An Fiach

lol. ... ---------- Post added at 04:33 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:29 PM ---------- One of my favorite tactics is to let the AI commander use its resources while I cap towns. The AI builds a functional base that serves the basic needs of the side until I have enough resources of my own and then I start looking for strategic positions for my factories and relocate. If the factories that the AI built get destroyed it is no big deal to me and I don't have to waste cash and supply on basic upgrades early on. After capping a few towns the players can start recon ops looking for the enemy's bases while the AI troops continue capturing towns.

Indeed, Indeed

I said players new to the game will leave because they do not get anything out of the box to experience, remember this community lives on player made content. Someone that knows nothing about ArmA 2 will not know this stuff. Aside from that, you don't like the numbers so now you are saying they aren't valid. That's a great argument. The only servers that won't show up are on lan. It is impossible to know how many play SP since they are either playing it or they are among the many that bought the game and threw it in the trash but you cant track them.AVBIRD has it exactly right, hell Command and Conquer was only popular because of the PvP mode and it isn't even an fps. Every type of game has PvP whether it be FPS,RTS or RPG. The simple fact is that people are competitive by nature and they improve themselves by cooperating or competing with those that are more skilled than themselves. Coop is great, it's pretty relaxed and you can do things any way you lik. It is also safe, because in coop you can never lose, you can only fail to complete, in PvP there is defeat, loss, a blow to the ego. In coop you can always go back and finish it, in PvP, losing is final, even if a new round begins, you still lost, were defeated. Not completing an SP or coop is about as traumatic as never finishing that kite you were building, generally inconsequential to your life. Losing on the other hand, makes you take stock of yourself, even in a video game, it gives you perspective and makes you aware of your own limitations. People that teabag and do other obnoxious behavior are only trying to compensate for a feeling of inferiority, but they are not the majority of players.

Not true at all. As was said, Warfare is one of the biggest PvP missions and is #1 mission currently. SBSMAC made an awesome wizard and script pack for creating pvp missions, I made one this morning in under a minute (granted it was too simplistic for my tastes). Coop only accounts for 41% of what is being played, the rest are various forms of PvP.

So you accuse me of backtracking and then do the same yourself? There is a good bit of PvP content, there just aren't enough PvP players to maintain PvP servers. You might remember that the largest server running was a PvP server.

It does IRL. The spalling alone would kill someone. ---------- Post added at 12:36 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:34 PM ---------- What is the first number in each set of results?

See, I'm not getting those results, I line up multiples of armor types and put an ammo box for both rocket types, fire them then go inspect the damage. The inconsistency tells me that either flight patterns effect the point of impact enough to cause a discrepancy in damages or these weapons are not performing properly at all. :confused:

It is very ambitious and despite the problems that were quite avoidable it is the best investment in entertainment that I have made in a long time. I look forward to OA and the added functionality it is supposed to bring us. ---------- Post added at 12:24 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:21 PM ---------- I didn't, you just read it that way. It was already proven that in no way is anyone asking to alter the game outside of improving already existing features such as the server browser. BIS making good missions just means more options out of the box before people have to learn about mod folders and mission making.

That's wonderful Bangtail, you've managed to show everyone how boorish your behavior can be and just how lacking in reading comprehension you are. I never compared ArmA to RO, I said that a few RO style PvP missions would be good for this game, it is right where this game excels, objective based, teamwork focused combat with limited resources. Missions of that type rather than the dreadful DM mission that came with it showcase how great this game is for PvP. I am more than a little bit amused at you claiming you are tired of people dictating how the game should be played but you are doing just that. Nobody said anything about making this game like any other game. Why are you so threatened by the prospect of having decent PvP missions come with the game along side the campaign and coop missions. Does adding missions fundamentally change ArmA 2? I had very valid point and you tried to avoid it. People buy ArmA 2 for the future mods because of the preceding titles, else wise they would not expect any of it from this one. Assumption? How many come to this community from games like WoW? FPS games provide the majority of new players and your snarky comments about PvP players having no talent are weak. I said 'came' from as in the majority of Arma players got here from OFP but they came to OFP via those games you hate so much. The problem is, we aren't attracting enough new people to sustain the community that is beginning to bleed modding talent. You'll start to care when the coop missions start drying up. You didn't consider the campaign when you bought this game because you already knew, you obviously don't care about new people joining the community. Ad hominem? It was an entirely accurate description of what you are doing. It wasn't a slight toward the coop crowd. I love coop, I played Ghost Recon (the original) with friends up until about 2 years ago, but at the end of the day, AI is easy to exploit and overcome and it is never as unpredictable and cunning as a human being. You must feel pretty inferior to PvP players to hate them all so much and to label everyone of them as the bunny hopping, fps doug loving crowd. Obviously you have never played Battleground Europe. With all of the complaints about players on Domination it seems like the coop crowd isn't any better than those you disparage, but then, that would be labeling all players who like coop as the same as those folks who obviously needed some father figure in their life to give them the strap.

