Deathstroke

I can confirm all people who have older systems but upgraded their pc with a partial SSD got huge performance improvement. Exspecially visible when entering busy areas such as town spawned with enemy troops. Mostly everything that would deter their fps to near standstill in old situation does nothing to their fps now ( apart from night situation, that will still suck ).

Well this discussion would not affect the outcome anyway as it has already been shown that arma 3 will have 3rd person. But conversations on the internet are mostly out motivation by frustation anyway and should the highly unlikely chance arise that some dev would read this and remove 3rd then :bounce3: I am just trying to make a point to you, there is not a forum discussion about 3rd on 1st person games being it from cod or games even with vehicles such as red ochestra 2. There are discussions about 3rd on games like this and battlefield, only because its there. Lot of conversations about the bf3 having no cursors in 3rd anymore and that the camera is 2 close. So my assumption to say that people using 3rd only do it for the feeling that 3rd gives them remains unchallenged. Because otherwise conversations like this would arise in other games as well. Why I dont take comments pro-3rd seriously is because I use 3rd to when I "need" and I know that its just to be able to look at something, see how well you are positioned, see if your located well in a bush, how you are located between friendly units, how your chopper is touching down, quick overview of a town etc. and when that happens my brain gives me a bit of endorfine when I realise my surroundings and safety, because thats in my nature, And to achieve that in 1st person you need to look around franticly like a bird and thats the moment you enter finger starts to itch like a smoker on break. It doesnt matter if you use 3rd a lot indication of addiction is there once you feel unconformtable when its not there. And this is just an aspect of 3rd, my previous post indicates the negative effects of it besides ruining fair play in pvp. Any idea that makes the game more consistent and exploit free is in my eyes a good idea. So I am not always pro flexibillity. Flexibillity was definantly there in the days of ofp but was restrained to low number programmers so the consistency in gameplay helped grow of clans within communities. Since arma1 consitency is not even there on a single server so clan forming only really happens in the coop enviroment. Maybe there are some cases i havent been envolved with but compared to the 3 tourneys for each game type like in the ofp days is long gone.

1st person feels that way because people who use 3rd dont adapt well to 1st person. Its like wearing a gasmask, if you wear it for 4 hours straight you dont walk into people or feel scared crossing roads anymore, because your brain adjust your headmovement to compensate. If you however pull it off all the time it will remain to feel unnatural 3rd person allows people to locate their enemies without the use of any realistic form of cover and/or concealment. Any person with any sense for fair play will see this as an exploit, but people wanting to engage their opponent in more realistic firefights will have to play bf3 in order to find this? Its not odd that most shooters are completely 1st person, with the exepcetion of some vehicles to keep a ballance between infantry, armor and air units. People who see this as an exploit can do little to avoid when playing their favourite missions online as its depending on the admin preferecens whetever its on or not. Its not like if you join a 40+ player server for a certain gametype that there is another server just like it with 3rd on/off. This is therefor just another roadblock in gameplay consistency whereas arcade game offer better cosistency and therefor are more prone to becoming a populair game. So in my eyes the allowance of 3rd for infantry units is a old long outdated concept in the world of fps shooters whetever it being an arcade or milsim. It allows exploits, negates adaptation to first person mode and ruins consitency in online gaming experience. And the only reason why a person would want to use it because he misinterprets the feeling of safety and relaxation in 3rd mode opposed to unfamiliar feeling in 1st as a postive thing.

Situation with 3rd: I see some enemy soldiers I fire and quickly move to a house accross the street. A friendly players reports he also knows that at least 1 more soldier is west of my position. Given the guys position and good guess of his objective I flank him on his route in order to get behind him. I finally see him and engage, upon entering the building he ran into i get shot once entering. After asking how he knew i was coming he said that he saw me flank with 3rd turned on. This is for me the reason to no longer play with 3rd on. A player can give me hundreds of reasons to turn it on, but if even arcade shooters turn it off to avoid exploits, how serious can you take a game that doesnt. A guy can, with 3rd turned on, lie on a roof watching your every move in a busy town till he decides to press x and kill you. Is that realism?

