Jump to content

Second

Member
  • Content Count

    1432
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Medals

Everything posted by Second

  1. Second

    Is the muzzle flash too visible?

    Depends. Western armies often have good powders. I think US currently is introducing ammo which is pretty much smokeless, but they have lagged behind with that for decades. Germans had practically smokeless powder already back in ww2. Which was problem from US point of view (not sure about soviets) as their powder wasn't nearly as smokeless. Flash is alot about rifle's parameters, which is often issue with carbines and such as they have considerable shorter barrel compared to rifles to which ammo was originally introduced, so fumes for ignition don't all burn up in barrel. I've had Russian Barnaul for my modernized Mosin-Nagant which had tons of smoke. Could be flash too, i havent' much paid attention to it and it often isn't as clear to shooter as smoke. I use mostly Lapua and Sako which burns very cleanly and there is no smoke or flash. But i guess Barnaul just would have needed longer barrel or silencer for all powder to burn inside barrel instead of open air, it has heavier bullet (11gr) with seemingly same muzzlespeeds as with Lapua and Sako (850-900m/s). My Army experiences are similar, but muzzle flash is pretty complicated matter (when put into practice) and in exercises there's blankadapter attached to rifle/LMG which affects to things quite a lot by increasing flash as burning pieces of wood are scattering into sides of rifle's muzzle. On firing range with live ammo there is no smoke of flash at daylight. I don't remember how it behaved in dark at livefire exercises or in firing range. We have similar 7.62x39 but Lapua produces ammo we use and it's pretty high grade.
  2. Yeah. I teleported one enemy unit around my unit. First had him attack my squad from south, hid behind hill (target marker stayed there) then teleported him to east side of my squad in hidden location. If target was on east side they would go east side. If i teleported him to west side my squad members started (slowly) to change their direction to west position. Even when their target marker was still on last seen position in south. System's kinda overlap there, as they seem to focus on position where enemy was last seen (forexample SL kept staring at last seen location, target marker's location, south)... But they move (=engage/attack) to actual enemy position. However they don't go directly to location but may try to use terrain formations (seems to favor high ground) and at best i had one of my squad member trying to spot enemy from ridge 400 meters away (from enemy) and reluctant to get closer (instead he zig-zagged on ridge, which is pretty dumb, but idea is cool)... Or at least it seemed that way. Sometimes i took role of enemy soldier and kept running for about 1-2 kilometers... AI's kept following me until SL told them to get back into formation... Based on my testes only way to get AI from following you is to get enough long away from them to make AI SL to order them back into formation, the time it takes for AI's to not be able to fix on your location is so long that one can't hide from it, because they will find you... At least not in wilderness, urban setting and use of building is another matter. Nemesis: That seems cool way to check it. Now i have to use cadet mode to make target markers to appear and have to have about 3-4 playable charaters (one SL, one enemy, one squad member) to check out how targeting system works. That would reduce hassle.
  3. I'm not saying that weight doesn't add to fatigue, it reduces speed. So same power output with heavier weight generates less speed. Thus to maintain same speed more power is needed to generate -> more fatigue. Weight it self doesn't add up fatigue, light guy can be just as spent if he fails in maintain optimal pace. But i take stance of looking at this from perspective of time. If heavier guy travels same time (but shorter distance) than lighter guy then amount of energy used is equal. Ofcourse if they have to travel same distance then heavier guy uses longer time, or increases his pace. So in that perspective he uses more energy. But again every human being, advanced athletes who have worked hard for years excluded, has pretty solid border lines how long he can move on Vo2max, aerobic or anaerobic threshold. So in this sense distance is irrelevant, as one chooses appropriate pace relative to estimated time he needs to cross distance. 