THEBLITZ6794

Im considering getting arma 3 but Ive always been very unfullfilled with the infantry combat. How is the infantry AI in A3 and infantry combat in general? Is it still the lay down in a line like in OFP?

Is the world still devoid of cover? I always took issue with how devoid of infantry cover the OFP/A1/A2 islands were and how hard it was to use what little cover there was

Sorry, infantry combat

So, compared to A2, how is A3 infantry combat

I come from A2. The A2 AI was impressive but still pretty stupid in my opinion

I really hope arma 3 focuses on conventional combat, similar to ofp. Stealth missions are a good way to mix the game up, but the engine just isnt good for them. The engine is great for mass battles. ArmA 2 had a great campaign but it was rather awkward. I wouldve loved to play as a CDF soldier fighting the RUssian horde or a marine in the crazy area up by Manhatten.

Am I the only one who find infantry combat in vanilla arma 2 (and OFP and aa1) to be pretty bland, predictable, and unrealistic? Ive found most/all infantry fights to go like this: The two sides approach each other either in a line or wedge (this is unrealistic, as any patrol would have a loose formation. Probably something like a box) Everybody immediately goes prone and a few guys start shooting, while many just look around and do nothing. One or both sides start crawling to each other through open terrain, with no flanking, support fire, bounding tactics, or even cover usage. Notably, the ai really sucks. Thats probably the biggest crux. But theres some things which are just odd. The formations are one. Theres no good formation for covering a large area on a simple patrol. The formations feel like a civil war game or a ww1 trench assault. The gameplay is also very unfluid (is that a word?). This is most notable in close quarters. Theres also a very distinct lack of cover. This makes defense placement hard on a somewhat side note, somewhat related note. Foxholes are badly needed. To conclude 1. Am I the only who notices this? 2. Are there any mods which /fix/ this. 3. Any other thoughts?

I just installed 64bit win8 on a new hard drive. Arma 2 is on my old hard drive. Do I need to reinstall it to take advantage of the new 64 bit capabilities (16 gigs of ram namely)?

It sounds like it will start like Resistance and evolve into something like the latter half of A2, once you have your army built (and it sounds like NATO reinforcements eventually show up?) Then again, Resistance starts going conventional too so maybe its just like Resistance. I like the premise though a lot. I just hope it show cases some good ole conventional killing fields Arma 2 did have a fair amount of conventional war...its just the missions all blew in an almost hilarious fashion. Manhatten comes to mind for me. It made it sound like it was Vietnam up there or something, when really it was just 4 guys going to random objectives, picking someone up, or killing a few Chedaki. Having squads of marines temporarily attached, random ambushes, and what not wouldve really immersed the mission. Dogs of War had great potential imo but just fell flat due to bugs and mission design. Badlands was neat.

Microcover is also a MUST imo

I never played BAF, can you elaborate? I really hope it doesnt become a case of super squad vs whole Iranian army ala CoD It does sound more like Resistance though I agree

eh it was too short was the problem. cwc was 40 missions or so

Im looking to get into Arma 2 multiplayer but I really just dont know where to start. I have no other friends, real life or from other games, that play arma 2. Im into infantry combat btw and pvp (idc if its player controlled squads of ai or intermixed, but I dont like coop).

I think they should be /influenced/ from the cwc campaign. The engine is geared towards large battles at medium-long range. I think this is a reason arma 2's campaign didnt work so well. Great campaign though imo, it just didnt feel right. CWC held your hand the first level, but the 2nd level turned into a run for your life scenario. The 3rd and 4th and 5th were easy (if I remember the order correctly) while after montingnac was another nightmare. Sure the game got harder, but not in a strict linear sense but more of an average one, as in the last 3rd collectively was harder than the first 3rd, which served well to mix things up. Many of the missions should be ones only experts can make in the editor I might add. We ARE paying for them after all. Without the missions, surely the game could be a lot cheaper. In any case, I hope its "no holds bar" that focuses on large battles and patrol actions, with a small side of stealth, ala ofp

Does this allow sub hc leaders to effectively carryout tasks?

Big boss just moves objectives around though right? Im saying have the subleaders under a human use HAC

ai needs to conserve ammo better. us army recommends m16 operators fire 3-10 shots a minute for suppressing fire

Having crosshairs go all around my screen is really bugging me and messing up my aim

I think Id always take the American take over its Russian equal T80 vs M60 is a tough one though

probably best to just leave it for simplicity's sake

Hi, is it possible, and if so, effective to have subleaders in high command? I dont mean group leaders, I mean a 2nd or more tier of HC. Ie: Player is platoon leader with HC over 3 squad leaders. Each squad leader has HC over 3 fireteams (with group leaders). Also, how effective is the ai when using the HC module as the leader?

I have another suggestion/idea. Perhaps the player could be substituted for "big boss" and have control over the leaders. This would enable the player to command up to about battalion level units with effectiveness (I cant imagine using HC for that many units).

Depends tbh. With no respawn, no leaderboards, serious mindset they will, at least somewhat Lack of micro terrain is the biggest imo

Depends on the model but from the looks of it the Russian models do (unlike Iraqi) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T-72_operators_and_variants Doesnt say anything about a ballistic computer though the T80 has one

Not sure if their guns are superior necessarily though. Did they have FLIR sights back then? More importantly, which tank can penetrate the other first