Lack of PvP in Oz (Zero PvP in Oz)

[76 0]

Done right I know it succeeds... I've run PvP nights on my old clans server and brought there numbers up from the odd few members playing to ~50 players most weekend nights and ~20 players most week nights.

There is a market for it and many clans have multiple servers but none are dedicated PvP or even semi regular PvP...

To be clear I don't include warfare... I mean real PvP (AAS, AAD, DM, TDM, FF, CTF, KOTH)

so I guess my question is... why not?

Edited May 15, 2010 by 76
spelling

[galzohar 31]

The problem is to get a PvP game of something more than just a TDM/mini-C&H, you need people. You can't just start a game up with 4-10 players and expect more to join, because those 4-10 players would get bored and leave before you can gather more players.

Also, making any kind of realistic and tactical PvP while still keeping it enjoyable is very difficult, and this becomes even more difficult when you know it needs to work with low player counts as well since you're most likely to not pull off getting a large number of players (20-30 if not more) to play it. Also those kinds of missions require a very active admin to re-pick them every time after they are done (which is rather frequent considering realistic missions don't have respawn and thus are not really going to last an hour or anything close to it if they are made to have anything that resembles a reasonable level of fun).

[76 0]

The problem is to get a PvP game of something more than just a TDM/mini-C&H, you need people. You can't just start a game up with 4-10 players and expect more to join, because those 4-10 players would get bored and leave before you can gather more players.

Soz galzohar, you couldn't be more wrong... there is a 'critical mass' so to speak once you have 6-8 players the flood gates open, you can't argue this with me... it happened 99% of the time I ran my PvP nights.

Also, making any kind of realistic and tactical PvP while still keeping it enjoyable is very difficult

........ Advance and Secure [AAS]

this becomes even more difficult when you know it needs to work with low player counts as well since you're most likely to not pull off getting a large number of players (20-30 if not more) to play it.

As stated above.... you just need that critical mass, and those numbers easily come from members alone.... so its a non issue.

Also those kinds of missions require a very active admin to re-pick them every time after they are done (which is rather frequent considering realistic missions don't have respawn and thus are not really going to last an hour or anything close to it if they are made to have anything that resembles a reasonable level of fun).

Thats me.... no one at my old clan was more dedicated than me (half the reason I'm no longer there, the head admins seemed to have given up and where more interested in talking shit and doing virtually nothing and got pissy when someone tried to push the servers/community into action) and for that I made our servers come from rank 53rd in the world down to 22nd in 3 weeks.... 3 weeks bro...

It can be done.... I did it..... can't anyone else???

[SPECOPx 10]

It's a shame really that there are only Co-op missions. I can play against bots by myself.

[bhaz 0]

Soz galzohar, you couldn't be more wrong... there is a 'critical mass' so to speak once you have 6-8 players the flood gates open, you can't argue this with me... it happened 99% of the time I ran my PvP nights.

Exactly right, I never join empty servers, and 80% of the time I end up joining a warfare server since that's the only PvP up with a playerbase.

[qwertz 10]

Exactly right, I never join empty servers, and 80% of the time I end up joining a warfare server since that's the only PvP up with a playerbase.

And because (nearly) everyone thinks like that, there's only few real PvP servers that are populated, which is a utter shame for this great game. I mean, shooting AI gets very old very fast.

Have one guy on the server, and it takes 3 minutes and you have 2.

From 2 to 3 is another 3 minutes.

(...)

After 20 minutes you have enough players to have a good PvP experience, and then it grows to 20+ quickly.

One would think that's worth the investment in time.

:cheers:

qwertz

[BCA Cat Toaster 10]

Maybe it´s because Australians don´t know that AAS even exists? http://ausarma.org/ Someone should tell them!

Edited May 16, 2010 by BCA Cat Toaster

[SnR 1]

AAS is well known, has been since Armed Assault. Its just not that popular with those who are addon/mod bound, those that i play with will disapear to BC2 or TF2 for there Human contact :p

[76 0]

Sadly it has been a issue for PvP players in Oz for awhile.

http://ausarma.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=168

I think alot of Aussie PvP players are associated to OS clans and play OS because not one Aussie community/clan/server will accommodate PvP, one dedicated PvP server for Oz... just one, if someone is game to set it up I'll run it.