5km runner has to know how long it takes him to run it to determe how close to Vo2max he can go, same goes for 10km and so on. In marathons this is quite obvilious as top runners run close to their anaerobic threshold, while common joggers jogs it closer to their aerobic threshold. That because top runners runs it in less than 2:30 hours, while joggers spent easily over 4 hours. Joggers aren't more exhausted, (generally even less exhausted) because they use different energy path ways. Top runners can rely much more on glycogen, while joggers has to utilize much more their fat reserves because they don't (=can't) run with as high heart rates as top runners does. Thus energy pathways and optimal pace are chosen relative to time. Typically from physical and even mental aspect soldiers (with poorish physical fitness) like more about combat exercises than forced marches, because in combat exercises they can keep on comfort zone (dash slightly slower to maintain low lactic acid levels, rest longer to reduce lactic acids). Poorish physical fitness doesn't easily show up in here. But in marches one can't do such thing, as one has to keep formation. So he has to move faster than his own personal (optimal) pace would be which forces him to use more glycogen and less fats, which eventually can lead into depleting glycogen stores and that's when the trouble starts. Ultrarunners can take lots of time to improve their body's capacity to use fats effectively as fuel because they have to be able to run for days in a row (well they might take couple hour long naps during nights!), but regular joes have got used to take energy form glycogen during exercise. Thing with carbs is that any (intelligent&experienced) soldier should know to carry additional energy with them. But yes, possibility to run out of glycogen is possible and then one has to rely solely on fat reserves and then movement gets slow. It's matter of how deeply one wants to simulate this. I know, i could be looking this thing from solely wrong perspective. It surely seems that way. EDIT: Oh and one more thing. I advocate that speed (not fatigue) should be affected by weight carried, jog is on aerobic threshold all times and can be kept up seemingly forever (well multiple hours atleast in row), sprint is done at Vo2max or little above it. That can be one thing which makes me seem sort of ignorant to other people's posts and point of view. If speed should be same to all, then things change and fatigue should base on weight. Which i my mind doesn't produce as good results, but as i said i'm ignorant.
  4. Could be, i'm not natural english speaker myself either. I don't disagree with any of your points, it's matter of point of view and opinion.
  5. But i take approach that fatigue == lactic acids. Old endurance saying fits well here: Speed kills, not distance. Always. Lighter person will be more exhausted if he fails to control his tempo. I think stamina (as if glycogen stores in body) is out of game's scope, on comfort zone they would last from aprox. 1:30-2:00 hours. And they can easily be filled with sports drinks and energy bars. Also body's wear and tear from carrying lots of weight is more question of days, weeks, months. It's is very common for people not to understand what amounts of effort they can endure if they need. Yes relative to distance heavier person has to apply more strength than lighter one. But i'm not sure if distance is proper measurement unit in ArmA for this thing, because when it comes to energy reserves and how body utilizes them it's more about time. Those in the end are pretty similar to all people. Distance can vary greatly from person to person, but time is pretty constant thing. 