Ferrando

I was very impressed with "Warfare" concept of Arma2, and how it seemlessly meshes RTS and FTP elements. Alas, we have all experienced numerous bugs in the Campaign. It is really not surprising given the evident ambition behind it. However, why not build a campaign with simplified triggers, and mission success markers? For instance, don't make the mission developments hang on a character dialogue script or a similar routine. Instead, why not go for territory capture or a mission critical object destruction, things that can presumably be easier to program? Then all the dialogues and events could or could not unravel w/o the player being stuck in a mission that doesn't end. Also, it may be better to break the missions into a number of smaller ones. Good example is FOB Manhattan. If that one was split into two or three missions it would be easier to avoid bugs. Same applies to DoW. Overall, IMHO missions where you are given an objective, such as capture a village or destroy a unit provide better fun and are less prone to bugs than missions where there are tons of time critical events and dialogues. Finally, even though it is a feature of real warfare, please don't put time limitations in missions. It sucks to get instructions to find and grab someone in 20 minutes. I am aware that this would reduce the experience somewhat, but simplifying the campaign objectives and missions along the RTS lines (remember C&C series where you usually needed to destroy the enemy construction yard to win) would avoid the frustrating confusion when something didn't trigger a mission-critical event. And I think atmosphere can still be created w/o complicated scripts and dialogues. Also, why not think about enabling a "force triggers" console command that would allow the player to initiate a routine that wasn't triggered for some reason. An example would be the start of DoW mission.

You can rearm at the crates behind the long desk where Shaftoe is. That crate has all the firearms in the world. I read somewhere in the forum that there are crates with SMAWs and Javelins around, but I don't have the time to go back there and check them out.

But the great thing about Arma2 is that you can have both...I also enjoyed being just a part of the unit, having to obey orders etc. On the other hand, I also enjoyed deciding about the resources, axes of attack etc, and unlike RTS and some strategy games like TOAW in Arma2 you can "personally" observe the operations you conceived of. Think of it this way, you start as Sergeant and end up as a Colonel. But two things BIS need fixing up because it is unprofessional to release games without them: 1) thorough testing to identify and remove bugs; 2) comprehensive documentation (no need to have a printed guide, just include a pdf file on the DVD).

That's how it works in DoW after I figured it out...we need the manual!

What I was trying to say is you can get complexity and freedom of choice if you keep campaign structure, especially the triggers simple. For instance, Badlands mission is good in that you are required

Buy the units, then select ones you wish to assign, then open communications menu and select SEND UNITS option (it will indicate units you selected in the brackets).

Try the cheat. Reporting to Shaftoe ends AmAssault mission so you are not missing any "decision" points. The cutscene with Shaftoe introduces the next mission and it takes place on the rooftop of a concrete building at the outskirts of the city and nowhere near the mobile HQ.

Hi all, In Manhattan, there is a task to Your thoughts?

I was only wondering if you waited and tried to grab him the next morning would the outcome be different? Anyway we are talking about a sideshow as it has no bearing to the campaing progression which is one of the reasons why I find this task odd.

Yeah but it's still slow...only 4x

OK you win:cry2::cry2: But on the operational level, if I was in charge of planning I'd take an US Armor-Heavy Task Force over anything Russia could field, anytime anywhere...but that's just me.

I'm playing DoW, bought a T-72 and as gunner, I get killed by a burst from BMP-2's cannon. This can't be real. You can't pierce T-72's armor with BMP cannon. All modern wars suggest that unsopported Infantry Fighting Vehicles like BMP run like hell if they encounter tanks. I'm running the 1.02 patch. Has anybody noticed a similar thing?

Yes, of course auto-cannons can cause damage to tanks. But I don't think they can kill the gunner in the turret, no way. But that happens in Arma2 :(

