Chunder

Reality is though Carrying around a 20-30 kg rucksack all day, hurts your energy & manauverability. Just because it is done for phisique reasons doesn't mean it's good operational practice. Thats what makes helicopters so handy

I always aim for the head.... I like thinking i'm a notch above the rest, even if I'm definitely not hehe... at other times if I'm feeling nasty a shot at the knees can be especially gratifying especially if the guy keeps on killing u in multiplayer =-p. I'm pretty sure I would be knocked over from a hit by 7.62 mm round with body armour on... and if I was the guy behind the trigger i'd sure as the sun rises again put another few in him for measure.

Some food for thought. Carrying a lot of gear in combat situations (along with a rucksack) just isn't proper practice for fatigue reasons. For much the same reason, try carrying a .50 Cal with accompaning ammo around the field... When I was thinking about 'carrying' I was thinking of perhaps 'picking up' and interacting with objects. I know for various reasons that some of these would be unable to be done but oh well. *picking up a stone and being able to throw it... *picking up a rifle by the butt and knocking something out, for instance that local dog that is really unfriendly... *being able to undo your canteen and refill it and being able to drink from it or perhaps being able to use your canteen somehow to help a wounded soldier... *being able to pick up a spare granade (unarmed) and throw it to a soldier to replenish him, as well as magazines, and lighter weaponry e.g pistols if he can't get to the rearm point because of suppression fire, or your on top of a building and he's not, or your flying in some ammo crates, or your a soldier in a helicopter, throwing out some mags to help your surrounded troops. *being able to arrange your own sandbag defences to some degree. That sorta nifty fun stuff that 'picking up' and interacting with allows.

Heh, you have no idea what the final map is going to be. Stop hyperventalating. For all we know that could be a map from a multiplayer screen where the commander has placed arrows on the map for his men for all we know =-\. Said it once, said it a million times, they've had 5 years to figure out the best format, chances are that as a highly skilled team they already know that and are working on it!

As far as i'm aware it's already been mentioned that the longer it takes for release, the more improvements find their way into the game. Whats the point speculating on anything? BIS are trying to release a game that they want to be very successfull, They have bills to pay. They will always be looking to increase functions of the game.

The impression would be that the tree would have a heck of an effect on the abrams.

Most Massive Living Tree The worlds most massive living tree is General Sherman the giant sequoia (Sequoiadendron giganteum) growing in the Sequoia National Park, California, USA. It stands 83.82m (274.9 ft) tall, has a diameter of 11.1 m (36 ft 5 in) and a girth of 31.3 m (102 ft 0.5 in). The trunk has a volume of 1,487 mł (52,508 ftł). This tree is estimated to contain the equivalent of 606,100 board feet of timber, enough to make 5 billion matches, and its red-brown bark may be up to 61 cm (24 in) thick in parts. Its weight, including the root system, is estimated at 2000 tonnes (4,000,000 lb).

Actually I was tending to think that the ability of individually destructable trees enables things like daisy cutters to be dropped ahead of a helicopter landing in that area....

uh, suppressive fire is still aiming to kill... just shooting more erratically to keep heads down.

OFP didn't take place in ''these days'', but in 1982 and 1985. Indeed, combat was very different 20 years ago. However, if it were up to me, I wouldn't mind seeing some cool Splinter Cell style knife attacks. There are plenty of cool things in Splinter Cell, but would the majority of them work in OFP/ArmA? No. Motion and heat detectors have been around since the Vietnam War. Trip Mechanisms have been around since pretty much the dawn of war, whether it be a string attached to something or otherwise. Heck, electronic trip mechanisms have been in your local conveniance door since the early 80's! Even a A-P mine is a trip mechanism - although banned by the geneva convention. They certainly have been around sensitive places for a very long time, not to mention copious floodlighting!

