live2reap

Thank you. Someone actually reads posts instead of spewing mindless babble! Yes I was referring to that video. I understand that he is at full fatigue and he is successfully managing to kill armor-less targets that are standing still. My problem with it is that he uses that to argue that engaging targets 500m-1km away at full fatigue isn't difficult. Despite the fact that in MOST cases said targets wont be A. Standing Still B. Not wearing armor themselves C. Reacting to your shots and in the case of AI lying prone and returning fire with super precision accuracy or in the case actual players moving to find cover. The only reason I brought up Sniping is because in the video he says he did it and he wasn't even using a Marksman Rifle or Sniper. He didn't demonstrate any accurate shooting in the video(though I am sure he is capable of doing so) he merely showed that against a non reactive target if you pull the trigger enough times you will eventually hit it. I think I am going to stop posting in this thread though. I guess it was foolish of me to think that just because this is a thread about feedback that there would be a level of maturity that with the exception of a few posters, just was nowhere to be found. I might still post that video some people requested if I get around to it, but otherwise I don't see the point in attempting to have a discussion when 90% of the replies are Tl;Dr I'm just gonna flame you and have no idea what your post was about. Hell nobody even bothered to comment on my idea to make the fatigue system more realistic and still be punishing just the way everyone likes it. If I learned anything from posting in this thread though it is that there is a huge difference in opinion between Dev Branch and Stable Branch. Or maybe it is just the standard forum hive mind mentality.... who knows. BTW, if you have read any of my previous posts you would see that I retracted my statement about running around a block and engaging a target. There were other circumstances involved that lead to the outcome I had, and in a perfect scenario you would in fact be able to do it.

I think you are the one misunderstanding here... that was my entire point, that snipers are supposed to take careful shots, whereas the video posted only proved that if you fire a ton of bullets you will eventually hit the target. You somehow are on an entirely different page here lol... Gotta love people who don't read.

Well this is a lot of things quoted so I guess I'll just address them in order. 1. I don't think that is a fair or accurate assessment to make. Yes, Arma is and always has been a military sim. That is the reason I picked up the game in the first place, however it has pretty much always had competitive game modes as well and to say Arma isn't ment for competitive gameplay just because it is a simulator is an unfair statement. Many people enjoy playing Arma competitively specifically BECAUSE it is a such an in depth military simulator and to exclude part of Arma's player base is pretty biased on your part. Part of it's appeal also because you usually can't be a to use your words solo-one-man-army-rambo. I never once in the scenario that I laid out was I upset over my death. I was alone with no hope for backup and died doing what I thought would be my best bet for survival. I accept that death, it happens when you are separated from your team. My complaints were and always have been with the lack of realism in a system that was intended to be realistic. 2. Thanks for the info, however I have friends that I do play with, and even when I am not playing with friends I am perfectly capable of coordinating with the teammates I have in the server. It was merely this one instance I chose as an example that I was alone, because I felt it was the best example of the fatigue system in action... I didn't think people would spend more time flaming me for being alone in the example than addressing the actual scenario. 3. Yeah, I understand it is very vague. If I get a chance and can find the spot where the encounter took place I'll record a video to demonstrate how things happened. That being said though, I pretty much understand why the system bit me in the ass that day. It was the day after the update and my first time really encountering it so I didn't really know why my fatigue was building up so crazy fast. Basically it came down to 3 things: Fatigue from the intital firefight(about 10-15% fatigue), my lack of stopping to rest at all while I ran around the corner, and the fact that prior to the update I almost always moved around with my gun raised(due to my combat style and because I feel much safer sweeping areas when my gun is in the ready and I can immediately react to any threats) before it didn't have a major impact on fatigue, but now it does and me moving the last bit of distance with my gun raised after sprinting kicked my fatigue up over the top. 4. After watching those videos I've noticed a few things that shed a little more light on how the system works, and while I still believe it is unrealistic it did give me some ideas on how to improve the system that would likely appeal to people on both sides of the issue without just toning it down. In the first video the guy runs a relatively long distance with some light gear, which at first glance would suggest that if you are wearing light gear you should be able to run long distances with little to no problems from fatigue, and under normal circumstances this is true. It is unfortunate that we cannot see his fatigue bar in the video, however part way through you can start to hear his character breathing heavily meaning he is getting close to high fatigue. The main reason he never actually hits the slowdown point is because of the time he spends lying prone to shoot. Given the way the current system works this makes sense since your fatigue regens fastest when you are lying prone and not moving and doesn't stop just because you are shooting. Which leaves me with the same dilemma that he also(at least partially) points out in his second video. If you are extremely tired, just stopping or slowing down for a short amount of time is going to do next to nothing to actually reduce your fatigue in real life. So for the sake of both realism and improving gameplay why not increase the amount of stamina the player has(the amount would be up to debate, but I'd say about 1.5 times what it is now), and largely increase the amount of time it takes to recover from said fatigue? It is unrealistic for someone tired from running for a while to be able to stop moving for 5 to 10 seconds and be totally good to go again. Why not make it so if a guy can sprint for 1 minute straight before hitting the fatigue wall(or however long it is depending on your gear) it also takes you an equivalent amount of time to recover from that fatigue? It would make pacing yourself on the battlefield that much more important. You could if you wanted go all out pushing the limits of your body and sprint till you couldn't sprint anymore, however you would then pay the price and have a long time to wait before you would be combat effective again. I find a hard time seeing any negatives to this concept this concept but feel free to chime in with comments/suggestions. I don't really like the second video though in terms of showing that it is possible to shoot at max fatigue... it doesn't really show anything conclusive it just shows that if you fire enough times at a target when your scope is going crazy you will eventually hit it. He never actually tried to stop and aim at his targets so it never really addressed the problems snipers and people with DMRs have since they can't really afford to waste ammo firing an excessive amount of shots at an enemy, let alone reveal their position due to repeat firings. However since the sway is being addressed on dev branch anyways we can more or less just ignore that problem. All in all thanks for your post though, it was the most constructive/non-flaming response I have gotten so far and I hope I answered the questions anyone else had from me. I read all the comments, but I chose to reply to the post that had the most things to address.

