Second

Vanilla ArmA didn't have any "sophisticated" easy to use logics. Modders could make quite complicated logics which mission designer then just inserts on map, to get benefit from them. I'd believe BIS now is going to give us pre-coded logics to Vanilla ArmA2... Ain't this thing confirmed already? The question is: How complicated will there logics be what BIS is going to implement into ArmA2. Do we have just bunch of civilians walking/standing around while emptily looking into horizon... Or do they even be able to replicate common daily activities, like eating, working, boozing&shagging, sleeping, maybe even defending them selves.

Where did i say that rifleman is better to be used in intelligence gathering than sniper? And even more: WHERE did i say that sniper is best used in shooting stuff while riflemen are better to gather intel? Nowhere. I think you demonstrate inability to read correctly. EDIT: To make my point clear: AGAIN! Most common rifleman's task is to keep eyes/ears on sector given to him. One of most common task where this happens are guard watches, which is defined as reconnaissance. When wiki or some other source says that snipers will do most of his time recon, it's is right. He keeps he's eyes on sector given to him... Just as rifleman does. -Sure USMC has scout snipers which main mission would be to do sneaky recon without giving away it's presence, which is why i more willingly would put them (as unit) under recon than snipers. -There are plenty of recon troops which have sniper rifles as part of their team/squad equipment, but still they are recon, like US Army also seems to have. They are recon. That is their primary task: to find out info about enemy without alerting it. -Snipers still are those who's primary job is to eliminate HP targets... Or just targets without HP, that is what they do most and that is how their tasks usually are tasked, planned and executed. -Then again ArmA2 ain't only about US (forms only bit above 16% of factions), so trying to use US-doctorines as ultimate proof of case is ~83% wrong and shows that person lacks perspective. -Then again we weren't discussing about scout snipers, but snipers. If we take pedantic approach :D Well we aren't talking about iron sight adjustment here, now are we? OP asked only about sniper rifles, which i treat as unimportant sniper-fetish. There are far too many other "just as important" features lacking. Sure if it would be stretched to apply for every weapon in game it would be great. EDITBitMore: But enough of this.

Hmm... So what were selections like? Two days? Intelligence and psycological tests (same as in enrolment for military service, kutsunnat in Finnish), muscle fitness test and 12 minutes running test probably were included. Or does Border Guards use "the police way" to run for 15 minutes? Was there 10 kilometers to be ran with backpack? I must admit i'm not 100% sure does Special Border Jaeger Station at Onttola.

Would you be so kind to tell me how this is different from regular rifleman, who has much-much more tasks to do that just to shoot things... like gathering intelligence. Yet i doubt there would be much arguing against statement that rifleman not shooting is wasted potential. This in MP-games, which usually are combat-focued and limited in their background set-up (no indirect fire, no pre-planning and preparations. very-very limited time to do anything which prepares unit for combat). Yet basically we talk about same stuff here. Sniper are not always blazing their rifles... And same stuff with member of rifle squads and platoons and how they deal with some tasks they should do, like scouting their objective and enemy in it or sneaking behind enemy lines to seize/destory/damage some vital objective. No special treatment to snipers, please. CarlGustaffa wrote: Yup. While i'm not probably best person to say (as my MP-experience is limited on public servers, and experience itself is limited) i doubt that other roles are played just as wrongly. And MP-games in general are quite limited in scale, timeframe and realism. It is whole different thing to have part of night and whole morning to use to plan and prepare something like attack and then execute it by mid-day (and we speak of limited attack of one objective directly behind enemy lines) than to do same thing in less than hour. Adjustable scopes? Naah. Better things to do and too hard learning process to most.

This thread makes hilarious reading. Once again i have to agree with Celery. Sniper rifle not firing when possible is usually wasted potential in MP-games where teams fights against each of other. It's like tank which is not used. From link CarlGustaffa provided: How sad. Snipers are found out to be guys who's primary job is to shoot buggers :rolleyes: Again every rifleman in fact are information gatherers also. What platoon does when it forms defensive perimeter? They put guards in their place to protect main platoon from being surprised by enemy (this is recon), they may send patrols to take contact to other units in area and make sure area in middle of them is free from hostiles (this is recon). They may take actual recon-patrols to enemy ranks, which is quite oddly named as recon. To mention few basic examples. No reason to get all psyched up and loose common sense. EDIT: By which i mean that next time some one argues that rifleman's first job is to recon while shooting part is much less important. Another problem here is that people seems to think that MP-matches (or ArmA2 in general) are something like low intensity conflicts against enemies which are not (uniform wearing) soldiers but blend into civilian population.

FDF. JaegerBrigade/Lapland's JaegerBatallion/Antitank Company/ATGM Platoon (to be exact :) ). NCO (lowest) is my rank. ATGM squad leader was my "specialized trade" in military passport when i was sent back to civilian life. That was in -99. Right now i circle around in voluntary courses to get all kinds of infantry training. All kind fun stuff.

Remember this was times of chaos. No salary paid to men, no money to train men, no money to up-keep equipment. Russia still is paying it's "price" from 90's and it take lots of time to repair all that damage. Against Georgia they did quite fine, very fine in fact.

