from a every random weekend warrior on a public server. Players locking themselves up in a voice program doesn't help the situation either.

A controlled environment such as a clanwar or a locked server are the best solutions for teamplay.

ArmA VoIP isn't that fascinating if you have idiots voice spaming the whole time like in the old Sahrani Life community. Of course you can mute them, it's the same as turning VoIP off.

[whisper 0]

Talk, talk, and more talk, but whenever someone tries to come in with a solution, the talkers suddenly vanish

Question raised a million times already, always the same arguments thrown, and nothing done about it, even though there are many people trying to change things. But, ofc, zero help received from the naysayers...

[Zipper5 74]

Question raised a million times already, always the same arguments thrown, and nothing done about it, even though there are many people trying to change things. But, ofc, zero help received from the naysayers...

If you're talking about people trying to get BIS to impose limits on mission makers, then that doesn't even deserve to be heard due to how ridiculous and ignorant it is. If they were to even know what ArmA II is about outside of MP, they would know that the freedom makes the game what it is. Imposing limits on that freedom would only hinder BIS, not help it.

To answer the OP - it's mainly because of bad server administration, along with most people favoring non-teamwork maps. Ones that reward you for points, like Evolution. While that is perfectly fine in games like COD4 and BF2, that's not what should be as overdone in ArmA II as it is. The best way to *start* to fix it is as NkEnNy said on the previous page - there need to be servers dedicated to hosting only good, small coop maps that encourage teamwork. Otherwise we'll be stuck with what is there.

[walker 0]

Hi all

Playing without a human admin is always an invitation to the nutjobs.

The solution is simple play on a human adminned server.

Kind regards walker

[whisper 0]

If you're talking about people trying to get BIS to impose limits on mission makers, then that doesn't even deserve to be heard due to how ridiculous and ignorant it is. If they were to even know what ArmA II is about outside of MP, they would know that the freedom makes the game what it is. Imposing limits on that freedom would only hinder BIS, not help it.

No, I'm talking about mission makers trying to implement what all the complainers here are listing. Missions that barely get the interest they deserve (even AAS doesn't get the interest it deserves. Devastation pack, anyone?). But still, I hear complaints about "this game needs this kit implemented, etc"? ... that makes no sense

I'm talking about server owners trying to put up missions that have what the complainers here are asking for. Servers that always stay empty. There are tons of discussion on this very MP board about how people can do to have this running (making gamemode-dedicated servers, using missions with fewer players, etc...), people trying to do something. And all the response they get, is this kind of "A2 sucks, PR pwns" threads.

[Zipper5 74]

Ah ok. Yes, I agree with you. I have yet to see a server running the Devastation map, and the times I have played it in private, it's awesome. People are just so wanting of their Domination or Evolution fixes that it gets shunned like every other MP map. It's very unfortunate. Again, however, someone should have a server like I mentioned earlier. That way, everyone looking for something else, would have somewhere to go.

[An Fiach 10]

While I agree, one solution would be for the complainers to set up a server and run the maps they complain others aren't running.

The other, as Walker pointed out, is to play on Administered servers. From what I've read PR is the way it is because every server is Adminned and team play is strictly enforced by both the admins and by the mission/map mechanics. Again, don't blame the game for the lack of players not doing what you want them to do. Make your own maps and host them on your own server and you will have what you want. Keep in mind also that public servers hosted by groups will often run Domi type missions when their members and Admins are not online, so it will depend on your time zone whether you catch them on or not.

[enforcer1975 0]

No, I'm talking about mission makers trying to implement what all the complainers here are listing. Missions that barely get the interest they deserve (even AAS doesn't get the interest it deserves. Devastation pack, anyone?). But still, I hear complaints about "this game needs this kit implemented, etc"? ... that makes no sense

I'm talking about server owners trying to put up missions that have what the complainers here are asking for. Servers that always stay empty. There are tons of discussion on this very MP board about how people can do to have this running (making gamemode-dedicated servers, using missions with fewer players, etc...), people trying to do something. And all the response they get, is this kind of "A2 sucks, PR pwns" threads.

In our case a clanmate has done what you suggested: "put in what poeple want", the missions weren't the problem. Even with the crappy preverions of ArmA 2 they worked better, even with ArmA 1 where the missions were converted from, where other missiosn makers had flaws his missions were 99% flawless.

The thing where players were suddenly moaning about was the game itself, about bugs that were actually features and unbalanced sides because they had no skill etc.

It killed a whole league before it started. It must have been the country though. The EU section still lives on, but players start to create TDM and CTF mappacks instead of the classic C&H missions the game was supposed to be played with ( no vehicles etc. )...in the end those players could have played TDM and CTF in any other game imo. TDM and CTF might still a teambased missions, but i doesn't take advantage of the capabilities of the game. In action shooters like CoD and BF2 where you have more limited possibilities ( BF2 is practically a C&H only game nad CoD is a mix of C&H, CTF, TDM and DM, but all on a different level scriptwise and areawise ) it's understandable that you can't make such missions.