Lol, I was expecting to be flamed so this kind of ignorant post comes as no surprise to me, but you do realize that this is still a game right? Have you ever played a game of King of the Hill before, or any competitive game mode for that matter? You aren't always lucky enough to have a teammate with you to coordinate with. Even IF sitting around doing nothing and waiting for him to call for backup when I don't have anyone in the immediate area to help wasn't the stupidest idea ever. Common sense dictates that if I just wiped out this guy's squad and he has any other friendlies in the area he is going to call for help. Seeing as the wait and see approach that you guys have suggested is not a viable option(in video game or real world tactics) I can either move to eliminate him before reinforcements have the chance to arrive, OR I can retreat from the area. I obviously chose the former, and had my character had the stamina of an average human male(let alone a trained soldier) instead of a 6 year old girl. Most likely given the fact that the enemy at the time still had no idea where I had gone, he would have been an easy threat to eliminate. With ample time to clear out before anyone could have arrived to assist him. Also to the guy who suggested dropping the carrier plate, I never wear armor that heavy so dropping my vest would not have changed that much, if anything I should have had less trouble with stamina by the time I was trying to flank, I had already dropped several magazines of ammo and my grenades off my initial weight. You guys seem to mistake my being mobile and not having backup at the time for me being a run and gunner who plays games like call of duty. I have always preferred Tactical Shooters such as Ghost Recon(the old ones not the new ones), Rainbow Six, and Delta Force over CoD and the ilk. My first ever online shooter was Socom: US Navy Seals almost 12 years ago, I understand Tactics just fine. Do real soldiers run across for buildings in urban terrain? Maybe not, but a real soldier wouldn't sit around in a building by himself and wait for enemy reinforcements to arrive and kill him, let alone be playing a game mode that has the potential for your to unwittingly be para dropped into a town separated from your team and behind enemy lines alone and have to rely on only yourself for survival so your argument is null in this situation. Regardless however you guys still fail to address the original argument and instead seem insistent on flaming everyone who has a different opinion than you. The original point was simply that any trained soldier who cannot run up a street the equivalent of 2 houses, make a left and run the distance of 2 more houses while carrying minimal gear(no explosives, no heavy armor, no backpacks full of stuff... just a rifle and a vest) without being out of breath and unable to run any further is a disgrace to their respective military force and should immediately leave the armed forces because that is something any average joe that is even moderately fit can do without any problems what so ever. I LIKE the system, I am a FAN of it. However that does not mean I am going to sit around and be ignorant to the obvious and unrealistic problems it has. There is no possible argument you can make that says the inability to sprint that distance without trouble is realistic and should be considered "working as intended". Also, it is nice to see some actual vets chiming in to point out the glaring problems with the fatigue system that some people just want to pretend doesn't have any problems.