Well, i spose i'm the same as many others. I am a fan of the op fp genre and as such looking forward to it's release. Whilst trying not to take a simplistic view of the circumstances, and whilst looking forward to the game as such my main issue is with the new release date: fall 2006. Whilst I understand that it is probably a necessity I can see some bad Public Relations happening, without a doubt. I see a discrepancy in regards to the community getting information through third party sources and posting on a BIS sponsored forum. I would have thought that using the web-page set up a bit better would perhaps more helpfull to the community image of BIS. Although have said that I see some discrepancies in the community itself - this community seems to speculate itself to death whilst not acknowledging the commercial reality as opposed to gaming ideology in regards to releasing of material. Il2 Forgotten battles is a good example of both novice and expert gamers running off the same system (hyperlobby) It is quite acheivable. However, having said that; getting my information from the community just isn't working for me personally. I would have liked a better approach wherby I could easily see the progress being made on the game for those genuinely interested in the game - not necessarily with screenshots or otherwise but maybe a percentage indicator & story line. As an interested individual, i find it hard to come to these forums and discuss in a mature format what i'm looking forward to in the game etc - and the reality is we will now be discussing it for another 6 months. Not making any pleas as everyone has to accept reality - but personally I won't be sticking around for another 6 months doing this. I do like the game genre and I like the work, I think at present however since I'm 'hungry' for another good release It might be that I buy another game to satisfy my appetite - not that that effects anything with BIS of course, I think the danger is for BIS to release in 6 months time, that the market will be hungry for the opfp type genre, after a long wait, and that might (only might) damage BIS sales. Thing is, I'm long overdue for another sim, and as a consumer, i'm looking for some fun, I won't be waiting for 6 more months for a preferred genre. I'm not sure if these are only my personal sentiments, I thought i'd air them for what they were worth however. Honestly though, I don't see anypoint about whipping oneself up into a frenzy about the proposed style of game play. As I sad above it works quite well with IL2 Forgotten Battles - One of the communities might wish to get in contact with jiri fojtasek of hyperlobby and ask for armed assault support - as hyperlobby has a better class of players. Long and the short of it is, is that i'm off elsewhere, I will probably buy arma when it comes out but have less time for it. Good luck in your developement and heres to a successfull game, and also to those that share the anticipation with me Chunder.

my main problem with stealth was it's more or less unrealistic implementation in some missions in CWC and indeed operation flashpoint: resistance. Sensitive materials,equipment and people are kept at secure bases. Often with a reasonable system of area denial weapons such as a.p mines (banned by geneva convention but never the less still used by some countries). These days trip systems, lasers, motion detectors and body heat detectors are some optional sensors installed on important locations Failing that, razor wire in really inconvenient places - we didn't really have that. In Opfp, you could theoretically charge in anywhere without having to worry about this, only about the enemy spotting you. I'm sure the danger of a mine field would make people slow down. In Iraq and stuff of course, Improvised Explosive devices - or booby traps are very popular in modern warfare. So in some areas to me, 'stealth' in operation flaspoint are a bit lacking, Fun, don't get me wrong a bit limited though. even though the missions that have come out are tough.

Not sure if your referrin to me or not, but i'm trying to avoid having one at present, I'm trying to afford to upgrade to play armed assault and other things, girfriends tend to be expensive and time consuming at this present point in time, where i'm after stress free lifestyle; the alternative always seems to be the opposite Ahh batching, it's an awesome lifestyle choosing and doing what I like at will, the definition of freedom... perhaps bi should relase a simulator called the bachelor for guys that arn't so lucky, whereby they can simulate having the life of a bachelor. =-p

I think i'll qualify an early post of what IMO is reasonable for a game like armed assault. Especially on a little island. It's extremely uncommon to base capital aircraft within 100 k's or there of to front lines even a-10's. Taking off on one of those aircraft would mean basically 1-2 minutes flight time to the end of the island. It's just not sensible practice. Indeed, perhaps with an island far out to sea where people have flight time to the island is much more reasonable. Not necessarily the case for amphibious forces like WASP class ships with harriers embarked upon them. Armed Forward Air Control Aircraft, are however likely to be based closer to the front lines. These are typically slower turboprop powered aircraft, both twin and single engined. Small african nations if they feel a bit more extravigant go for aircraft such as the Hawk 200 single seater, which can carry a suprising war load. The reason is quite simple, a SINGLE aircraft can cost upwards of 45 million dollars, which, when you buy 5 or 6 of them + support equipment just isn't a likely scenario for an island economy. Which would suprisingly be inline that island nations with only a relitively small population often don't have an airforce that consists of any armed planes whatsoever, usually has a few helicopters serving dual roles of SAR etc. If, however two opposing superpowers were backing it, then it would be a different story. Apart from expecting USN support for the Marines which means perhaps some harriers and stuff, hold off the over kill and let the mod makers do that naturally. Turbo Props are still bloody fast, and still make an awefull mess. Most have modern cockpits too nowadays.

