Akumu

I've played BF3 and ArmA 2. I must say I have seen more cheating in BF3 than in ArmA.

Just getting into ArmA 2 and hate that I just found out about the game but enjoying my time until ArmA 3 releases. My current issue is the AI is so Defensive but it doesn't do a good job at the defense part. It's as if they are sitting their waiting to be slowly killed off by the much smarter human players. While ArmA 2 opposition look only like a well supplied gang, I'm hoping the next group will be more of a threat with more power/resources. There needs to be "Capital cities" so to speak where enemy presence is heavy, snipers are planted, better enemy artillery protection, and good heavy armor presence. Reinforcements should also drop in a lot of soldiers and an occasional Light/Heavy armored vehicle, while also using better air support to try and shoot down our aircraft. What I also found to be an issue is the lack of enemies actually using the inside of buildings as cover, while shooting outside. A battle should make a soldier cautious of taller buildings and higher up windows. There should be more of a reason to actually search the buildings for opposition. These Main territories should aim to be a battle that can last for hours where you might start at day but find it turning night before the battle is even over. Smaller territories shouldn't be as long of a battle though. However, The AI shouldn't sit back and allow you to steam roll over their smaller territories without a reaction of course. As you take over the AI should try and take back their land or take over yours(even muster up an attack against your main base if pressured enough). The smaller territories should also be civilian heavy and killing them recklessly would allow the AI to be able to take over that land back easier with regular civilians rising up and joining their cause also making it harder to reclaim such land. This would check the reckless behavior one could have by bombing/shooting everything in sight. It keeps the players more on their toes as they will have to watch who they shoot and not be so trigger/bomb happy. ArmA 2 is a great simulation, but I think Arma 3 should do better at showing how serious/mental a war can be against a solid opponent, as shown when you look back through history. A soldier is trained to pre-plan an attack but adapt that plan as the variables change, which in war is bound to happen. Currently a solid tactic can be established and not much forces a change in thought. It's like a good plan is established then zerg it until we inevitably capture the area and slowly take over the map.