2 minutes in Vo2max means that any person will shut down, distance can be anything from 300-800 meters. Lactic acids and Vo2max are solidly interlinked, they practically are the same. It doesn't matter what the weight is, it's matter of how much power one generates. And i mean this in context of time, in context of distance it's different, but as i explained i think ArmA should be looked from context of time. So: With more weight and equal power speed is reduced. If heavier person ends up trying to keep up with lighter person he will end up using more power, so then he will have increasing lactic acids which eventually will shut him down. Then again for example dedicated AT-specialists usually have better power output as they generally train with more weight on their shoulders... So basically AT-specialist can maintain slightly higher power output than rifleman on average. But that gets too complicated in my mind. Or something, i'm not saying that i don't agree with you, because on context of distance you are right, heavier person has to utilize more strength/energy to cross that same distance as light person. Does he then take them from fat reserves or from glycogen aerobically or anaerobically is another thing. How he's muscle/strength endurance lasts with extreme weights? (well it should with anything under 50-60% of bodyweight)... To be honest i don't care, just thought to bring up some facts in my previous post.
  6. And this works wonders in RO2. I refuse to pick up semiautomatic rifle, or SMG, as a antitank soldier (carrying AT-rifle, pistol, couple AT-grenades) because of the fact that it will make me slower, even if it means that against infantry i'm underdog. If i need to assault tank from close distance i will rid myself from everything but pistol and AT-grenades/mines, because it makes me move much faster. Heck in MP i rarely see blokes carrying more than what they class gives them: primary firearm, possibly pistol, grenades.
  7. Soldiers are got used to carrying heavy loads, so weight doesn't matter on it self. I have "run" (=jog) with 40 kg of gear, but i had hauled it already for months so it didn't feel that bad. Lactic acids does. Running with out gear sucks as much, only speed in greater but lactic acids does come in in same way and cause same amount of burn in body and lack of oxygen, eventually shutting body down. Jogging in comfort zone isn't nearly as unpleasant and that is why people like to stick in there, and they can stick in there for hours if need be. This is why people generally don't tire them selves up in combat exercises (or in combat) to max like they would do in in sports, and even there these kind of exercises demands lots of dedication and willpower. In Military there can be things like dashes from cover to cover, but there are usually good amount of time to recover from each dash. Then there are panic situations, where one tries to flee from pursuing enemies or escape from MG's beaten zone or something like that, in here soldiers will push against their comfort zone simply because their existence relies to it. I know maybe 0.1% of our valiant internetz warriors are aware of what lactic acids are and what they cause, how they occury etc etc etc. But this is why i think jogging should be easy effort with little to none fatigue effect because lactic acids doesn't rise up but remains steady state, while hitting sprint button starts to strongly increase fatigue (=lactic acids) eventually slowing soldier down and making him combat ineffective for tens of seconds or even minute(s). In RO2 for instance it's advisable to not to sprint into maximal fatigue as it demands lots of time to recover and ability to hit with fire is severely reduced for long time, so advanced players commonly tries to keep fatigue from maxing. I think in real life terms it worked well. Maximal amount of time one should be able to sprint? I'd say around 30-60 seconds. More logical and realistic would be 2 minutes as that is amount of time human can spent on Vo2max, but for gameplay reasons balancing can be problem as then recovery paces should be long (up to 5-10 minutes) and such time is utter hell (if freaks me out how everyone markets HIIT in fitness indusrty, as if people would actually be able to do it effectively!). And one can't repeat that often, usually not more than once. I think with 30 seconds of sprint one should spent recovering from it for about 2 minutes. But he should be able to sprint as often as he likes. In real life even those sprints should be limited to about 10-15 (and that for well fit athlete) after which ability to sprint should be taken away and fatigue levels simply doesn't rise up as body is bathing in lactic acids, but it sucks balls how that would slow game down. So what i'm saying is that fatigue should not be affected by weight... Movement speed should affected by weight. person weighting 100 kg will run marathon (or 1500 meters) just as 50 kg person would. But he would be much slower. Even if their aerobic and anaerobic fitness levels are similar -> weight reduces speed, not amount of time one can move.