I find this to be a somewhat redundant question as it has been asked before and also doesnt need a large explanation. One can sumup a decent answer with 1 line saying that other games are actual games and that this "game" is actually a public variant of an army used simulation program to partly pay the bill of the companies projects. But you can also throw in as many variables as you want by simply comparing a cod or bf games with arma2. As Ill show below what arma 2 lacks to become as populair as another shooter pvp wise: Consistancy in game experience Instant gratification Playable on system with high and low system requirements Joining a game quick Auto teaming based on skills of players Joining your friends Ballance between weapons Ballance between sides Ballance between vehicles Up close and personal kills Deathcam Quick to use interface Tournaments Enviroment pushing players to use clans if they pursue more enriching experience. Basicly this list can go on for ages. The thing is that most populair shooters/rts/mmorpgs bring in the addiction factor, by giving the player a consistent good experience. By adding a little rpg factor next to it they add a bit of extra addiction and voilla you got a populair game. In arma this experience is dependent on a lot of different variables. Sometimes the people suck, sometimes the server sucks, sometimes ballance sucks, sometimes the mission sucks, sometimes the mission parameters suck etc and the gameplay itself is build up feeling of action instead of consistant and instant gratification and therefor highlights these annoyments even more. My point is if I start a game now on bad company 2 i know what i can expect, so when i feel like playing bc2 I will simply get what i want. I can also quickly find top clans and join tournaments which get recorded, shown and sponsored by developer. I can do this in even less popular games or in rts games like company of heroes, starcraft etc When I want to play arma2 there is lot of choice. Every server seems to have its own map, with own parameters and own players and general attitude. And I can spend hours finding something good and find out its already time to enter my bed and next day find the server empty or next week hating an extra feature added by some programmer. I can join a clan to enrich gameplay but finding 2 clans liking and playing the same map with same parameters hasnt been possible since arma 1. edit: Despite this, I feel that arma 2 would make a pretty good coop game, but the problem with coop is that the challenge against ai will eventually dissapear. While a good pvp experience can keep me attached for years. And I am not the only one, if I look on my ts i still see 30 people playing operation flashpoint crcti every day compared to the 6 people playing warfare on arma2 and 12 teamspeaks adresses of dead coop clans :D

I skipped arma-2 kind off. I did buy it but never could run on own pc. But got 600 of 1k euro for pc for arma3 saved up. Maybe about time to switch. I have been playing ofp cti with same 30 dudes every night for past couple years now ;)

Heh long live ofp :cool: I smell a small cti reunion coming up this weekend ;)

Operation Flashpoint Resistance is really hard to find so I suggest like the others here to buy GOTY since it is only 5 pounds these days at gameseek.

There are a couple of things that cause the tanks in arma to feel so unatural. ( Feeling of being to slow ) - Cut in realistic dynamic and physic models: Because armed assault is such a big scaled game and that hardly no well thinking dynamics expert is gonna throw away a steady 40k starting income to venture into harsh world of software/game industry ;). All vehicles in armed assault have limited calculation models compared to other games wich less scale. -Tank speeds: Despite what is mentioned above, the maximum speeds according to real figures seem to closely align with realistic values. However those numbers are based on fuel effeciency and material wear, in reality its possible to function above those speeds for short heaps of time. So one could do a small speed burst in real life just to get over a hill a couple seconds faster, and destroying its gear box completely by doing so. In armed assault you are completely dependent on these set of numbers, but thats not main problem why driving a tank in arma can feel so sluggish. -Gears: As far from what I have seen the vehicles has no gears in bis games. You can press w for slower speed accerlation but you are still on same graph as pressing e only you get to maximum faster with e and to higher point. If you go up a hill you start off slow eventually getting momentum to a set max speed depending on degrees in climb. In reality the tank will start up hill relatively fast reaching his max speed within 0.5 second. Armed Assault does create a realistic climb speed eventually but because the start of the climb does not portray a torque monster the tank loses most it glory. -Traction: In real life the tank is contantly digging in the ground despite tracks best efforts not to. In armed assault its matters not much if its driving on solid road or grass speed wise. In fact the momemtum can often ( when going to downhill ) completely ignore realistic values. Making the tank feel like its sliding down a icy road frictionles. Or when coming to a hold feel like back is sliding to front. Verdict: Tanks are not realisticly portrayed in this game. But with such a vareity of vehicles and large scale it will be hard to improve. On some parts of its calculation it neatly alligns with realistic values so we at least get that. You have to realise that if ai already fails PID'ing to stay on middle of road most of the time that coming with even more calculations will not better the game :)