I'd be inclined to have armed Forward Air Control Aircraft A - La Bronco,PC7 (and like aircraft) Smaller nations go for more affordable aircraft like the Hawk 200 Single Seater. Being able to lay a smoke bomb on a target From a relitively slow moving turbo prop would be more suited to army style operations.

It wouldn't make any difference about the competition that was always out there from the beggining altering any promotional aspects IMHO. Flashpoint is an established name along with BI with specific genre of games. Getting signatures and iimpressing guru's is the idea of E3. The more they have to impress the better. However, like said, I wouldn't be wasting my paid time trying to keep up with possible demands from the community etc. They've had since 2001 to look at the game and I have no doubt they have. They are a business like any other - they need to apportion time to the stuff that really matters, and they've had more than a few years experience of marketing. Lets look at it from a truthfull point of view. until things are wholly developed ready for launch, why put the cart before the horse. I certainly wouldn't. If you put the cart before the horse it drags you downhill till you crash in an untidy mess IMHO.

personally I'm really looking forward to armed assault because the developers are updating the gameplay points that operation flashpoint was weak on - or outright creating new options. I really do like the thought of using these features to create a battle field in which I fill my own role, a minor part in acheiving a greater objective. Out in this island which is just *huge* where an enemy, be it a GI, sniper, bmp or anything could be lurking behind the tree, in the ditch, over the ridge. in a bush, in a house and your death could be seconds / minutes or even an hour away. Infact, someones boarding a Attack helo right now at a base the other end of the island right now and is going to do a sweep of your area after being called in by the enemy. In return you may have any number of options available to you to combat this, and an environment which disguises the enemies movement much like in real life. I find the thought of it awesome. I can't wait to be scared of it. The new features indicate the game play is being fine tunesd, even improved upon from before in an evolutionary step thats seen op fp, resistance, and now armed assault, and they've had 4 years to think about how to improve on it. It's going to be great I think,

You guys speculate too much. I think they are aiming for an E3 promotional gig - little iin the way of screenshots means keeping stuff under raps. Those screenshots we have seen have seen LARGE improvements. With E3 the studio gets a lot more launch hype than a few lucky magazine articles here or there. Armed assault won't be a medeocre improvement on flashpoint, it will be a majorly improved version (and as far as I think it is they will try and develope game 2 afterwards) It will concentrate a lot on the gameplay & playability as opposed to perfect graphics to test the market for a flashpoint 2. There arn't very many games like it out there. All I can see so far is that the developers are keeping to more or less a sensible operating plan, indeed setting up and running these forums is just another part of the business implementation plan - to establish a forum, and hold off the gimmicks until that time. Once you split from the publisher, and you have a solid game, you want to ensure it's success. Just because someone is hanging out to play the game bad and has litterally seen only a few screenshots and are whipping themselves up into a speculative frensy, almost threatening self harm and demanding more - that would make a physchiatrist rub their hands together with prospective future clients at hand. is not a reason to keep us up to date and spoil the release or get bogged down listning to a community that probably won't ever be satisfied. I think they do have some business acumen about them and I think the final product will be great. Chill out guys... All they doing is keeping to a business plan.

it's say there was nothing worse than looking at mutilated dead body. i've always thought that op.fp has had enough types of dead characters. I spend my time concentrating on living, not studying the dead, not insinuating you are - but i've always shot someone in the head and thats were the blood is. If you shot someone in the head with a .50 cal it would be a discusting sight i asure you. If I was a developer, studying dead people and putting that into a game, or the way people die seems to be in the least an onerous thing to expect from any developer. ragdoll doesn't matter to me -I'm sure they are improving the way people die but enough to study a thesis on the subject i doubt IMHO that is.

'rag doll' effects don't matter to me, the bit that matters to me is the point until the immediate threat ceases to be a threat. How they fall or otherwise doesn't matter to me one bit so long as they don't do irritating things like start bouncing like a beach ball, or get pushed along by vehecles. It just doesn't matter to me.