I almost could have swear that with for exmaple Barret there was just small decrease in sway but grouping's size was much smaller, suggesting that dispression of bullet's was smaller. But i'm not arguing against you :)

Hmm... How has ArmA's hold breath worked? I always thought that it was about increasing bullet's dispression? I'd like to point out that MAJORITY of bullet missing bull's eye (so to speak) comes from fact that while discharging weapon there was some mistake made, usually in trigger pulling part. Aiming mistakes have MUCH smaller part in bullet missing bull's eye. This is very clear with inexperienced shooter (or shooter under pressure). It's easy task to look that sights are in correct place, but (fine) controlling small muscle groups such as muscles of finger under pressure comes harder. Example: If we have like 20 centimeter sized grouping, easily 13-15 centimeters from it comes from mistakes done during discharging weapon while only 5-8 centimeters comes from aiming mistakes. The way i basically see it: bullet dispression = mistakes done while discharging weapon. Sway = aiming mistakes. In that sense increasing bullet dispression (cone of fire) is good thing and agree with Baff1 that dispression is much better than sway (which i hate as i'm fighting against game again), but like i said it's not good thing on it's own. Game needs to tell the player that okay now you can't hit much anything. Be it suppressed Icon, blur, anything as long as it's clear sign. I hate to guess am i now enough relaxed to actually hit anything.

What are recon then for? Coffee makers for Brigade commander? That used to be sniper's job in the past :D

I agree with DreDay that suppression has to have effect on battleground, this is big factor also in accuracy of fires. [and i agree that i forgot to mention it :p ] Which i personally would like is that ArmA2 would force players to get suppressed. However this should be clear to player that now he is suppressed. In Brothers in Arms forexmaple there was pretty complete (compared to other games) suppression model affecting also to player... What was the problem? I've have played it quite a bit and i managed to understand just in the end of Hell's Highway campaign that my character's accuracy is affected by enemy fire, so he is not always so poor shooter :D However i really never really understood (i played also LOTS of Earned in Blood's quick battles) when and how much my character starts to suppress and when he is not suppressed... That led me to ask myself who am i controlling? Answer was something like this: Some stranger who's reactions, fears were not told to me and in the end i was controlling stranger during whole game. Which was bummer. I can understand if role playing game would have such, but shooters arent' like that. I don't build character, i don't study what are he's weaknesses and strong points, overall i don't know nothing of my character. Weapon sway and higher bullet dispression (i believe) has been used forexmaple in SLX and overall i didnt' find it saticfying, same problems as with BiA. Who am i controlling and what are his thoughts? I don't find myself suppressed but still i don't hit broad side of barn. Based on that i'd say that ArmA2 shouldn't just drop characters accuracy down, but instead it should use blur and other visual and audio marks to force player to take cover. Mild blur already should affect player's shooting accuracy great deals because he can't see very well, and it will probably force player to play more cautiously... However that is just theory i made up in my mind. Sure adding bullet dispression on top of that might be good thing, but without blurs and such clear signals i believe it would fail. Players would have loads of WTF! moments.

How come it's not realistic? Shooting is quite simple thing when the process is drilled to level of automation no reason to create mysticism around this issue, sure drilling improves accuracy but by default every human being should hit easily with little drill human sized target from 300 meters. Hard part comes from fact that people generally don't want to get shot so they try to be hard targets. which means that they are visible for just seconds and terrain offers much cover for them to hide the moments they are not running (which probably will be most of the "battletime"). Basically. Sure ArmA could/should increase bullet dispression somewhat when shooting is done without proper holding breath button usage. How much if at all i'm not sure. But when hold breath button is used correctly guys should be deadly accurate. I see wonky tonky logic here: I can't hit enemy who stands still in 300 meters because high dispression and neither can enemy hit me!?!? Now that if something is wrong. Sure it's nice for little time, but immersion usually gets spoiled when i understand that i'm standing without cover in firefight while blazing my mags on autofire at enemy and i really don't even get killed by doing that. Edit: Sure ArmA firefights aren't usually very entertaining. That comes from fact that player are not liking to spare their digital lives (that is why respawn is there!) and many times terrain is such that i doesn't allow being hard target (one will pretty much always be visible). Sure one can prolong firefights by higher dispression and it can be entertaining, but claiming that it's realistic is somewhat odd. As it leads to far too many unrealistic aspects of human behaviour.

I dare to disagree... BIS has to have been improving their recoil simulations from days of OFP. So prone and standing positions will have different recoil forces lifting the weapon. Example M16 offers greater recoil on prone than M240, but on standing it's different matter as this time M16 offers smaller recoil than M240. I could be wrong as i'm not most fervent/fanatic/hardcore/fanboi ArmA player.

:confused: IS it the same Celery than 2 years ago? :confused: I wonder the same. 2 years ago i "hated" him... now i in fact am prone to "love" him. My hair remains the same, on top and below. Has to be due some other factors/reasons... Unable to process more.

Or marker. Anyways this would be very appreciated feature to have.