1. Generally speaking flanking is more effective when you aren't seen doing so. There was an open area between me and the other guy so just moving through the building next to me would have accomplished nothing. It's not like I went far out of my way or anything. I chose the shortest route to my destination that would also keep me from being seen as well... that however is irrelevant considering the total distance I sprinted was only about a 60-70m half circle 2. Fair Enough` 3.Have you tried moving with AT since the update? even with the most minimalist loadouts you still get exhausted extremely fast, and you can't really be a dedicated AT Soldier in modes like King of the Hill where your teams base is 3-4km from the AO and you have no means of resupplying once you leave the base. So the very few people people who do chose to use AT weapons have to either use their rockets immediately on the first thing they see(potentially wasting them on low priority targets) or sit around waiting for something big to come up and not be able to participate in combat with the group because they have to stop to catch their breath every 30 seconds and their aim from exhaustion is totally destroyed. Not being able to be all purpose walking tank anymore is great, however hardly being able to participate in combat due to the system kinda sucks.

I made a forum account just to post this, and I'm sure I'll be flamed for my opinion but I am going to post anyways. So... yeah. As someone who has been playing Arma 3 since beta(As well as previous Arma's), I have to say while the fatigue system is a great concept. The general opinion of MOST people I have spoken to/played with/against believe this is the most detrimental change to game play against human players that has be released thus far. There are several reasons for this: 1. The new fatigue system effectively neutralizes your ability to be mobile at crucial situations. example: You are carrying a MX Rifle w/attachments, 4-5 mags, a .45 with 3 mags, 2 grenades, and a first aid kit. Relatively light on the gear side right? You are in Kavala and come across a group of 3 people, which you proceed to engage fire on. You down two of them in the initial fire fight using up 1 mag in the process and another mag and a grenade pinning the 3rd person behind cover. You throw your last grenade at the man forcing him to take cover and proceed to flank him by sprinting around the block which is the length of approximately 4 buildings and takes about 20 seconds. As you turn the corner of the last building your fatigue bar reaches the 80% mark and you can no longer run, no longer aim, and are slowed to a gasping walk and it takes you another 15 seconds to reach your destination. By the time you finally make it to the place the enemy was hiding he has realized he was being flanked and is sitting there waiting for you. I don't know about most world militaries, but I am pretty sure not being able to sprint for 20-30 seconds with relatively minimal gear is a big red flag. 2. Weapon sway making mid to long range 150m -300m shooting with low power optics and sniping 600m - 1500m with long range scopes a hopeless endeavor. explanation: I know weapon sway should technically be a separate thread but since it is also linked to the fatigue system we can talk about it here as well. Anyone who has held a rifle before knows that it is impossible to hold it completely still. That being said anyone who has ever held a rifle should know that the level of weapon sway weapons have with NO FATIGUE is 100% unrealistic, and the amount of weapon sway you have when moderately fatigued is excessive at best. Go right now pick an MK18 with an SOS or equivalent scope, and lay down with no fatigue. Look at a building 500m away and watch as the weapon sway on your rifle moves the center dot on your scope clear from one side of the building to the other without even touching it. 500m is NOT a long distance. A person should be able to look at a target 500m away and have relatively little trouble keeping them in the center of their scope. Lets not even mention the fact that holding your breath no longer works anymore. 3. Penalties for carrying heavy gear encourage more people to over use tanks and aircraft in matches, and makes infantry easier targets due to slower all around movement speeds and lack of movement in general. explanation: Since the update we have been seeing a surge of people in games of King of the Hill and other PvP modes flooding the maps with vehicles because less and less infantry players are carrying Anti-Tank and Anti-Air launchers because of the huge penalties to fatigue. While nobody likes a walking Anti-Armor guy carrying around like 4 rockets in his backpack regular players with 1-2 rockets are essential to balanced game play and preventing games from becoming a cluster@#$! of armor and aircraft. However nobody wants to take on those roles when they can't participate in regular combat because of their weight. I'm not talking about guys with like 3-4 rockets, a lmg with several belts of ammo tons of grenades and a satchel charge either(they should be penalized for taking a loadout like that. I am talking normal loadouts with a launcher with 1-2 rockets and relatively light gear such as a carbine or SMG and they still cannot participate in regular combat due to weight. Now don't get me wrong I LIKE the idea behind these new changes to fatigue(sway not so much because it was realistic the way it was before). However I think the degree to which they have been adjusted is EXCESSIVE and unrealistic at best. Should you be out of breath and ready to pass out after sprinting 100m with a 100lbs of gear? Yeah, sure. The way things currently are however you get that tired wearing 25-30lbs of gear, and that is just pathetic. If they tweak the system properly I think it can be a great improvement to game play, but the way it is right now it is nothing but a detriment. On a side note, while I understand the comments that are saying to adapt because everyone has to deal with it, and rest assured most of us already have. However that does not take away from the fact that at this point the excessiveness of the changes are UNREALISTIC. Realism being the #1 thing we should be striving for right? So if this system is here to stay and we are supposed to make do with it shouldn't we at least push to have it toned down to realistic levels?