Warfare Balance in Operation Arrowhead

[gossamersolid 155]

Is anybody else worried that the OPFOR side is seriously under-gunned than the bluefor side?

Nothing I've seen on the OPFOR side so far has an upper hand over the BLUEFOR technology and power.

What do you guys think?

[Amra 10]

Is anybody else worried that the OPFOR side is seriously under-gunned than the bluefor side?

Nothing I've seen on the OPFOR side so far has an upper hand over the BLUEFOR technology and power.

What do you guys think?

I think as long as opfor side has AT and AP mines, they are ok.

[postal vending machine 10]

Lee Enfield > AH64D with AH-6x support

+ OPFOR Got SCUDs.

[gossamersolid 155]

I don't think the scuds are actual firing units, I think it's more of a scripted thing like in OFP 1

[CarlGustaffa 4]

Well, I'm not a Warfare player, so I can't say "I'm concerned" :p And usually I tend to go with "it's not supposed to be balanced, in symmetric warfare every side has its powers and weaknesses".

But... That's for symmetric, think USA vs Russia, both "strong" in weaponry although their capability will vary. OA (without having tested yet obviously) appears to be quite asymmetric. If west have a distinct advantage in weaponry (which I think they should), Warfare should keep that in mind and increase the numbers for the opposition forces.

From a gaiming perspective, who wants to play a side which have no chance against the others, and where no adoption to different tactics can defeat them? So yeah, although I'm not worried, I do understand your worries...

[gossamersolid 155]

I didn't mean symmetric balance, it's not that way in warfare as it is... but I'm concerned about any possible balance. I can't see T-72 MBT vs M1A2 MBT turning out well...

and as for air I've seen the L-39 or whatever it is, su-25 and mi-24.

[NevilleBartos 10]

opfor have the home ground advantage???

im sure there would be some way to balance a game of warfare, no doubt any huge imbalances will become obvious after a couple of weeks.

[gossamersolid 155]

well I guess the thing is that if you use Combined Operations then you'll be fine as you'll have stuff like the tung and the kamov and the T-90

[dm 9]

Balance with tactics, not with vehicles/equipment.

[Defunkt 431]

Don't you have to buy everything in Warfare? Just make the T-72 a 3rd of the price of an M1A1.

[tyler4171 10]

Or protect the assets as best as you can, if Benny ports his warfares to OA (which more likely he will) make use of the camo nets etc. If that T-72 doesnt stand a chance against an M1A2, pull away. Warfare is not supposed to be balanced, to me it is a challenge to see how well you can manage your resources and assets, in short terms, Protect your valuable ass.......ets!!!!!!

[Murklor 10]

And another way besides prices to balance it: Simply make the OPFOR have more players than the BLUFOR. There's nothing saying that it *have to be* equal sized teams.

[Beagle 684]

Arma 2 warfare is not balanced either, the russian side is way overpowered as soon as they got T-90s Tunguskas, Sukhoys(all types) and Kamovs available.

[gossamersolid 155]

Arma 2 warfare is not balanced either, the russian side is way overpowered as soon as they got T-90s Tunguskas, Sukhoys(all types) and Kamovs available.

The SU series has nothing on the bluefor jets...

The t-90 gets 1 hit by the tusk

The tunguska is good

Kamovs are usually disabled from what I hear.

[Imperator[TFD] 444]

The SU series has nothing on the bluefor jets...

The t-90 gets 1 hit by the tusk

The tunguska is good

Kamovs are usually disabled from what I hear.

The SU series will get up in the air because the Tunguska will shoot down any BluFor pilot that seriously considers taking off. The Su-34 also carries 4xR-73.

Also, the Ckh-29 is better than any missile in the BluFor arsenal except perhaps the Javelin.

The TUSK also dies to 1 MBT hit too.

[Beagle 684]

I did not encounter a single server with Kamovs disabled so far...

Su-34 and Kamov will denie any air and Ground operation within minutes as soon as they are up and BLUFOR is not already.

Aonly really good ant tricky AV8B or F-35 driver can get a Su-34 thats already up, and when you firred your 2 Sidewindern you have top rearm...thats exactly when Ivan gets you with his spare R-73...additionally he can outrun, outclimb and vertically outmanouver you...and while you dogfight at 1500m the tungs are taking a aim at you.

[Imperator[TFD] 444]

I did not encounter a single server with Kamovs disabled so far...

We disable it on the GoN server because of how clearly unbalanced it is, being capable of locking onto and destroying 12 targets in just as many seconds and from a distance that far exceeds anything BluFor can use to counter it.

BluFor AA is a joke, the AIM-9x has a max range of a pathetic 4km while the Avenger/Stinger is even shorter.

[CarlGustaffa 4]

Has anyone considered timer based availability instead (or in addition to) money based? To restore balance I mean when it becomes such a serious issue. One Kamov an hour vs five whatever you use to fight it with.

[NevilleBartos 10]

1 kamov an hour is still enough to dominate the map in wrfare.

[gossamersolid 155]

I keep forgetting people don't use mando missile mod. Kamovs aren't problems anymore with that.

[-=Firewall=- 10]

Well, the Tusk is a bit better than the T90. The T90 will explode immediately after getting hit, in a tusk you will survieve the hit and could escape. But this reflects reality. (Maybe the armour of the M1A1 is a little bit weak ingame.)

But east is really overpowered in the other heavy equipment.

West has nothing compared to bmp 3, btr.

I don't have to mention the tungi....

And the metis could be fired from very close to far range, while the javelin has a min distance of about 100 m or more (dont remember).

West also has its advantages in equipment(Tusk) and helis (Apache and cobra :cool:)

But the human players will make the difference! Its all about tactics.

I don't like uncoordinated games, where everyone is playing on his own.

[l mandrake 9]

Don't you have to buy everything in Warfare? Just make the T-72 a 3rd of the price of an M1A1.

exactly - in Warfare you balance through price.

[Pain0815 10]

You can make asymetrical warfare more balanced with having more playerslots for opfor as for bluefor (1-3 more) so they have more manpower and the others better equipment.

Or balance over price

faster money for opfor

and so on and so on

Lets wait and see how PR mod adress this issue, there is only insurgents vs brits.

[IceShade 0]

In coop it doesn't really matter, but in PvP BLUFOR can take full advantage of FLIR. FLIR on their guns, on their Strykers, Abrams, Bradleys, Apaches..

The Takis only have FLIR on an AKS-74 (Goshawk). Nothing else. Not even on the T-72 or on the Hind, and these vehicles do have IR systems in real life... Then again, the Hind is an ancient D version and the T-72 could be anything. So no guarantees there either, I guess.

Edited July 3, 2010 by IceShade

[Gunnarmarine 10]

well who ever gets control of the air first should win. opfor might be a bit underpowered but you need to get those jets in the air to take down those bloody Apaches.