Yeah. This is problem. People are free. What free people does? Stupid things. Look how free people are ruining mother earth because automobiles and wasting limited natural resources are "freedom", trying to take out that away from them and you will have riots, civil wars and all kinds of ugly shite. With those capabilities to cause harm with freedoms, freedom easily can destroy whole game. Freedoms doesn't even need to sweat to do that. Besides rules and limitations equal for all creates comfort and stability. Kids raised based on freedoms instead of discipline are prone to become junkies, hookers and all kinds ugly shite. And i'm being partially even serious.

It indeed would be nice if AI would understand that okay i have still 80% of ammo left [this including additional ammo from ammo bearers within squad]. Time to burn some powder. Then: Okay i now have 50% of shots left... Time to start become more careful with burning powder. And next: I have less than 20% of shots left. Just accurate single shots from now on at "clearly" visible targets. And finally: I have one mag left (or 30-40 bullets in belt)... This is only for emergency situations. This has quite deal to do with volume of fire which one can deliver and upkeep. This combined with suppressive effects. Morale tied to these both. Hmm... Gets interesting. Then again ArmA2 will remain as sniper paradise (=not enough cover&concealment) so level off ammo probably won't have much effect to outcome of battle as troops generally can't empty even their first mag before getting killed (if shooting accuracy of AI isn't dropped too low).

Most MGs make this possible only when firing from hip (too long distance from bipod to butt of stock), Which ArmA doesn't include. I think from current set of weapons SAW might be only exception because it's bipods seems to be quite close to shooter. It would be (again) nice to have "keep weapon stabile, aim by impacts" shooting stance along with of current "aim along barrel or sights, let recoil throw barrel to sky" shooting stance. But again it would be just one more little feature which makes game play more complex and more unappealing (cubersome) to most, including me. Then again two animations (keeping MG on hip while not aiming) and two sets of recoil for MG based on does character aim or not might be best way. Wouldn't require anything from player other than desission to aim (=snipe) or not to aim (=saturate area with impacts), no additional "take grasp of bipod"-button... At same time we would get rid of this quite stupid looking animation where machinegunners always keeps MG up against their shoulder and aims to horizon if not running.

True we are mis-communicating. My post's grammar again was a mess. :p In picture we have (handsome) man using "sniper" position where left hand is bellow stock of rifle. What difference with this position is to typical way of holding rifle, where man hold's his left hand under barrel? Only difference is the position of left hand. Moving left hand to typical rifle holding position takes no time. True shoulders are higher also, but that is minor thing. Same problem when shooter has to turn comes even without bipods. One hand reserved for holding rifle while another hand helps legs in turning body (be it masterpiece of human-agility or half crunched position by which he turns his body). But yeah, i won't continue further. My bipods experience is quite limited in the end and there might be things i just don't get from your point-of-view. So if you have something to share do it, i'm very interested. From your point of view I can think just that bipods are one more moving part in machine which should be as simple as possible to work fast, so getting good firing position fastly can become bit harder with bipods. My problem with bipods is that i'm most familiar with them in LMG weighting over 10 kilograms (with ammo). Which can distort my point-of-view little as it's heavy&cubersome piece of **** pretty much always.

How? If i take my left hand from rifles stock and put it under MG (from where rifles traditionally are held) then i have just weight as an issue. Weight is an issue yes, but it isn't dependant of bipods. Only difference in how i hold my MG is that where my left hand is stationed, i can change my way of holding MG by moving my hand. Sure everything gets slower with heavy items, but again that ain't dependant of bipods. MG with deployed bipods or without still weights the same.

Are they? To me it seems that there isn't any randomness in action when recoil tosses weapon in ArmA.

Cone of fire is quite good. Example. I have target in long distance. I have LMG. I have orders to engage that target with long burst. I fire at target with one long burst (20 bullets, absurd figure i know). What will happen? No my bullets won't rise in nice patter up and bit right. But dependant of case (mostly my "grip" on LMG) my bullets will create widening "round" beaten zone which is more like cone which other games features. If i fire without weapon support (=standing position, not-symetrical) my bullets would rise up lots, like ArmA has it. But with support or symmetrical standing position me controlling recoil and it's more like "round" beaten zone around target that steadily rising patter of impacts to upward direction.

But compare M240's recoil on standing, kneeling and on prone. Recoil is insane (literally) in first two, while it's quite tender in last.

I doupt. I'd say ArmA has much better system already. Haven't played PR but i dare to say that weapon accuracy should be what it is in reality, and by that i mean WEAPON accuracy (shooter's accuracy should be MAIN factor). Ability to snipe HAS to be possible, this HAS TO force players to play cautiously or die. If that fails then realism in that sense is thrown to trash. What i hear about PR is that it's still run'n'gun, and i believe it is. Same happened with OFP mods which had option for so-called HD magazines. Which were inaccurate. On mid-long ranges it was mere bad luck for one to get hit. If you saw enemy on 200-400 meters better was just to put whole mag at him either with rapid sinlge shots or autofire than take him into sights and take accurate shots.

EDIT: Blah. Wrote totally off from the mark.