Maybe they are frantically clicking the right button to target me so fast, problem for me is that when inf slightly in bush i can right click all i want but suddenly my die hard crew member shooting a tank over 1500 range suddenly turns into this guy called "ted" asking me for the manual. And when I jump out as last measure of survival, ted suddenly grows some balls and starts blasting away as I get picked off by a sniper. To make matters worse not only does he avenge me by killing the sniper ( and making me look like a noob ) but also picks off 10 other soldiers I have not seen. ( And brags about each guy he kills "I've got him" ) Ugh maybe I should stick to infantry :)

I play Flashpoint because the pace of the game allows a lot of communication. And the community it drawed in were mostly players looking to get more out of the game experience. They were like people that enjoyed a well baked cake instead of quick bite of chips. The gameplay was different, way more punishing and more exiting because of that. It led to some fantastic tournaments either ctf, c&h or cti. And lot of coop clans that all had their own vision on how to play good coop ranging from clans like LOL, CIA, GOL, 23rd etc. It was not rare for a player to visit another player in real life because that is how tight everything came toghether ;) Overall it was good experience and also reason why i have eventually returned to it to play cti on daily basis with same 50 guys over and over ;) Though I look up to BIS I see ArmA and ArmAII more like a military product given to civilians to bug test it. PvP combat is less interesting as the realistic long range weapons and inballance between factions suddenly make main stream shooter seem a lot more interesting. The campaigns have as much brilliance as the ofp red hammer expansion and community itself seems more like sheep that has to be herd into the right direction by the mission with players that eventually dissapear after couple of weeks or mission scripters going on solo adventures to fame. Dont get me wrong arma and armaII are still despite all that in essence great games ( exspecially if you look at the alternative: dragon rising ), but its no longer my cup of tea. To put it into perspective I rather never played arma or armaII if it ment I could have played one more tournament in flashpoint :)

I have been playing Flashpoint multiplayer for a very long time now and over the years I have seen many tricks ( some called fair game knowledge other can been seen as exploits ). But there is one trick I havent been able to put my finger on completely. As seen in the picture below its impossible to target the target listed on number 2. Even in arma it shows up grey. I always found this very annoying when a soldier fired his first law against my tank and while i was frantically trying to find him or target him he managed to shoot rest of his salvo before I could even switch to gunner seat myself. Exspecially while a tank with ai commander punishes anybody firing a at missle or even sneezes while a tank is in range straight away. It would have been no problem for me if only ai would able to do this. In cti for example i could bring an extra cheap ai tank to cover me from these ambushes. However when encountering certain players on the battlefield in a tank, ambushing them from forrest or bush always resulted in being shot by ai gunner straight away. ( Even from positions where a right click on me wouldnt activate the gunner to target me ) Now the only 2 tricks I know off that could come close in order to recreate this situation is: - In the picture below there is only 1 target shown. Getting a larger list of targets ( sending more ai as scouts into the field ) increases the chance of your target showing up on a different number. Exspecially since tanks get preference over infantry. So if they manage to spot enemy t80, the guy firing you will neatly show up on number 3-9. - Like any ai when an ai gunner spots an enemy unit it will occasionally follow it's direction closely so firing the weapon manually will result in killing the target. But they dont come close to what I have seen. So if anyone knows bit more about this please tell me ;) ( Picture showing principle of target 2 always being grey for tank commander )