You can make the best mission ever and there will alway be somebody like you to complain.

Edited November 7, 2009 by Enforcer1975

[KELLO 0]

well to be honest I tried to do somthing about this by providing a free community server (quad core 4 gig ram etc...), but the response was almost zero, Players were invited to apply to admin the server and i got zero requests, players were invited to suggest maps but not one request, the community side of this game is probably the worst its ever been, as there is probably one popular 'public' server atm that is capable of hosting a descent amount of players, and the rest play in there locked servers with the same people against AI every night....not complaining about it, its just how it is...

[galzohar 31]

He's not complaining about the mission makers as much as he's complaining about players not looking out for missions that they like and instead just complain that all servers run domi/evo/cti/ctf/tdm. If I wouldn't have been looking on the server list for "a server with more than 5 players running a mission other than those common public server missions" I would've never found Zeus.

There is a reason servers run those missions. Those missions require no teamplay at all (well, cti/ctf/tdm could require a little but not nearly as much as coop or A&D). domi/evo are so common because they're simply missions where you can't loose and thus you can do whatever you want and have no consequences as long as the mobile respawn is kept in a reasonable position. You see the mess on those servers, right? Now think what would happen if you would try run a realistic coop mission with such a mess - the players will most likely not even survive the first firefight! And to be honest, not surviving the first firefight isn't a lot of fun. Basically no teamwork leads to domination/etc servers and those servers lead back to having no teamwork.

Joining a server with a human admin is not enough. You need a server with a human admin that runs realistic missions and kicks anyone who doesn't help completing the mission in a useful manner. Even servers that do have a human administrator don't usually have that. What's funny is that on Zeus the admins kick players who simply fail to respond in chat before a mission starts. It's amazing how much it reduces the amount of people that simply don't help the team complete the mission not to mention TK/grief.

3rd party voice is required for good teamwork in this game simply because the in-game voice is horrible quality and volume (even TS's horrible sound quality is pure gold when compared to Arma 2's VOIP). Servers that want public players to work with the team will generally give you their TS/vent IP and you can join them. Zeus don't even force you to do that as long as you just follow your group leader (but if you want to know what's going on or lead a fireteam/squad you are required to be on).

[-GCA- Salah ad Din 10]

well to be honest I tried to do somthing about this by providing a free community server (quad core 4 gig ram etc...), but the response was almost zero, Players were invited to apply to admin the server and i got zero requests, players were invited to suggest maps but not one request, the community side of this game is probably the worst its ever been, as there is probably one popular 'public' server atm that is capable of hosting a descent amount of players, and the rest play in there locked servers with the same people against AI every night....not complaining about it, its just how it is...

What? Where? Is that offer still standing? Why wasn't I informed about this?

Please contact me, ASAP.

3rd party voice is required for good teamwork in this game simply because the in-game voice is horrible quality and volume (even TS's horrible sound quality is pure gold when compared to Arma 2's VOIP). Servers that want public players to work with the team will generally give you their TS/vent IP and you can join them. Zeus don't even force you to do that as long as you just follow your group leader (but if you want to know what's going on or lead a fireteam/squad you are required to be on).

I have noticed that Arma2 VOIP quality is highly variable... on the same server during the same mission. Some people come through crystal clear, while others break up constantly, so this CANNOT be a game issue but must be related to the players computer/connection/shoe size.

I believe some people have real problems to hold down the PTT from 500 ms before they start talking until 500 ms after they stopped talking. IMHO, the Arma2 VOIP is excellent, people just need to learn how to use it.

Missions that barely get the interest they deserve (even AAS doesn't get the interest it deserves. Devastation pack, anyone?).

Yes, I would love to see servers running Devastation. Sadly, our community's server is for some arcane and mysterious reasons currently not able to run an Arma2 server :(

Edited November 7, 2009 by [GCA] Salah ad Din

[KELLO 0]

yes the offer still stands, but more interest from the 'community' is needed....

tell you what if we get five applications to admin it in this thread the server will go up straight away.......:rolleyes:

[Zipper5 74]

Well, I'll be honest with you Kello. I didn't see you advertising this anywhere. Maybe I just didn't see it, or perhaps you advertised it incorrectly. Where did you post about this? And when? You have a link to it? Can't believe that if you did inform us about it that there was no response. You can see that people like Salah ad Din are definitely interested, as would I be.

That is, if you did advertise it.

[USSRsniper 0]

You can' get a good game on a public server. On some servers people actually use teamwork on domination. There are idiots on the server but sometimes there is group of people who work as a team.

Edited November 7, 2009 by USSRsniper

[KELLO 0]

Well, I'll be honest with you Kello. I didn't see you advertising this anywhere. Maybe I just didn't see it, or perhaps you advertised it incorrectly. Where did you post about this? And when? You have a link to it? Can't believe that if you did inform us about it that there was no response. You can see that people like Salah ad Din are definitely interested, as would I be.

That is, if you did advertise it.

http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?t=89029

Posted in the multiplayer section..still cant believe it???