  8. It's those tactical goggles which gets fogged. Quite frankly i like this feature as a formed paintballer and airsofter, last time i spent good 10 minutes lying in pool of water with-in enemy positions as a result of failed assault into opponents positions, all i saw was strudy layer of fog in my mask and all i heard was volumes of paintball fire directed at my general location... In this light i never really understood use of tactical goggles in combat conditions when changes are that during heavy physical efforts, lots of sweating and breathing goggles will get fogged and person is pretty fundamentally combat ineffective (i know i have been!). Same goes for eyeglasses in freezing temperatures, i fecking loved livefire-exercises in offensive exercises because of fogging. Even instructor took me as an idiot because i didn't dare to shoot all targets as i wasn't sure is it my combat buddy or pop up target. So blur should stay, even get increased effect (and add sound of laughing clown aswell), but only with goggles. Maybe with shades aswell. That should teach those tacticool-idjiits some lesson, yeah baby yeah. I say this with slight sarcasm and humor. Because quite frankly goggles does seem dangerous military hardware anywhere but in photo shoots, in my eyes (which have been covered by fog thousands of times).
  9. Combat Mission Shock Force do place itself in Modern Syria. And basically their new engine works in 1:1 scale which means that in the end it isn't different from ArmA when it comes to details and how to model them. Basically one could play FPS in it. They have even ERA-blocks modeled (you blow one up and you have cap there), Slat-armors, modern countermeasures (Sthora, dunno is there other's). Armor and ammo are naturally classified so they have to try to guess what can penetrate what, but it's there (not actual metric values are displayed). Very realistic, very well modeled. So it's doable alright. And Battlefront had only one coder at time who coded it in there (the whole engine). But i don't give rat's arse how BIS does it. Current level is fine by me.
  10. It does fade away after longish time. My guess would be, based on my experiments, something like 5-10 minutes, after that it drops back to 0. But in my test i teleported enemy to over 500 meters away, i don't knoe can distance have effect on target. However again i must underline the fact that targeting system kept track of enemy only for few seconds after loosing LOS to it. I teleported him first in first location (immediatly after opening fire at my squad and killing one of us), then after about 10 seconds i teleported him into another location. Targeting system still thought him to be in location one (even with knowsabout at 4!). I even revealed him to my SL, but still target system thought him to be in location one... Which is odd, but i think it's been like this from start, reveal only works if AI knows nothing about target of reveal. In my example they already knew he was in location one, so that info was deemed more important that information from reveal. However engage system tracked him into location two where he actually was. I dunno why it uses two different methods, it would be logical to think that they engage enemies based on target-information on them, but instead there is some other (bugged?) system. Feck, this brings back memories from ArmA... Makes me sick, i started to hate that game by overanalyzing it's AI and it's flaws.
  11. umm. No. And i general i think your comparing apples to oranges. That seems to be more about somesort of tracking system, and how engage order works. They do follow your movement path, heck they even track you if you teleport. But that is not same thing as targeting and seeing. Just tested. I revealed enemy AI to SL and SL told me to target him (with cadet mode i get target marker), then teleported enemy to another place. Target marker remained on the spot where he was, while he quite clearly wasn't. Even another reveal command didn't give enemy's new location, not until old marker had faded. Dunno why, i think it updated marker location before. Also SL kept his azimut related to target marker, not actual position where i teleported him into. I also played as enemy, shot one from from their