Jump to content
Bohemia Interactive Forums

An Fiach

Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content Count

    832

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Medals

Posts posted by An Fiach

  3. Posted

    Oldie but a Goldie

    I say bring back the floating zone tyranny of Operation Flashpoint days! Force it on for everyone. It is unquestionably harder to aim accurately with a larger floating zone. Therefore simulating how difficult it is to hit anything with 'unaimed' fire.

    As Daniel notes its not impossible to get used to it either.

    For the unethical all you need to have 'perfect' unaimed fire on servers with no reticule enabled, is merely a piece of tape or dot at the center of your screen. Even so for people like myself who have played quake since the dawn of time. (periodically without crosshair) making center screen hits is a piece of cake anyhow.

    Operation Flashpoint had it right. Full floating zone in unaimed mode; no float in optics/aimed mode. Reticule optional.

    Interesting possibility

    Another intriguing possibility is dynamic or variable floating zone. That is increased floating zone based on your current 'stamina' or 'breathing'. The logic is obvious, when tired its harder to make center-screen hits.

    -k

    No floating zone, it is unrealistic and additionally makes some players physically sick. There is nothing realistic about having arms made of rubber, better to have an increased rate of dispersion that makes close up encounters not too difficult to deal with but requires using sights to make long range or accurate shots and removes the dot in the center effect.

  4. Posted

    Yap, why not? CoD does the same! And some time ago when the first multiplayer games were released a lot of them had similar solutions. 1 normal license and several MP licenses, this is nothing new...

    aha, I don't see that. why not?

    Ehm, I think there are more than just CS kids out there who have never ever heard of ArmA :rolleyes:

    I don't know if it is new or not as I don't attend mass lan parties, they never have anything I wish to play, however I haven't seen such available outside of licenses for businesses. I'll take your word for it.

    Why not? If people want to play it, they can pay for it. BIS isn't a multi million dollar a day company with the luxury of giving free handouts. It requires the client to play the game, the game streams everything in real time from the HDD, so it requires the full game to play MP as well. Other games will download map info to a temp file for the duration of the round, ArmA 2 mission content downloads directly to your PC in a permanent cache file folder.

    To your last point, those are mainly the type going to these large lan parties, so, yeah....

  5. Posted

    You've just nullified your argument by comparing ArmA to DR.

    Not at all, DR sucks hard but it was the first game that popped into mind when I was thinking of the bringing up sights feature.

    ---------- Post added at 04:39 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:35 PM ----------

    Lemme Try some science.

    You are trying to sell a game to consumers. You want to attract them with as many features as possible. Assuming your making a game for a single monitor crowd is not the best course. As seen by the Nov09 Steam Hardware Survey. Quite a few people are running Dual monitors.

    HWSurvey.jpg

    That particular configuration is practically useless for MOST games. Stretching the view over 2 puts center at the crease so it is not useful. However a screen dedicated to a map, stats, ai controls, etc would be an extremely attractive feature/game for everyone with that dual monitor setup.

    On a side note the only way I can figure to do this without the help of a mod is getting a another computer right next to mine.. Make it join games with me and use it just to view the map. But that doesn't allow for AI control on computer 1's ai. So it would only be a half working system. And that seems a bit extreme.

    I'm sorry, but I fail to see how this post assists your position in any way. You won't attract anyone that doesn't already have interest in this game with such a superficial addition to the features list. That also has no real impact on whether or not it is a good idea to do.

  8. Posted

    So you are asking BIS to develop a separate client to accomplish what the current client already does? Then allow it to be played by up to 3 more people for free? It is impossible to start a quick mission with anyone that doesn't have the game you are wanting to play, this doesn't make any sense.

    So are you really asking that BIS develop a licensed LAN version for sale to establishments that host lan parties?

    ---------- Post added at 07:06 AM ---------- Previous post was at 07:04 AM ----------

    If that is what you are suggesting, I guess it is their call but the likelyhood of getting many additional sales from Counter Strike junkies is slim to none.

  9. Posted

    Yeah, Lemme just do that in my low flying attack helicopter while over enemy territory..... Oh wait.. you're dumb and now I'm dead. I need info and completely removing my view of the entire world while I get it is a retarded idea. Same in tanks.

    Please see BI's list of arma features including Triplehead support and Track IR.

