MugHug

That's what tactics are for. If you can't reach the tank, move to somewhere where the tank cannot reach you without also exposing itself. Eg. a reversed slope position. FDF mod has TOW's etc. but they require two men to carry, and are not too flexible on attack. But in plain vanilla ArmA the closest you have is Humvee with TOW's. With the scope of ArmA and the various missions on public servers, your solution does not even come close to the actual problem that caused me to post. Example: Flag area on a small hill in a large CTF (Can think of quite a few missions on public servers like that). Defenders have to stay at least in the area to hold it, plus it is a respawn point. A very popular range of CTF maps on public servers use this type of situation a lot. Think they are called Berrzerk or something. Problem: Tank at higher elevation being used to lay down a random barrage. Â To quote one of your solutions: Using a reversed slope position on many missions removes you from maintaining an effective defensive position. Next, driving a Humvee with TOW's from it's respawn point across a great distance is not the ideal solution if you even get there alive or in time. As most public servers play on cadet mode (which us players have no control over), you might as well put a big flashing sign on top to advertise you as a target to all the enemy helos and planes. If you just look at the multiple variation of situations that can occur, just moving away will not always work. Therefore you are still left with the original problem!! In light of the real world on public servers and the greater areas, missions encompass now, it would be more sensible for infantry to have some kind of effective threat such as the Javelin. I support that it should be limited to visual range attacks. Even limit its power if it is too un-balanced for the game. It is not a case of tactics but a case of a possible un-balanced game play situation created by accident to correct a previous issue over game play balance!

Just an informed ArmA player here. It seems that the decision to not upgrade the T-72 in OFP to either the T-80 or T-90 in ArmA was short-sighted. While not being an expert, I suspect that the alternatives would at least be more balanced. I know there are various views on the realistic aspect of tanks in ArmA, but I did expect more improvement to this aspect of the game. From BIS's point of view, maybe it's an issue of game play balance such as the class issue in games such as Everquest or SWG!! Think about it before you dismiss the idea because there are similarities. Do we really know what motivated BIS to have it the way it is? If this is the case, maybe the message to BIS is that many of us play ArmA because of what it simulates and would accept an adjustment in the game play balance if it takes us one step closer to the real experience. Just my view, but hopefully something to think about.

If the Strela air to air missle works then there is no reason for the Javelin not to work as it would be very similar code. I still find that infantry under bombardment from a tank at extreme visual range have no effective means to attack. I am fairly good at using the M136, but at the ranges I am talking about, the odds of hitting the tank are worse then winning the lottery. With the landscape in parts of the island, this gives the tank a killing field against infantry. By the time you get within range of the M136 a lot can happen and the effort ends up being pointless. I expect the tank to be a tactical advantage, but at least provide infantry with some kind of long-range threat against such attacks, as exists in the real world. In the real world, no decent tank crew sits there bombarding at long-range in the view that they are safe against infantry!!

For the normal person, what does protected mean? and how does it affect the use of the weapon in the game? Thank you.

This is a shot in the dark as I cannot verifiy it since my upgrade went well. In OFP I could get similar types of error applying patches. I remember that with applying the patches in OFP I had to turn off DMA settings in my motherboard BIOS to patch successfully. Once installed I restored my DMA setting to original. I experienced this with some of my AMD based systems and cannot talk about Intel systems. I never found out why, but it did work.

Need the 1.04 to 1.05 patch. Downloading the v1.04 to 1.05 patch at 4.52kb/s to complete in 16 hours. Filesize 226Mb. Now downloading the v1.02 to 1.05 at 51.7kb/s to complete in 2.5 hours. Filesize 461Mb.

At last downloading the file. Well, my initial impression will come in about 16 HOURS due a download speed of approx 5kb/s. Actually my pre-initial impression is not good as they did not providing enough mirrors, considering that the world and everyone including BIS knew this would be a high demand download once it was released.

Impressed that I cannot even start a download from any of the sites for English v1.05 due to what looks like over demand for the file. To be honest, clearly more mirrors would have helped all around.

