KNac

William could you add off-map arty in the future? Thanks for your excellent job.

the potential of this is endless. i hope when things are smoth and running you start adding features and mod compability (like R3F arty, new units, more maps, more types of actions like delaying or withdrawal or whatever). Just wow! Gonna test my first mission!

Very nice map, can't wait it to be finished! Big map (need more of these) and very interesting area and landscape. What I was waiting for to make a planned campaing so can use it in conjunction with Razani. In some of the screenshots I've seen 'desert' textures but I'm getting greenish 'Chernogorsk' like textures, is a newer version not uploaded? I didn't download 'Requiered_PBO' so maybe is that, but I tried and didn't receive any error message (have full CAA1 allready though). Do I need to download it (because the other file included razmisc.pbo allready)? I've razani so could I delete razmisc.pbo if are files from that map? In any case, great stuff and hoping for a more complete version soon, didn't have any performance issues with my standard settings (high visibility too).

Something you can do (apoart of using ACE2 for the weight issue, even tho it doesn't completlly model the weight as is seen by that quote) to start with is disable the 'gear respawn' in the parameters, later in the game it won't make any difference, but at least at the beginning you won't see everyone and his mother running with the best AT assets every time. About prices, you can easilly modify Warfare BE (or any other edition) with new prices, if you don't know how, let's start a serious discussion or list and I can do it for you, if you want.

Have been waiting for something like this for a while! Kinda cool, thanks for it. p.s: lynx you should try it and give feedback back, if you wish off course.

LOL, ok, my bad, wrong expression maybe, no to be taken literally. I was not refeering to sniping infantry with RPG's but hitting vehicles at long ranges with unguided AT stuff (RPG's, SMAW). In real life that stuff is quite innacurate, specially RPG-7, but right now you can hit an Stryker as far as from 500m!! With an RPG-7, which is a joke as far as realism goes and makes IFVs and APCs useless. The spread of these weapons should be highlly increased so they are useless at "long" ranges, these are CQB AT assets (<300m, RPG-7 probably under 100m), not Javelins or Metis. p.s: funny enough Javelin is more useless at close tange due to problems with targetting w/o xhair, but that's an Arma issue.

One thing I would like to see is accuracy of AT assets (specially RPG's) being tweaked to realistic standards, in line with firearms. RPG7 sniping is a joke right now. Yeah i should probably register in dev-heaven and open a ticket I know xD

Any news about tweaking accuracy of weapons & stuff to be more in line with other weapons?

Stop whining and whining about whining and answer this good ol' man: (in the page before this one).

You may be right, but that's a very simplistic analisys: armour placement, angle, reactive armour (and different types), etc. all act as strength multipliers, and matters A LOT. But yeah, probably tanks are too much strong in the rear where they would get disabled, at least, from a direct short range hit. Then again, accuracy of RPG's, sepcially rpg-7 are a bit too high compared to what you would see IRL.

ACE2 models tank damage much better and they are actually usefull as can withstand a good deal of damage.

Pretty much. The other day we were playing and a single guy M1A1 took an unlimited amount of damage without being destroyed. he singlehandlly won the game. Anyway you don't counter AA with air tbh. p.s: clarification, the guy was cheating

I wanted to do a more realistic warfare at some point. I don't think it's that hard to archeive what you want using an existing mission as base and editing it. I have been planning to do a SP campaing though, but will try. No promises.

I wasn't sure if I should post this in troubleshooting or report it but to get sure first I guess I may ask in case is only a thign of me. I've realized that I can't place defenses (like bunkers, sand walls, H-walls, barbed wire) in the editor. I guess this is happening since 1.05 as wasn't happening before, I opened older scenarios where these were placed and saw that they have no 'faction' or 'class' field (it's empty). Could someone confirm it? Tried with vanilla. I suppose a hotfix would be doign a new config file or usign old scenarios where these are allready placed (or editinf mission.sqm), but still...

As I've said in the other thread, there are options for both, more arcade & more sim type games. To start with, if you want tos ee less usage of advanced weapon systems like attack helos, aircraft or tanks, remove 3rd person view. I tell you this will cut a lot the number of players using them, as they ar eno longer soe asy o use and requeire better tactics, specially for armour, because armour tactical awareness agaisnt infantry is poor specially in areas like Chernarus (except probably the valley that is around Stary, which is more open to armoured battles). Ocupation forces and even resistance can be tweaked to use less vehicles if players, but I don't find it a problem even now tbh, with such open availability of AT assets, heck even RPG7 (with right ammo) and AT4 can be very harmfull to most armoured vehicles except maybe MBT (and even these will suffer when hit by various light AT assets, broken tracks, optics or guns and you have disabled them). Gear respawn should be removed (can be done allready in Benny edition in parameters) and compelx weapon systems price icnreased a lot, and probably 'building' times (because the logistics tog et these to a warzone would be costlly). You can even do a lot with a bit more some edition: i.e. increase the space between camps and the numbers of camps in each town and you will get longer battles for towns involving a lot of infantry fighting. Features like camp insertion in AWP version help pvp, but adding an easy way to respawn AI squads would increase the war-like atmosphere even more. Shifty tbh, you shouldn't be able to singlehand take a town, warfare should almost force cooperation between different playwer forces and even some combined arms. Big towns (120 points) shouldn't be able to be captured by at least 4-5 players with AI infantry (a reinforced platoon of strength) and heavy AT assets or soem armour support, and smallest towns (50, infantry occupation/resistance) should need at least 2 full strength squad (mayeb less with some armour support). Building times for air assets should be increased a lot, bar transport helos maybe. Same for MBT and advanced IFV's. There is a lot of stuff that can be done to have 'beliable' warafre mode (I prefer that word to realist, because only way toa rcheive realism in the game is with some heavy mission edition and fixed objectives & forces, dynamic games never will be realist but can at least be beliable).