You should substantiate your claims my friend. The only training the Russians seemed to have conducted was growing potatoes on the grounds of their military bases when the funds dried out in late 1990s. There were even widespread reports of famine among the troops, not the mention the prevalence of alcohol abuse. Although the situation has improved somewhat with the rise of the price of oil, Russia is too a Third World country in many respects. You can't seriously claim that US military is not adequatly trained. No country would field a BATTALION of troops organized along the Russian/Warsaw Pact principles solely for the purposes of training. Putting political considerations aside, assault on Iraq in 2003 was conducted flawlessly against the odds, including meddling by Rumsfeld and co. Check out www.irvin.army.mil, that's probably all the research you need as regards the US training. Add regular NATO exercises to the mix, and simply put, the only forces that train today are US/NATO. Russians? Well, they almost overran Georgia, but how difficult is that? And they still managed to lose a number of Backfire bombers? I mean, c'mon... When it comes to ERA, it just proves my point. T-72 was developed from T-64, with steel armor. M1 was fielded in early 80s using British-invented Chobham armor that has a number of layers, including ceramics. One of the reason Russians use ERA extensively today is probably because they are unable to develop/reproduce Chobham-type armor. I mean, if ERA was such a big deal, the US would have fitted that already. And I've never come across even a hint that a US SABOT round would have problems with ERA. Also, how did Iraqi T-72 substantially differ from the USSR T-72 at that time? Remember, in the 90s Iraqis were awash with money whereas USSR was not. They had enough leverage to ask for and receive top notch variants. And Saddam was quietly supported by both the US and USSR against Iran until he had a brainfart and invaded Kuwait. Bottom line is this...whereas T-72/80/90 family are in many ways excellent platforms, unlike Abrams they are not proven in combat. In both 1991 and 2003 M1 (in all variants) was deployed outside its ideal surroundings (Europe not desert) and performed admirably, even in MOUT. And contrary to doomsayers, the losses were minimal.

What do you mean by a more penetrative weapons system? More penetrative than US SABOT round? You are wrong in stating that neither can penetrate each other in the frontal shot. Frontal kills were documented in Desert Storrm, and apparently, SABOT rounds cut through T-72 like a knife through hot butter. Of course, T-72 has been subsequently upgraded, but I did not start the comparison. You said T-72 vs. M1A2 is 50/50. I would so like you in my poker game :) As to Iraqi v. Russian crew performance, I don't think the amount of training in the Russian Army is sufficient enough to bring ANY ADVANTAGE that T-72/90 may have over M1. I mean, just read the news reports from 00s about the degradation of standards in their military and bullying of young conscripts. When you factor in the general decline and the lack of funds in the 1990s., it is more likely that RF tank crews would not be very well trained. And remember guys, US armor troops rotate every now and then to a place called NTCCC in Californian desert, where a simulated OPFOR battalion awaits. All get killed and humbled there - simulated, of course. Every US tanker will tell you that the training is actually more difficult than combat. Apologies to the original poster, this is straying from the subject but I think it's relevant as Arma2 after all, is advertised as a military simulator. And kudos for the experiment.

What about it? As I remember, it was the Russians who dropped a full regiment of airborne troops there. Besides, the Serbians agreed to withdraw from Kosovo following the air campaing, NATO was unopposed in ground maneuver.

Thanks! Perhaps this has been discussed elsewhere in the forum, but is it possible to edit the relevant .cfg files and how do you go about doing it properly?

Yeah, but you can put pretty much anything into M1A2...jet fuel, petrol, diesel, yoghurt :D T-90 is diesel only...besides you are unlikely to advance more than 50 clicks in a day w/o some kind of operational pause/resupply. US Army's 3rd ID 150 km thrust in OIF was the farthest armored advance in a day in history. (Can't remember which date exactly, but I think it was on the third day of the campaign).

Anyone help with a tip on taking out the third village? Also, I can see I get (for example) $43 for taking out a technical (nearly at the expense of my own life)...how can I afford to build a factory and buy APC's? "Another strategy is to capture the second town and just wait until you get enough money for a heavy factory and a BMP-2...it's easy sailing once you're mechanized." You get money from towns you control. The more you control better the cash flow. You earn money in combat too, so after you set up your HQ, buy yourself an RPG and some troops and harrass the enemy at the 3rd town until you have enough money. It's too bad people give up on Badlands mission. It's rather enjoyable.

Just replay Badlands, it's a great mission! When you create additional units, select them, go to Comms, then select SEND UNITS option and finally, select the commander you wish to send them to. Alternatively, just wait until you have sufficient money to build a heavy factory and a BMP2. Nothing can hurt you with that sucker around.

I don't mind the fact that you can't buy NVGs, but I DO MIND that Coops had them and then he doesn't anymore... This also goes for the rest of the kit. In Manhattan I took M4 with ACOG and then in Bitter Chill I'm back to M4 with reflex optics. Why can't BIS let me keep the stuff I want??? It's not realistic for anyone to take the preferred weapon off a badass Recon Marine ;)

Another strategy is to capture the second town and just wait until you get enough money for a heavy factory and a BMP-2...it's easy sailing once you're mechanized.

I found them about 2 clicks south east from the village, you should be able to spot them as you go over the crest of the hill. There are a couple of technicals and a BMP. Unfortunately, there was a bug so the vehicles were just standing there...it was like shooting fish in the barrel