Edited May 16, 2010 by 76

[galzohar 31]

The problem is if you do decide to take manners into your own hands and join an empty server, you will most often find yourself alone there.

76, my point wasn't that there aren't any admins, but that there simply aren't enough to keep PvP action going even if we did have the players, as you can probably agree.

As for AAS, it may be fun and playable, but is not even close to a realistic game mode. A "realistic" game mode would generally have no respawns and a clear objective similar to what you would find in a coop mission, except this time with player defenders instead of AI and appropriate balance to account for that. Of course these provide less action and are harder to balance than the respawn-happy modes such as AAS and require much more admin work. Shorter rounds -> more times per hour where an admin needs to pick a mission. You would also get more "OK, round is over, CU!" situations, along with little ability to provide JIP capability without ruining the idea of the game mode. And to top it all off, teamwork and communication need to be several steps higher to get good fun out of a game with no respwans.

[76 0]

The problem is if you do decide to take manners into your own hands and join an empty server, you will most often find yourself alone there.

True on some random corporate server but not a dedicated community run PvP server... not in my experience anyway.

76, my point wasn't that there aren't any admins, but that there simply aren't enough to keep PvP action going even if we did have the players, as you can probably agree.

Soz but I do, there are many good, mature PvP players in Oz (that I meet on OS servers) that may or may not help admin if it actually eventuated.

As for AAS, it may be fun and playable, but is not even close to a realistic game mode. A "realistic" game mode would generally have no respawns and a clear objective similar to what you would find in a coop mission, except this time with player defenders instead of AI and appropriate balance to account for that.

Not many COOP dont have respawn... and why the hell does it have to be 'realistic'... the realism I draw from ArmA is the realistic weapons, vehicles, units, terrain and the realistic ballistic, the one shot kills (no f%$^&* health bar) not realism in terms of "yes sir, no sir, sorry for not using the correct radio protocols sir'

You want realism... then throw your A2 disc away because if you have been killed once then it would be unrealistic to play again.... point is realism comes in many different forms for many different people.

And to top it all off, teamwork and communication need to be several steps higher to get good fun out of a game with no respwans.

Jump on ArmAcalypse's Game server and TS3 server, introduce yaself (everyone is real friendly) and tell me you didn't enjoy your time with medium level tactical gameplay (TS3 required)

I would have to say that coop players just dont get it... maybe because they don't know it because they avoid it... I don't know...

I do know all the 'requirements' coop players demand before they'll look at AAS/PvP are very contradictory because they except and even love those 'unrealistic' and other things in COOP... just not in PvP :raisebrow:

Edit:

And this is what you get when you try to promote PvP in the Oz community...

http://forums.ogn.com.au/showpost.php?p=802901&postcount=126

Edited May 16, 2010 by 76
double posted, added content

[galzohar 31]

Not many COOP dont have respawn... and why the hell does it have to be 'realistic'... the realism I draw from ArmA is the realistic weapons, vehicles, units, terrain and the realistic ballistic, the one shot kills (no f%$^&* health bar) not realism in terms of "yes sir, no sir, sorry for not using the correct radio protocols sir'

I'm not a fan of coops with respawn, and I'm not a fan of extreme (to the point of uselessness) enforcement of radio protocols, but rather just enough so that people can understand eachother and be effective.

It's not that it has to be realistic, but it would be nice to also be able to play a more realistic pvp mission, just like I can do with coop missions. Except I can get people to play more realistic coop missions with no respawns, but when it comes to PvP it's much more difficult for the reasons mentioned above.

[SnR 1]

because not one Aussie community/clan/server will accommodate PvP, one dedicated PvP server for Oz... just one, if someone is game to set it up I'll run it.

76 You were given a free server to use HERE Vanilla server no ACE with all requested AAS Missions :confused: you made a Honorable attempt and no one showed interest, not even thoughs close to you in your previous community.