    MtjlmfAljh0

    Your argument is piss poor. It is better to argue that certain vehicles have a digital display that includes a map, but it isn't true for all vehicles and this is why most vehicles have a person to do the navigation while another drives. Triplehead and TrackIR add to immersiveness but are not unrealistic features like a hud map.

    Also it makes more sense to ask for the map to work as an overlay because the transition time is prohibitive and unrealistic. It simply takes too long to transition from reading the map back to driving or running. It is much like the transition to using sights on a rifle, it isn't a smooth transition, one of the few things that DR got right.

  12. Posted

    http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/Israel+beyond+politics/Integration_women_in_IDF-March_2009

    "Women represent a significant portion of manpower in the combat units that they serve in; in the Anti-Aircraft Division and in the Artillery Corps, women represent 20 percent of soldiers, 25 percent of soldiers in Search and Rescue units, 10 percent of the Border Police, and the Caracal Battalion - a combat battalion - is made up of 70 percent female soldiers. In addition, this year marked the first year in which women are eligible to serve in the Field Intelligence Corps."

    I don't care about what you define as a combat unit, or how much on the front line a unit has to be stationed to be one in your eyes, but it is rather clear that the Caracal battalion is one - Even if it's "just" border patrol it is a unit intended to carry out combat activity. Lest you want to argue the meaning of that concept with the authors of the above document.

    As to where your sudden urge to blurt out that petty little innuendo came from I have no idea - I rather just outlined the reason for why females are actively being recruited into front line duty (you asked for one, or rather said there are no reasons), there may be many other arguments against it, but that is one argument for it. It enables forces to communicate better with the local populace, and thus, carry out their job better. And whilst mine may well be a small country, my countrymen, and indeed women abroad do their jobs pretty damn well. Bearing in full mind that some of these jobs weren't really theirs to do in the first place.

    And once more I repeat (with some parts in bold this time around); Female soldiers in ARMA II, as a mod or as a part of OA. Or at the very least proper animation sets for females. I am all for it, regardless of the reigning protocol of the main faction portrayed in the game.

    I can take a group of nuns and label them a combat unit, it doesn't make it so. It is rare to send females intentionally into direct combat and you are dancing around that fact.

    Innuendo? Yes, please take it upon yourself to be offended by that statement and further make a fool of yourself. I do not know the demographics of your nation so if there are more women than men in the population, naturally you might have a need for women. Additionally if your country is small this may further cause a need to recruit women into the military to fill out combat roles. The US military makes up roughly 1% of the population, there are plenty of men unwilling to do the job, why you would take that as a special insult directed at your country is beyond me. Still it is irrelevant with respect to the scenario that this game presents.

    I'll repeat for you, I have no issues with people making mods, they are free to mod all they want, I have no right to say no. I also agreed that females should have a complete set of animations. I do not agree that female soldiers should be implemented in the vanilla game/OA unless one of the factions uses them in direct combat roles. BIS is all about realism and accuracy. They do make mistakes, however, they do not knowingly fabricate information.

  14. Posted

    It is strange then that the Swedish MoD has rather clearly outlined the need to raise the number of female soldiers in active duty abroad. The need has arisen from quite a few years of experience of places like Eritrea, Liberia and Congo where Swedish forces are and have been deployed in peacekeeping situations. In places like these, only deploying male soldiers more or less leaves half of the population (read: the female half) unheard and untouched by the mission. So where my statement may be patently false for other nations, it is quite valid for Sweden and other nations who deploy their armed forces to similar effect.

    In regards to females in the IDF, since 2001 females are allowed into combat roles - The last numbers I have however are a few years old, but at the end of 2004, 450 women were in combat units, primarily within the Caracal battalion, but also in the artillery corps, airforce, search and rescue units, field intelligence corps and the anti-aircraft division.

    So, to reiterate; Female soldiers in ARMA II, as a mod or as a part of OA. Or at the very least proper animation sets for females. I am all for it, regardless of the reigning protocol of the main faction portrayed in the game.

    I do believe I said, as appropriate, but if they don't have them IRL they shouldn't be there.