Hey - I'm relitively new to the forum here but I thought I would have a go at a new topic. Its about what I think is what I am looking forward to in Armed assault. There are lots of demands on developers by us the community, and most of those are either about 'graphics' or what we term as 'reaslism'. I want to clarify that when people point out wanting better graphics - better graphics arn't the be - all to end - all in the game. I say that with many years experiance in wait for, and playing updates, and getting PC's specifically for games. A game developer may want good graphics but must wiegh it up against who can use those graphics, and the time constraints given a release date, or, focussing on other areas given a smaller sized developement team. I've rarely ever been able to use full graphics. But I've played games that have had nothing in gameplay going for them, and getting the graphics perfect. Thats why to me it isn't all about eye candy. Other things that get brought up that I can't seem to be presuaded on is the ability to Swim, with much combat gear at all, let alone the real life chances that any tacticean would seriously consider swimming as part of an operation. Only as escape! Long grass- yes long grass exists in some area's but not all. Given the nature of islands, and their small sized villiages, and their geolocation, relitively short distances inbetween, indicates a more farming type sustained economy. Most obscure islands are sustained by their farming industries Which means livestock and cultivated fields, which means long grass is not present in many areas, the tallest things being crops. These days crops are bread to have little height, to eliminate chaff processing in headers and such - which means the crops arn't very high themselves - but certainly high enough tob e prone in and not be seen. Having said that, grasses are still likely to predominate in gorges and other innaccessable areas, along with rocks, streams, scrubland etc. Rarely is there a large abundance of grasses etc except in zones excluded to livestock like national parkes, and gorges / gulleys - and for that matter, along roadways. Walking outside in farmland country, u can come across a stream which has bullrushes/reeds in it, thick hardwood trees, collapsed dead logs, and thorn bushes. Infact, your more likely to step on a cowpat than walk through thick grass that has been untouched by livestock. Which would indicate that thick grass is more or less unlikely with the desity of townships in the island modelled. Cheifly, I like environments that are beleivable. When I walk between hillsides I expect it to be damp, or muddy, or a stream with relevent vegetation than nothing. - there are exceptions. Some farmer even might have it dammed as a supply to his livestock in summer, with a little island in the middle of it if your lucky! Now, imagine your jeep getting bogged in the mud between hillsides... or in the sand in the desert, or a boxthorn in the tyre because u decided to drive through a thorn bush in it. Not everything on the battlefield is noted either - in Armed assualt we are going to have detroyable bridges - perhaps mobile bridges/pontoons would be good - in real warfare, mobile bridges are a big thing for consideration when conducting an advance, and most countries have them in their inventories. Nothing worse than more than likely being able to call in a support unit to lay a bridge across a stream or otherwise, but not being able to in game. My brain does all the other sorts of imaginations to fill in the gaps. All the environment has to do is set the scenes. And, for the gimmicky little things - like being able to throw a paddy - mellon up into the air with your left hand, and bring a shotgun to bear on the object and blowing it to bits. I think that a pick up and throw option in game would be most usefull for picking up rocks, or melons, or anything, if it wasn't onerous. being able to do little things like that make the game a bit more funny. Being able to pick up a rotten bit of fruit and throw it at someone for it to splatter over him. I know it's my two cents - just trying to get people to think outside the norms. Chunder

You couldn't really call me a graphics freak on anything, No game I've ever had have I made full use of the graphics available. I guess you could call me a large percentage of the market - the student that doesn't have the best system because they can't afford it. I loved operation flashpoint when it came out. After awhile I got bored of it more because of my connection than anything else. No 'one thing' really makes me anymore happier about the lpress release of Armed assault, I'm quite glad that another game is being made and I'm quite glad that some graphical features are being improved. I don't think the graphics being as good as they can be really makes any difference to how we play the game - as to what they are now - we are at an evolutionary point for gaming and I think they've chosen a nice graphics level for Armed assault. Im a big atmosphere person. I LOVE the atmosphere created by the game and part of that atmosphere is being able to 'live the game', where when I'm being shot at or something I'm really trying to avoid being shot, or where your heart is pumping like when your squad gets all shot up and your left alone in the OFP CWC. To me the larger environment will make me feel a lot smaller in my role on the battlefield, and make me a lot more worried about the potential threats. One thing that did worry me about the game and I think it is my only worry - is the land environment. In Australia there arn't actually that many forests apart from national parks and such , so a lot of it is cleared, but as a general rule of thumb, the hillier it is the more vegetated it is, the more rough the terrain is, and otherwise. Gulleys and such have a reasonable amount of shrubbery and lots of rocks, and our creeks generally tend to have bigger bushes, and trees behind them that you could easily hide behind if someone was firing bullets in your direction (being hardwood and all) As such creek zones are cruicial battle spots and such and from a graphics point of view, hopefully vegetation along these areas is noted. It doesn't gerneally have to be heaps of it, my imagination does the rest. I am really looking forward to the multiplay experience, and the large size of the island. Can't wait to be waiting in a UH-60 or something and receive a call for extraction, having to dod 30 odd enemies in a multiplayer zone. That or, just hiding in a bush, knowing that enemy will be specifically scanning and even shooting into the bushes to kill me. Being able to dig in in deformable terrain like a sniper does so as not to be in any suspect areas is what matters to me. All in all I agree with the sentiment, Graphics only need to be so good for me it's more of a factor of being beleivable... thats what matters to me. Between most hills there is a creek of some sort. Not modelling nature to reflect it is what detracts to me. I'm very happy with the press release - I'm also very happy with the screenshots provided. I'm not in for super graphics - any machine i get to play the game won't be able to handle the best graphics. BTW, last time i got a new PC was to play the Original OPFP, now it's to play armed assault. Best of luck to creating a successfull game I'm difinitely looking forward to it! Chunder