Edit:

And this is what you get when you try to promote PvP in the Oz community...

http://forums.ogn.com.au/showpost.ph...&postcount=126

You want to promote in the Oz community then do so with out the wa wa:(

The BI Forums is a long way away from Oz, with your OS signature:p

[BCA Cat Toaster 10]

Of course people have different thoughts about "realism". Advance and Secure is just a game-mode. If you want to play without respawn, you can do that, the options are there. But obviously there is no real interest doing it.

Another thing I noticed is, that many people are still under the impression of their AAS-Experience in ArmA they had in 2008 and 2009. Beta and Alpha-Stuff. They simply ignore one or even two years of development and over 400 revision changes since the last eight months. There are more than 100 different missions today offering all type of variety one could think of and one third of them are pure infantry fun.

Of course I can understand that people don´t like it. I don´t like any other existing game-mode in ArmA2 than AAS. That´s not the point. No matter which MP-Mode, to be successful certain standards are required some people need to agree with. In ArmA2, if one doesn´t like something he simply changes it and goes on its own. At the end the community has more different game-modes than players.

Another thing is accessibility. I´m not an OFP-Veteran. The whole Addon-System is a complete pain coming from another century. There are so many great Addons (and even more completely useless...) but to use them in MP is almost impossible. Authors use the same key for all different versions of an Addon and even for different one. A Server can host Island X V 4.2 and players using four different earliers version can join and see all different things. What´s that? 2010, Anyone?

Is one really wondering why people prefer paying five bucks for two new Maps in CoD9 before they even consider getting a free ArmA-Addon working after trying half an hour and nothing works? I am not! I´m not saying that YAST and Six-Updater aren´t great Tools but they are REALLY far from being simple solutions used by normal players. That´s not a problem specific for one game-mode or one area.

And I just want normal players. They should start the game, hop on our servers and enjoy playing if that´s what they want. Can´t we even agree on that single point as the Community? Without the need to spent hours and hours to get addional Tools and Addons runnning.

I´m not saying that ArmA2 should be turned into that casual crap like CoD and Betafield but the one thing it should adopt is the accessability for people that just want to play!

That´s why we decided to take the best Addon-Content worth it, resign it for consistency and provide it with a simple installer one can use who never played a BI-Title ever before. I believe that´s the only way to increase player numbers. Improve Accessability, Usability and establish Standards.

Well, or business as usual, every two people playing their own game-mode. But that´s none of my business. Either you´re with us or against us one US-Diplomat once said. ;-)

Edited May 16, 2010 by BCA Cat Toaster

[76 0]

I'm not a fan of coops with respawn, and I'm not a fan of extreme (to the point of uselessness) enforcement of radio protocols, but rather just enough so that people can understand eachother and be effective.

It's not that it has to be realistic, but it would be nice to also be able to play a more realistic pvp mission, just like I can do with coop missions. Except I can get people to play more realistic coop missions with no respawns, but when it comes to PvP it's much more difficult for the reasons mentioned above.

After near 6 months of down time we receive a temp server... a broken server with a 10th of the missions I asked for, no server control and I'm suppose to attract ppl with that shit.... cmon snr... wake up matey mate

[Zipper5 74]

Please tell me you actually told whoever was providing the server to you about that, 76... :butbut:

[galzohar 31]

What is interesting is while COOP has popularity for both missions that attempt to be as realistic as the game allows and missions that are just trying to get the best gameplay without too much care for realism, while for PvP people would only play the second type and completely ignore the first. In COOP people are fine playing a mission where if you die early you need to wait an 30-90 minutes for the next mission, while in PvP they wouldn't be willing to wait even just 5-15 minutes.

[qwertz 10]

What is interesting is while COOP has popularity for both missions that attempt to be as realistic as the game allows and missions that are just trying to get the best gameplay without too much care for realism, while for PvP people would only play the second type and completely ignore the first. In COOP people are fine playing a mission where if you die early you need to wait an 30-90 minutes for the next mission, while in PvP they wouldn't be willing to wait even just 5-15 minutes.

1) Respawn: There is and has been not a single succesfull PvP multiplayer game out there in the past 10 years that would require players to wait 5-15 minutes for a respawn. There's a really basic reason for that, whether we like it or not.