    If you were paying attention as of 2009 IDF women are allowed in combat roles doing the following: 1) Oketz Unit, which is essentially a K-9 unit that handles and trains dogs, 2)Search and Rescue, 3)Border Police, 4)Artillery Corps and 5)Caracal Battalion, a co-ed infantry battalion that is assigned to border patrol. These are not front line troops.

    I couldn't give a rat's behind what the Swedish MoD has to say because there are no Swedish forces in the game. If there is a need for women, perhaps they have a shortage of men willing to do the job. I can only speculate, it is a small country.

  16. Posted

    About steam. I've said this before and some people didn't believe me... I can understand that since it works for them, but every couple of days I start my pc up and I get the message that I can't connect to steam. That means I cannot play. The next day it usually works but that's something I don't need.

    Just my two cents.

    That's definitely an issue on your end, but I certainly don't blame you for not using it. It's a personal choice.

  21. Posted

    Doesn't matter, in the US military women being placed in front line combat is the exception and not the rule. I have no issues with a mod being made but they should not be in the vanilla game. If the Russian forces do use women in combat roles then they should appear in game as such, we are after realism. Arguments about other armed forces are not applicable and neither are arguments based upon political correctness. I am not against females in game having the ability to use weapons either as it is simply a realism issue, women have the ability to pick up a weapon and use it. I do not agree with Celery's statement regarding female pilots, there is simply not enough evidence to reach any such conclusion.

    Darkhorse, your portrayal of IDF women is inaccurate and serving aboard a naval vessel is not the same as duty in front line combat.

    GoOB, there is no need for women on the battlefield, that statement is patently false. They may want to be on the battlefield and we can argue whether they should be or not but to say that there is some circumstance that requires their presence is simply not true.

  22. Posted

    I play with 0 deadzone, simply because I was trained that my weapon goes where my eyes go and that effect is not accurate, it doesn't feel right to me. Also my training taught me to turn and face my targets to make the most effective use of the ballistic armor that US troops wear these days so turning my body isn't an issue for me. I use free look to see areas that I do not wish to point my weapon, for example, at my team mates.

  23. Posted

    Rifle crosshairs should be more transparent and much wider to eliminate long distance aiming while still functioning as an indicator for weapon orientation and using menus, etc.

    WWII Online is great, but it doesn't have AI like ArmA 2, in order to limit the AI the same way players are handicapped by not having their muzzle glued to center screen (realism), the AI would be rather ineffective. For PvP it is fine not to have crosshairs.

  24. Posted

    ^... how are you to engage anyone quickly within 100m and maintain situation awareness with a magnified sight?? The real ACOG has a pair of iron sights on top which enables it to be used for close combat which isn't simulated by default.

    I know quite well what ACOG sights include. How to engage quickly? I don't walk around with my CCO glues to my face so, pretty much the same as any other target. My question was simply aimed at why you would give up the advantage of a scoped rifle, especially one that does not have a large zoom factor that is problematic in close quarters.

  25. Posted

    Your biggest mistake is thinking you have significant knowledge about how software works and how a game should perform given its features and content. Your questions demonstrate otherwise and your attitude, rather harsh and insulting.

    It is good to be skeptical, I understand that, I've been burned a time or two, even after the community convinced me the game that I was buying was great. However, you need to be mature about it or be ignored as a troll. ArmA 2 is unique. There are people that think it is another FPS like COD and others that expect it to be an in depth sim like DCS-Blackshark and both groups are disappointed because this game strives to give you the full experience without being too complicated or being a simple arcade game. The engine also allows for nearly no boundaries on customization. All of that comes at a cost.

    A lot of people have issues with performance because they have unrealistic expectations as well as refusing to believe that issues are not on their end. Most have always played the same type of games and thus do not have experience with how different game engines can behave differently on their computers. Just because a manufacturer puts out a new driver does not mean that the driver is good or works well with all games. Sometimes older drivers work better, sometimes people fail to realize conflicts or limitations on their systems that result in poor performance. This is not to defend BIS where their product is lacking but to point out that you cannot have a system that is perfectly compatible with every game or more accurately, every game cannot be compatible with every system. Other developers try to hide issues with their products while BIS tries to take on those issues and improve their product while also allowing for a wealth of information for current and potential customers to decide if they can run this on their systems or how to fix any issues that they might have. You will see these threads here because they do not lock, delete or ban in order to keep everything positive on their forums.

×