squad to ensure their enduring interest on me and then teleported away. They couldn't trace me. Checked that as having playable character in said squad. Target marker and enemy sign in map remained in where they had last contact to me (from where i teleported away)... Even when another squad members started to move to location into where i teleported him into. And here's interesting part, when they found their target it got reported as new threat! They were not aware of any particular enemy (=me), but they were aware that something is there. So main problem i see at the moment is that they can track enemies over long distances. Until SL commands them back, and that can be hundreds of meters, even kilometers. On matter of AI targeting enemies i think my case still stands. Infact i just did test thing where i teleported my character all over enemy AI squad and they shot me when they had LOS, when they didn't have LOS they didn't. But when i opened fire they replied to it with immediate wrath of god. I could crawl 50-100 meters from them in long crass and they didnt' spot me. But i i shot at them from 400-500 meters they shot me thru bushes and all. It seems ArmA3 still operates under same ruleset as previous titles: they don't need to see enemy to shoot at it, enemy has to just give them clue about his location, generally by firing his firearm.
  12. It's pretty clear that AI doesn't see thru bushes of anything, has been since OFP. Problem is their targeting system which is capable to pick your exact position (not you) and kind of overcoming cover and concelament. Just the way you can shoot target marks on you HUD, AI knows it can shoot thru bushes so it fires thru bushes. This is OFP-old stuff and i've not paid attention to it since ArmA. But this is the way i understand it works/worked: 1. You shoot. Creating both audio and visual clue for enemy to pick up, to player this is visble by target marks given by SL. This might last from anything from milliseconds to seconds, depending of configs. Forexample in OFP burst fire was notorius because it created strong clue for enemy to pick up which lasted for about 5 seconds. So enemy was aware of you the whole time, no matter what you do. In ArmA AT-soldier had seriously hard time to evade getting shot on without proper cover. If i recall enemy was aware of exact location for 10 seconds or so picking you up form behind bush, so anykind of concealment was useless as AI knew it can shoot past it and it did. Bushes still had properties to hide you from their eyes, but their targetting system kinda overwrote that... Just the way target mark on you HUD does. 2. Once that 5 (or something) seconds expires your location isn't known anymore. Enemy will presume you still linger in same spot. So if they get orders to engage you they go to that location. If you fire again and they detect it -> return to #1. That made OFP and ArmA to be solely about dead-on accurate singleshots shot at long intervals, main thing was to remain "silent" and "unseen" by regulating singleshots to over 5 second intervals and to know that you can't hide the target mark from them and try to counter that. Or that was how i thought of it. And it seems same system is still installed in ArmA3.
  13. Mixed bag, AI could ruin it or save it. I can't tell am i already satisfied with current AI or not. Should test a lot more. I doubt it will improve much from this, because that i my experience with BIS. So far i like it, but aiming and shooting is big problem. Stances needs some amount of tweak. Firstly i'd like to see at which stance i am. Sitting is the worst because it makes player stationary, maybe replace it with high prone position or something which leaves player mobile. Maybe even eraze whole stance if there is no suitable alternative. Driving seems horrible, but i don't care much about that stuff. Fatigue meter would be nice. Editor is seems nice and fresh.
  14. In maranthon one doesn't work at his Vo2max, 800 meters is much more better at that. Mainly i dislike swallowing and stops in his breathing cycle, as if he would be suffocating into his own spit. It makes me feel physically bad and almost hyperventilate myself. Like he's having flu and slime all over his throat, nose and mouth and at the same time he didn't warm up properly. Strenght of breathing sound is okay. If they would make goggles to fog aswell... :bounce3:
  15. Second