Their problem is that it's not 'realist' (you wouldn't crush entire towns nowadays with arty, but in a total war who knows; even then the ratios are just screwed, a single squad wouldn't get a dedicated battery support in a total war as arty assets would be more scattered). Funny enough neither are most coop missions, at least the mainstream ones (Domination). However, what is nice about this game is that it is highlly customizable so no one is preventing any of you of doing a more 'realist' warfare missions with limited units and loads, it's quite doable. If I would have to 'cry' about something in warfare is the air:ground ratio, it's stupidlly broken tbh with sometimes even half a team usign aircrafts and helos, and current AA assets are not that strong if you play with advanced modes where targetting and aiming is not so easy. Same with armour:infantry but this is more even with so many AT weapons around, btw this is well recreated as modern warfare is quite deadlly to armoured units when used alone (rambo-style we usually see in a lot of warfare/pvp servers) in chernarus-like landscape and towns without infantry protection (combined arms). What I find lacking is more teamplay in warfare public servers, that would actually even the playing field in a natural way, that and using vet/experienced mode so armour & air is not so easy to use, plus a bit of rebalance in prices and no gear respawn. In short: just find or open servers with custom configs or build your mission and warfare will be 'better' (that's a subjective thing off course).

That's awesome Nouber, can't wait for more info, keep it. Will you add different sort of options for firemission from FO's (spread, rof, whatever), and can these FO's be AI as well as human? Won't derail the thread more though, will wait until you open the thread.

SNKMAN could you add a config option or, better yet, some command you can init from editor so your own squad in 'detached' of GL4 AI enhancements? I ask because sometimes your squads goes compelttlly nuts and ignores your orders due to GL4 Ai overriding your orders (I think this specially true if you have fireteam eladers in your composition, but haven't tested it much). I would like to be able to use AI on friendlly units but not these udner my command. Is earched on readme but didn't find any option, correct me if I'm wrong. Also just a question, there is any conflict with high command when using GL4? Not sure about that and would be usefull to know.

If the company you sold the aircraft models to can link an internet alias in a game forum to your person you are doing it wrong ;) Minor variation oif the work should do it. Anyways, excellent job, enjoying ACE version. Thigs I would like to see and/or I'm missing: - arty! (main mortars (120mm), rockets and towed arty one of each at least) - more variety in IFV's/APC's versions and wheeled vehicles (AT version, GL version, etc.). secondary, maybe older MBT than Type99 which are still in massive use I guess. - chinese names/voices - air support (CAS specially, don't care that much about fighters because honestlly, Arma2 is not a flight simulator) - better attack helo? (if chinese army has such thing, or in different config) - AA support Anyway, thanks for all, great work! P.S: I have one doubt though, how balanced are weapon attributes? where comapred to others? i.e. I had an impression that assault rifles were too accurate but that may be a wrong early impression though.

I'm interested specially in the FO department, a bit more options should be available when doing firemissions. And I'm not a hardcore artillery guy but it would be usefull even from a gameplay pov.

This campa9ing was way more inmerssing than the original campaign in the game. Well done sir!

Game has options in singleplayer point of view as well as in team player opint of view - they should not exclude each other: false, CTI/warfare is all about teamplay, a team composed of lonewolfs will lose horribly to a team of teamplayers, AS IT SHOULD BE. Rambos go play DM/TDM/CTF. I'm tired of losing because my team mates are nuts. Game is fast phased enough, but is not too fast, so that making advanced tactics/ working with team is actually possible: This can all be setup by sceneario design tbh, but in general there is a progression in games. IMO air force is just too strong, a lot of times the first which gets attack helos/aircraft wins easilly. Game is fast phased enough, but is not too fast, so that making advanced tactics/ working with team is actually possible: Again, easilly tweaked in scenario design, how strong is the defending AI, which is the price of units, are you using 3rd viw or just 1st, etc. All influence the pace, progression and viability of tactics. For the rest, more or less true, but as I've said, you can tweak missions to appeil more one gaming style or other, like in any other game mode, you can make it as hard or as soft as you want, and depending on it, tactical gaming will matter more than arcade gameplay. Warfare has enough variability to make both gaming styles viable. ---------- Post added at 05:30 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:29 PM ---------- Game has options in singleplayer point of view as well as in team player opint of view - they should not exclude each other: false, CTI/warfare is all about teamplay, a team composed of lonewolfs will lose horribly to a team of teamplayers, AS IT SHOULD BE. Rambos go play DM/TDM/CTF. I'm tired of losing because my team mates are nuts. Game is fast phased enough, but is not too fast, so that making advanced tactics/ working with team is actually possible: This can all be setup by sceneario design tbh, but in general there is a progression in games. IMO air force is just too strong, a lot of times the first which gets attack helos/aircraft wins easilly. Game is fast phased enough, but is not too fast, so that making advanced tactics/ working with team is actually possible: Again, easilly tweaked in scenario design, how strong is the defending AI, which is the price of units, are you using 3rd viw or just 1st, etc. All influence the pace, progression and viability of tactics. For the rest, more or less true, but as I've said, you can tweak missions to appeil more one gaming style or other, like in any other game mode, you can make it as hard or as soft as you want, and depending on it, tactical gaming will matter more than arcade gameplay. Warfare has enough variability to make both gaming styles viable.

Woa this looks awesome, gonna try it. Seriouslly thanks all the modders and BIS for your effort, excellent mods are starting to roll in and last patch, is like getting a whole new game.

ACE AI + Zeus AI skills + lastest betas = different game. Now if Fabrizio resumed his AI mod...

nope, these parameters are intialzied at the beginning so it's impossible to change while playing.