Man, seriously, the location of an office within a company is rather irrelevant. Hiccups is an overly generous way to describe the condition of this game when it was released. If you are more concerned about people making forum post that you are not forced to read than you are about having a flourishing community, well, that's your problem. Nobody is talking about adding bunny hopping capabilities to ArmA 2, time has proven that those not interested in what this game has to offer, will leave . You have to get people to try it though.How isn't it not accurately simulating infantry combat? I do believe it has taken ACE 2 to add some important aspects. I was making the point that this game doesn't strive to accurately simulate any one thing, it instead focuses on creating an overall atmosphere. It does it very well.

Man you are just awesome.

Don't compare this game to DCS, it doesn't come close, this game doesn't accurately simulate anything and its openness is intended to appeal to a wide audience. And nobody is saying Arma 2 should be simple. If you can't spot the irony here, you are the problem, not the solution.I don't see why you take offense at people wanting a server browser that not only is large enough to be readable but also have some useful functionality to it. Or someone suggesting that the basic missions that nobody plays be turned into something that would actually interest potential new players. Nobody bought OFP thinking it would have great mods and longevity and plenty were turned off by the bugs and lousy multiplayer. People are online right now still playing it. The majority of ArmA players came from those "other PvP based games", this community and even the game, survives on player made content. What is wrong with wanting to attract talent from other game communities? Especially when more and more people look to the internet for their entertainment. You want generic PvP? Look no further than what BIS provided stock. Put 8 players in a small square with some obstacles and call it a DM mission. Why are you telling everyone else they have to play the game the way you want them to? Just because BIS provided you with content right out of the box and you are happy doesn't mean everyone else is or should be. I agree, making missions is essential, so in your opinion the game should come with no scenarios or campaign, it should just be an editor and some content to play with. Personally I'd like to see more PvP players attracted to this game, but they never will be because the game doesn't show people right out of the box that it can be a great PvP game. Some people like a challenge rather than spending night after night in their parents' basement making themselves feel like heroes by fending off a lemming horde with their machine gun. I enjoy all of the different game modes, including those created by the community but PvP matches do not have enough players to make them great and abundant. This is because people believe this game incapable of great PvP. That is simply not true. Anyone that loves this game should have no objections about improving it or attracting more players which equates to more money for BIS to develop games and more potential modders. I don't know about you, but I'd like to see guys that can do this with crap battlefield games move on to mod for our community. Even if you don't like PvP, stuff modeled for PvP can be used in other game modes and vice versa. In ArmA , more is better. ---------- Post added at 05:11 AM ---------- Previous post was at 05:07 AM ---------- http://pro.bistudio.com/index.php/services/motion-capture.html You've been around a while, we are talking about attracting new blood, not trying to hang on to the dwindling OFP crowd. For people already familiar with BIS games, it doesn't matter much. To newcomers, it matters a lot.

Yes, but unless it has been tested with tools not available to players the evidence is only anecdotal. It has to be repeatable from the same angle and point of impact to determine what the damage should be. I would guess though that BIS used info for the HEDP warhead instead of the HEAT warhead. Still, no one shot kills for RPG-18 in my game and damage from both seems to be inconsistent.

I'd advise you to browse the many forums and see what you can find, taking advice from people that love the game can only lead to disappointment if their views and goals do not match your own. I learned that they hard way with another game. Time and money I'll never get back. I don't care for single player games at all, personally, but I do know that this community puts out a great deal of excellent content that is free to use. That may sway your opinion or not, but it is true.

This thread still alive? Anyone that has ever used an M136 knows that it takes 2 or more to be effective against any type of heavy armor and still, better to call in a Jav or a Hellfire. I think people play games with an overinflated idea of how weapons work or should work. No doubt there are things in the game that aren't correct, but be reasonable. In so much as what the books say about capabilities, they also said the M-16 A1 was self cleaning and reliable. It took a lot of dead soldiers to correct that.

on US keyboards it is the / key

You have to remember, it is the same company. VBS2 is based on Real Virtuality, which was developed for games, include the fact that they have their own MOCAP and sound studios, they aren't lacking funding. I don't expect things to be perfect, and I love the game, but we also have to be willing to call them on it when they drop the ball. This has been happening since OFP and now they have a new game in the works that will run on the same engine, I expect, and if they have the same issues will make even more people angry. You don't accept that kind of sloppiness from the guy making your $3 burger, why put up with it from someone that gets $50, plus tons of word of mouth advertising and even defense from the insane trolls that bash them??