    6.5 mm and recoil management in game

    Rifle doesn't come down from recoil, that is my main problem with it. Even in prone position when i shoot rifle it doesn't come down. Movement of gun is slowish in recoil, but i dont' exprience that as big problem, i hate it if i have to fight the game in this matter when i'm supposed to fight against opponent. I've double tapped targets upto 250 meters, with LMG i've shot double-bursts (2x2 shots) upto 400 meters. And i've shot fast flying birds down in dublees from standing position with shotgun, which requires quite fast ability to shoot fast successive shots at different targets with gun which's recoil is similar to 7.62x54 bolt lock. Recoil has never been this kind of problem as it is in ArmA3. Infact i've never had any sort of recoil management teached to me and if i'm not using automatic fire with lightish rifle i don't think it's necessary. When i trained mostly with BB-gun i told to one experienced shooter that it doesn't teach me to manage recoil he said that "What goes up comes down", and he was right in my opinion.
  16. I dunno if jog should be something like steady state level which one can run for hour(s) with lactic acid levels at pretty much same, so it would be little beyond aerobic threshold level. So movement with weapons raised would be aerobic movement, acting as active recovery mainly. Jog would be extorting (painful and unpleasant) but doable for long time. Running would be something like 1 minute balls out effort. highly rising lactic acids and some serious side effects. Should stamina (glycogen levels of body) be taken into consideration at all? I don't think it should as it feels to be out of game's scope. I think jogging should be taxing enough to make character feeling unpeleasant, but it shouldn't never end up into 1 fatigue, maybe 0.5 would be proper. Only down side would be slightly negative accuracy for limited time, until fatigue drops to 0. There could be heavyish breathing voices involved, or then not, i can't tell. For real world similarity maybe lactic acid levels would around 3 or 4, so it's maximal steady state. Running instead should result in high lactic acid levels, and thus fatigue rising rapidly into 1. When this happens movement gets slow and aiming and such are seriously hampered, blur and and tunnel vision maybe too, and i think it should be such until fatigue has hit zero. One can remain running but at severly slowed speed and serious sideeffects. And jogging doesn't bring character back to normal. Only way to do that is walking or remaining stationary. So on what level fatigue would end up being, would define movement speeds along with cargo, stance and elevation of terrain. Basically. Walking is telling to character to take it slowly, jog would be telling character to go beyond boundaries of pleasantness but reaming just slightly above that level. Only running would burn character down. And most of all, we need fatigue meter which tells us at which level of lactic acid our body is working at. Without it all fancy details are useless as they are pretty hard to notice without proper meter. I think it pretty much like in RO2, but in bit more complicated manner. RO2 doesn't count terrain elevation as one factor, does it? AI maybe better to be left untouched by this.
  17. I'd say that BIS should finally elevate skill levels of default squad members. right now range is 0.1-0.35 (or something). It's supposed to be abysmal and not something trained rifle squad is supposed to have. Some then do elevate skill levels in their missions and some doesn't... I do forexample tweak AI so that they can act decently with their default skill levels, because elevating skill levels of each AI in every mission is quite a bother. And forexample in missions made by BIS their skill levels are elevated to something like 0.5-1... Which makes them horribly accurate with my AI settings. That is my main problem. AI in BIS's missions have always been quite a problem as i do tend to try to tweak AI on default skilllevels (0.1-0.4) into what i think is both realistic and challenging anything in 0.5-0.7 is already unearthly killing machine... Not to speak of those with 1. Maybe even having text next to skill level slider which tells mission maker what BIS expects this skill levels to be. Like this: 0-0.2 untrained. something like civilians 0.21-0.4 basic trained. Couple months at basic training is all it. Like artillery man as infantry soldier. Or rifleman just fresh from basic training. 0.41-0.6 normal training. Troops have been trained for many months for this task. 0.61-0.8 highly trained. About year or so of training (not sitting on barracks with thumb in arse). 0.81-1 Elite. Some highly talented and trained individuals. Forexample default rifle squads should be something of 0.4 to 0.7 and mean average maybe in 0.55. This could set some sort of standards across board.
  18. Indeed. And moving to Skyrim isn't most touching move to make for me personally. Going for Blackmarsh would have been new exotic location to explore, much like Morrowind was. If Blackmarsh would be made properly it might serve as really mind blowing experience! Right now i'm expecting us to get yet another generic viking-world with generic-vikings doing little more than boozing and kicking ass. Much like Oblivion was about generic fantasy-land with generic fantasy-stereotypes, with little originality and some design-flaws which broke the lore's reliability and continuity... Which for me is key to immerse myself into universe of Elder Scrolls, lore is very important and things like turning Cyrodill into temperate climate with no trace of Jungles (as there was supposed to be according lore) are eating away reliability of lore. So overall: i'm not very exited but will buy it if it scores as high review ratings as Oblivion did.
  19. Second

    Cover system for Arma3?

    Doing it Vietcong style would be all what i would wish, for player. Meaning that there are high shooting positions for kneel and prone and low ready position for both as well. Low prone means hugging earth and making as flat target as possible, even roots of trees became potential cover (didn't have bullet penetration). I Now days it feels unpleasant when i'm forced to go prone and back to kneeling position if i wish to shoot from kneeling position. There's room to improve it, but even still almost 10 years ago it's most immersive thing for me. Easy to use and learn... Unlike MOH:Airborne's system which i haven't learned even still and i've finished that game three times already. :D For AI? They should be able to use cover as firing position and as hiding position, they don't do that and usually they just lie behind rock wall unable to do anything. They should understand that in which position they can engage target and at which position they are hiding from enemies. And they should understand how to be hard target and when they have been shot at. OFDR's lousy AI had all of these (wink-wink ;) ) Not that i'd expect these kind improvements from BIS, i'm already far too skeptical with BIS and their game-improvement policy.
  20. Second