Red, Thats what I mean - You can't have swimming accessable to anything in anyway. I only mean swimming, of course there are rivers you can wade through. I'm just talking about the ingame abuse that wouldhappen if you allowed soldiers to cross a river with a kit, particularly because if you have rivers and lakes, there is a large bet in multiplayer they will be included as an obstacle... I'm all in favor of options e.g dumping your kit... or even throwing bits of it across, such as magazines and stuff... in conveniant areas - if possible. Primary reason why I am anti swimming in the sence of the term is that in planning an attack of any sort crossing a river by swimmin IS NOT a realistic approach used by a planner of any sort. Swimming with kits doesn't mean it's expected realistically of troops anyway. For a variety of reasons, one it might be a bloody freezing day and you just wouldn't do it! you can't model hypothermia. I think the key is limiting the mobility so battlefield equipment is used to overcome the lack of mobility. The last thing I want to see is a couple of jet skis somehow just brought up the river to cross a 10 meter gap, that we are all jumping onto in multiplayer. Pontoons, mobile bridges (particularly) I think would simulate much more accurately the difficulties had in true warefare, and not only that, bridges will be destroyed... From the screenshots i've seen, it might be something worth thinking about... before just allowing swimming. However of course I am looking forward to the true use of a BMP ASLAV or M113 - I always found it absolutely laughable in resistance with the soviet envasion force BMP's travelling how many kilometers in open sea?? Just incase no radar station or patrols picked em up going a walking pace... Now with rivers and such it will be some fun I reckon. Chunder.

I hope that swimming isn't allowed - or if it is in limited format. Why? 1. Combat soldiers, swimming? loaded down with ammo and stuff?? Doesn't seem that real to me. 2. Doesn't seem to happen in practice much at all. 3. Hopefully they will give us some cool bridging equipment that really has a place in op fp. I think that would be awesome comming up against a river and the tanks (although being able to ford) was considered dangerous so they had to have someone in a mobile bridge deployer to come and stretch out a bridge. I can imagine if the brige was destroyed it would ruin the combat offensiveness of a unit until it revived (I think thats a coolness factor). 4. Who really likes getting wet? Personally i don't think it's a good idea having swimming available to every man and his dog. It be like bf1942, if your get bored of waiting for a landing craft, jump off a ship and swim to shore... also the terrain looks hilly so presumably the rivers would be rather quick moving. I think if they weren't moving you might have the realists screaming blue because they opened a can of worms by making people able to swim.... I don't think having swimming is necessarily a good idea, or if u do, u forfeit some of your weapons - or maybe being able to 'throw' your weapons across the creek. I spose this would be a good idea if your under fire and your buddies running low on ammo u could throw him a magazine... but i can't really see that happening in the heat of a fight either... oh well. Edit - hmm I was just thinking if u can 'throw a granade' from your suppliies, perhaps u could throw magazines and stuff? Imagine if u could pick up a rock, and throw it at somebody... Just an idea. Most soldiers don't swim because it means they get all wet and very uncomfortable, they are human and although they are in uniform they still avoid it! If your out for a day patrol, on a cold winters day... with a cold wind 'hmm lets go swimming'. Chunder.