Members of MugHug's Marauders are split between version 1.02 and 1.04 which has put us on hold here. Once v1.05 patch comes out we will be on-line most nights. Imagine with v1.05 we should see things improve and then with ArmA release in US stores, numbers will increase again. Things will be getting better sonn.

Having run two OFP squads with one entering the War Games CTF ladder and winning first time, I cannot accept your view as based on a valid and balanced argument. ArmA offers exactly the same advantages and disadvantages as OFP and CTF at it's best was always team-work and good communication. My squad member have found that exactly the same tactics work in ArmA as OFP. I can still take the flag single-handed at times, but other times I cannot. Cannot expect to carry out the equivalent of taking a flag down from a pole in a hot-combat zone and not expect to be fired upon at if any defenders are near. We accept that a flag defended needs teamwork. Some to draw out and deal with the defenders and others to take the flag.. Even when we defend we have at least two members hided away making it very difficult to take the flag. The better players work as a team to deal with us or the single player first works on us before the flag. Sounds like common sense. Maybe a re-evaluation of skills and tactics by you and your friends are in need. To blame ArmA does a dis-service to BIS who have delivered one of the best tactical combat simulations available to the general public up to date. Like everything it is not perfect, but as nothing can stand-up and compare to it's scope and versatility, put your blame elsewhere. NOTE: Have any of those players that support the original poster's views ever considered that just like in real combat you need to secure an area before doing things like taking flags down. That sounds like a no-brainer considering it is advertised by BIS as 'the most realistic warfare experience ever seen on a computer' Go back to your arcade games, if you cannot handle ArmA. Regards, MugHug [M.H.M] Â

I was wondering if someone could asnwer a question for me. Using the in-game browser of the most recent demo I noticed something odd about the reported pings for some of the servers. Instead of an actual number, the browser displays a question mark. I have noticed that within our LAN, this is not an issue with our dedicated server, but once I switch the browser to Internet, it comes up with the question mark. Any advise would be welcomed.

Hi, Just a bit of info to think about. I have tried every trick in the book, on the Avon Lady FAQ, W2K/WinME/WinXP and all the alternative drivers out there, but I still get the odd crash or reboot on my workstation. Having experienced problems running OFP on a VIA chipset motherboard I decided to move away from VIA totally. After having read the reviews on the stability of the SIS 735 chipset I upgraded the motherboard and RAM. All other hardware was changed except for the video card. I still get the same problems. The one common item in all of this is my GF2 GTS/Pro 64Mb video card. It runs stable in all other situations I find it hard to believe that it is faulty, etc. I am no expert, but I am suspecting that the problems are clearly related to OFP video issues. The DS Server that I run is fine if run as as DS, but when I tested it by running it with the normal executable it develops the same problems. Three different makes of chipsets and hardware and the problem is still present. I think that the VIA chipset is used as an excuse and the issue is more generic with OFP and mainly video hardware. Regards, MugHug

Thanks Mister Frag, A very good point and one I will look into. Regards, MugHug

Mmmmm, 'my favorite past time is watching Ping rates to my server or the ones we use' That explains your fixation with numbers. Try to get out more. And if I need to explain anything to you, it shows the gaps in your knowledge and experience!!! I will tell you one thing, I have worked in the field of computers for the last 20 yrs. I still find there are things I do not know. I still find that because something works once, it may not work exactly the same way again. I still find that paper does not always translate to the real world exactly 100%. Maybe my trouble is that I live in the real world!!! If networking and the Internet was so cut and dry as you seem to put it, them why do companies spend so much money on IT staff and training?? I would like to wish you a merry Xmas and a Happy New Year, but no doubt being the expert, you will have something to say about that!!!. Anyway, have a nice Xmas and New Year. Oh, on Xmas day stop checking your 'PING' and spend it with your family. Just do not bore them with you tech talk. MugHug (Edited by MugHug at 1:56 am on Dec. 24, 2001) (Edited by MugHug at 1:59 am on Dec. 24, 2001)

Not exactly informative and really common sense, so no real point in stating. I think I will wait for BIS to reply or e-mail them directly. MugHug