    Combat Mission: Battle for Normandy

    Reason why i liked to play as RED in CMSF, i easilly could send company into meat grinder and knowing that i would get promoted if there would be such thing in game :D Combat Mission Afganistan is probably most Horrible experience for me. Soviets were really lacking manpower and forexample Airborne company might had just 5 men in each squad at start, so preservation of men became vital. One casualty in such squad dropped it's combat ability very much, often to limiting it's usefulness into firesupport role. One poorly made tactical move in battle could mean that company was rendered completely unable to combat for rest of the campaign. So while in CMSF casualty preservation was more about moral stand point often and even luxury (why send infantry team/squad if you can send Javelin?), in CM Afganistan it was just practically necessary.
  21. Second

    Ar-15

    If i recall 5.56mm brass is made to handle more pressure than .223, which decreases powder capacity. But then again 5.56mm usually can have more pressure by regulations (handloaders might use .223's larger powder capacity however) . But i don't think it's usually a problem... not that i'd recommend it to shoot 5.56 ammo from .203 as it can damage firearm (probably doesn't but it can do that). This from my memory, i don't own either of them so i might be wrong. Bit same as shooting 7.62x54 and 7.62x53 from barrel and chamber made for 7.62x53: 7.62x53 is .308 but 7.62x54 can be somewhere from .308 to .311, principally this can means problems but basically that is not big or even small problem. As long as i know only specially made ammo for Dragunov (you can't expect good group from SVT with standard 7.62x54! Tigr is different gun) can be real problem, but technically it shouldn't be 7.62x54 anymore. Case is longer and with bolt action rifle it can be hard to close bolt as case simply is too long. Anyways back to 5.56. From hunting magazines i've read that .223 (and 5.56) is one of toughest cartridge type to find well behaving ammo. Basically meaning that each cartridge type has to be shot in range for each individual rifle to see what group it shoots as variety is large, from very poor to very good. And finding well behaving ammo might not be easy thing. Don't recall what made it so demanding in case of .223, i think it's due various rifling which various rifles uses.
  22. Second

    A few real life combat questions

    The thing Beagle was after by my understandment is that mission makers doesnt' even try to test the limits. I made my best missions in OFP, by best in this i mean missions which mimiced real deal as closely as OFP could. ArmA2 could go closer in many ways, but the thing is that there rarely are missions which ventures into that terrain. Same reason why CWC is still the best campaign BIS has made, it mimics real military affairs pretty closely. I as freshly out from military felt good with it when i played it first time, i don't recall any single game which would have made me feel that what CWC campaign did. Same in MP community: Back with OFP there were missions, alot of missions, played in public servers which were setup so that it had realistic structure, objectives, units, equipment, AO etc. By ArmA things got in more mainstream direction... Or should i say that mainstream got into more arcade direction. And seems that i has got even more into arcade direction from what i've read. As for underlined part: Like one instructor who spent his day evaluating software for training porpuses said that he would accept COD as training tool for infantry troops with few tweaks, mainly by adding instructor kit in it. This doesn't mean that COD "as it is" would be enough, it just means that basic gameplay mechanics are enough close for player to feel immersed to game and offering realistic base with which player would learn more. Training scenarios ofcourse should be made with instructor tools. As for game which didn't fit in training porpuses (by that same instructor's point of view) was Medal of Honor Airborne. Mainly because of it's cubersome controls. Which forced player to learn to play the game instead of learning to do his infantry-stuff.
  23. Second

    Has OFP/ARMA put you off the Army ?