2) COOP: To each his own - realism in COOP stops for me the second I realize that the AI opponents have less than 1% the brains of an average real soldier (= player). Besides being hyper accurate shooters, there is nothing realistic or at least challenging in how AI behaves in this game (and any other game, this is not criticizing ArmA's AI in particular). Playing against AI is be the biggest realism killer by an order of magnitude, at least for me.

Playing against AI is only "realistic" in Zombie games or similar imho.

Edited May 17, 2010 by qwertz

[LJF 0]

Just an idea, but can't we create a new pvp clan? But a casual clan, you can turn up when an event is on, but expect to play with teamwork in mind etc. So you might have a pool of a hundred people who get together at scheduled events to play PvP (you might only get 30, or more, who knows). Maybe every Saturday night at 7pm or something. We roll up with the agreed-upon mods and play :)

What do you think?

Edited May 17, 2010 by LJF

[Imperator[TFD] 444]

I'm an Aussie too and quite frankly find AAS very boring and from what I've seen of PvP sessions I've initiated while voted admin, other people get over it very quickly too. The Warfare we play on GoN's server is quite often PvP or more likely TvT and is very satisfying. Often myself and other regulars who are voted admin will setup the warfare game to encourage more player versus player interaction so that AI towns are easily overcome and players end up fighting each other more often.

The beauty of Warfare is that allows both Co-Op and PvP within the same match. Players who want to go conquer towns with nothing but AI in them can do so, while others can go looking for human players and start fighting each other.

[LJF 0]

I think I'd like to see some more realistic games to be honest. I never really liked Warfare for that reason - it felt really detached from reality. AAS is the most realistic PvP I've seen in ArmA2, and I also agree - AI just doesn't cut it.

"Frontlines" from Men of War or "Rush" from Bad Company 2 would be great I reckon, two teams take it in turns to attack and defend a string of objectives. Possibly with a limited number of respawn points (similar to the BF series) on both sides (so if one team just rushes and gets annihilated every time they run out of respawns and the other team wins).

I'd just like to fight against some humans with some fellow humans.

[SnR 1]

After near 6 months of down time we receive a temp server... a broken server with a 10th of the missions I asked for, no server control and I'm suppose to attract ppl with that shit.... cmon snr... wake up matey mate

Experienced and Active OGN members could do it in a heart beat. A 1 man army in Oz isnt going to cut it, I suggest try again when Operation Arrowhead comes out or even better join us when were playing PvP with the Project Reality Mod when finalised. Whats popular in Oz is Warfare or Clan internal TvT mission nights, and both seem to keep players happy.

[Imperator[TFD] 444]

I think I'd like to see some more realistic games to be honest. I never really liked Warfare for that reason - it felt really detached from reality. AAS is the most realistic PvP I've seen in ArmA2, and I also agree - AI just doesn't cut it.

But what is it about Warfare that you don't like?

I'd just like to fight against some humans with some fellow humans.

I don't know what servers you play on, but have you tried Games.on.net? We regularly see humans verse humans in the servers during Warfare matches, especially on Duala where the towns are big and you end up with players fighting it out over a single city and it essentially becomes a little PvP within the warfare session.

[LJF 0]

But what is it about Warfare that you don't like?

I don't know what servers you play on, but have you tried Games.on.net? We regularly see humans verse humans in the servers during Warfare matches, especially on Duala where the towns are big and you end up with players fighting it out over a single city and it essentially becomes a little PvP within the warfare session.

Warfare always felt a bit detached to me, but I'll give it a go tonight though - I haven't exactly played a lot of A2 online, usually a mismatch of mods or it's just all coop.

The best game I've ever had of A2 was a game of AAS in the logging compound in Electro ... something. We were waiting for the enemy to counterattack, really tense - the bit I was covering didn't get any action, but it was still awesome. We were playing as a team (and using voip), which I've yet to see in Warfare (mostly it's people going solo with their AI or at most, a couple of guys head out together).

[galzohar 31]

In America's Army 2/3 people often wait that long for next round (not exactly respawn though, I never said 5-15 minutes wait for respawn, just for next round, same as you do in no-respawn coops except those are usually way longer and yet people still wait).