The problems with this game are the source of its unpopularity. Making the game more user friendly doesn't mean having to dumb it down. It already has a steep learning curve but as was said, you shouldn't need to educate yourself on computer tech in order to play it. The large gamer numbers also are into online play. People play online to play against people, not computers. The campaign and single missions are lousy anyway. It would be so simple to improve the server browser and for BIS to include some default missions that will appeal to the FPS crowd. The mods are great, we all love them, but newcomers will not bother with mods if the vanilla game leaves them disinterested. You can take SBSMAC's script pack and in short time make a great Red Orchestra style PvP mission on Utes. Good performance, good game play. You could have about 6 of those and it would get more gamers right out of the box. It would get gamers interested and from there they would explore the rest of the game. Quality control is another issue. BIS QC is horrid. It isn't fair to compare it to BF2 but we all know it had and still has performance issues and the number of game stopping bugs at release was inexcusable. We might be willing to accept these flaws because of our desire to experience the openness this game provides but BIS is a large enough company that they can catch these things before release. You can bet they don't try to pass off VBS2 on the military in the same condition.

Il-2 was playable out of the box, Ireally don't know what you mean by bugs, but it was nothing like ArmA 2"Good" as defined by players wanting to play them, it doesn't apply to anything that shipped with ArmA 2. This game relies solely on player made content to succeed. The dedicated server stuff was an after thought, as in they thought after many complained of the lack of it, they better put something out there. Netcode- I've played much bigger games and I tell you a ping of 200 shouldn't give you insane desync, no matter where in the world you are connecting from. I get desync with a ping of 60, that's bad. Anyway, I was answering the question from the OP with my post, mindlessly defending a game that has no defense for its shortcomings is fruitless and there are many more that are a turn off for sim fans. Yes, we all know this is a niche game but it COULD be more popular. Getting people over the first obstacles is the issue. You can't take back first impressions.

1. Bugs 2. No good MP missions out of the box 3. No dedicated server support 4. Horrible net code resulting in high pings and higher bandwidth consumption Players get bored/frustrated before they even consider exploring the massive depth of this game. Only those of us truly interested in what this game has to offer in the long term stick around and we know it before we purchase the game.

Bottom line, most people will not bother purchasing the tools. They already invest their time and creativity on a game that couldn't survive without them. Ask them to pay for the privilege of investing their time and to the benefit of many who don't appreciate it... bye bye mod community.

what is the current version number please? Can't seem to find it and just want to verify. Also, Yuka, I pity you that your leadership would be such a-holes as to have gunners carrying their tripods rather than the AG doing it. I never got to use the m192 but it looks like a nice improvement and knocking 2-3 kg off of carrying weight is always good for the grunt.

Hate to say it but, Celery has a bit of a point. While I don't exactly agree with his harsh tone, there is no need for Kju to act like some sort of martyr. You see the same with some other modders as well. They can have pages and pages of people praising their work and voicing their appreciation but it isn't enough if someone else has privately or publicly criticized them even once. You make a mod because it is what you want, not for anyone else. People come, people go, doesn't matter. If someone doesn't care to mod anymore, that's ok. Maybe someone will replace them, maybe not. It's their choice to mod or not, their choice to share or not. Just don't blame BIS for not supporting 3rd party stuff when they don't make promises to. Don't blame a community for not helping with a project that they never promised to. I don't plan to kiss anyone's feet due to the choices they make, mod, map or mission. I also don't think it right to criticize them for investing their time, so long as they don't think I owe them something because they chose to do it. If Kju is fed up with BIS games, that's ok and I can easily understand that. So many game companies these days put out unfinished projects and a lot of gamers are tired of it, though not enough to make a difference. It's ok for him to say so too. But: There is no excuse for insulting the community like this simply because they have no interest in working on his project as in his opinion there are not many good ArmA 2 missions. Make no mistake, that WAS aimed directly at the players, not BIS. When it comes to that part, I do not disagree with the harshness of Celery's remarks.

Use the gun sight?

It is a staged photo, any way you look at it. You will never see soldiers in combat with such a relaxed posture, the soldier on the left has his foot on someone's combat gear, and if that isn't enough for you the clip from the article states that she received a CAB in her role as a machine gunner. This means not only does the photo have nothing to do with her being in combat it also means she wasn't participating in an attack, she was awarded a medal that you get when someone shoots at you and you shoot back, in other words she was tasked to sit in the gun seat while on a convoy and they were shot at. In so far as being a soldier is concerned, it is not much of a deal, just part of the job. It just proves my point about the glorification of every small thing that women do which, if you think about it, is pretty demeaning. For such meaningless things to be treated as such a big deal, the people shouting about it must not believe women are capable of doing it and so are surprised beyond belief. Sad really. It is like praising a woman for closing a door properly.