    Look at map and look at Israel and you should see why Void_False might think what he thinks. Israel has strong military culture, it has long successful career in employing it's conscript armed forces against it's enemies which are in almost every direction and had acted in very hostile manner in last decades. Israel doesn't ultimately have much choice. It can be that Israel wouldn't even exist anymore without such attitude. So even when Void_Flase's opinion might not hold true in whole Israeli society, i'm pretty sure it has strong public support. We have same tradition but it's getting watered down as threat levels are decreasing due Russian getting more and more stabile, but still had it strong in 90s. Every man who did civilian service was considered more or less a lesser man. Why? Because they didn't show enough dedication for their country and relatives to be prepared to defend it and them. Instead it looked like these people doing civilian service would let Soviets/Russian to take this nation without any fight. So this can strictly be seen as small nation's one survival strategy in shoulder pocket of bigger, stronger (potentially) hostile nation. Because it creates norm into society that more men(and women in Israel) will go into armed service and i'd say that it also gives motivation to do it good. Forexample our conscript military service produces motivated, capable and eager soldiers (even on international scale), which by definition isn't what conscript service is good at achieving. Constantly men who have finished their conscript service does give good rating concerning their service time and how they feel about it, even when that time is usually very demanding, tiring and ofcourse they get only pitiful pocket money out from it (not enough to buy back of cigarettes per day). Me. I first served and then i heard of OFP. It sounded like dream come true, with it's iron sights, vehicles, regular grunt gameplay (those days it was all about special forces like rainbow six, ghost recon, SAS) and so on.
  24. Second

    Best way to learn navigation?

    Sun's height on sky isn't the point. I'm very familiar with nightless night of middle summer and lightless days of middle winter, being Finn and having little bit of Lapland dweller inside me (doing army time there plus few vacations) and all that. Reason why i like to use east as a start is that most people probably knows that sun rises from east at morning, i personally found Land of Rising Sun helpful at start. And continuing from there it doesn't much demand mathematic abilities to figure out the rest. By my experience it's easiest one to use on move, no need to check watch but for time and no need to halt for mathematical calculations as plus and minus calculations are only needed. But each to his own. Be it either of "my" systems, 15 degrees per hour system, or clock system which JdB mentioned. Whichever one finds suitable method to understand and more importantly to remember in stressful circumstances... Getting lost from my experience is really stressful experience and it really can deplete mental resources even from rather experienced navigator if getting lost happens in already stressful circumstances. Nothing as humiliating than moving south when it should be west. Only reading map up-side down is worse :D (cladly can't happen in ArmA)
  25. Second

    Best way to learn navigation?

    Easier to do it like this: -Sun at 00.00 is at north. -Sun at 06.00 is at east. -Sun at 12.00 is at south -Sun at 18.00 is at west. Easy-to-remember-rule: Sun rises from east at 06.00. From there each 6 hour means that sun has moved 90 degrees on compass. At night try to look for bright side of sky, sun/north is in there (or then there's large town). Using shadow's direction as help is good idea as you don't constantly need to check the direction of sun. Easier to keep in direction during move if sun is behind you back. It's good idea to check this thing in ArmA2, and maybe even on all maps. There could be differences between maps. As in souther side of earth this should work clockwise with north and south. For example here when EU-directives orders man to switch his time to summer time (+1 hour) sun goes slightly off and technically Sun is at north during 01.00. But usually it doesn't much matter. Can't tell about other methods of finding north which would work in ArmA2 besides stars and sun. There probably are not. One thing to take into consideration as well would be so called "step-pair measurement" which means IRL that you measure how long your foot step usually is in terrain and then you count those steps when you travel (my step-pair is about 70 centimeter in common terrain last time i checked). This way you get pretty good understandment how much have you travelled. Lets say you think you have to move 500 meters to north where you have to set up recon-spot from your current location so you head north and count your steps until you reach 500 meters. Or you have to navigate inside huge forest without clear terrain marks. In ArmA you can do this much more simply as character moves at constant speed. So let's say that character moves 100 meters in 30 seconds so you move 2 and half minutes to north and there you are. I don't know what is walking speed of character so some one should measure that. But this is advanced method which is pretty hard when moving alone as you have to navigate, count steps and observe surroundings. Usually conting step pairs demands almost full focus of one guy. But it's good thing to know if such need arises and you need precise navigation without clear terrain marks or luxury of GPS.
×