Brady_The_1

could be a likely solution.

https://archive.is/Ggk00#selection-773.1-773.59 - https://web.archive.org/web/20161107221800/https://store.bistudio.com/products/project-argo ( Ultimately, the much longer-term aim of this project [Project Argo] is to develop a similar (most likely Arma-related) multi-platform game on a different engine.) This is really bad news. I'll be honest here, I doubt now that Argo will get anywhere ever. While Real Virtuality might work alright for PvE Roleplay, it definitely does not for PvP, especially in small-scale CQC environments (which the whole of Argo basically is). That leads to following: - Non-Arma FPS players won't stick around in Argo, or be interested in Argo at all due to the clunky movement and all the other problems with the engine. (Not to mention that the barrier of entry is still pretty high compared to standard FPS games) = No market - Arma players deem Argo as casual and unworthy of their time, because (at least) the vocal players deem shooting static targets or targets with easily predictable movement patterns with a Lynx from 3 km away while laying on their stomach in a bush wearing ghillie-suits as the pinnacle of tactical gameplay, while having to come up with tactics and manoeuvrers on the fly in stressful unpredictable CQC PvP situations is being called "casual". = No market

If the developing process ever gets to the point where the prototype enters a stage where Argo could be released as a fleshed out standalone game (which is a long way out, and would include an engine switch to make it suitable for the (mass) market), I hope the developers take the Pay(-Once)-to-Play model into consideration (potentially combined with the sale of cosmetics to beat down the price a little bit). People should, in my opinion, spend money on quality products to support the developers. This includes the "I spent the average price of an AAA title on Arma 3 four years ago and demand a lifelong free access to every Bohemia game ever released"-crowd.

The first two sentences are unfortunately a little hard to understand. How many errors do you get exactly and when do you get those? Without more details to isolate the problems it could be a lot of things. I assume you verified the integrity of the game cache? If not, do that first. In case that doesn't work I pull a Microsoft forum moderator and suggest doing the following: Go to Start, click All Programs and open Accessories. Right click on Command Prompt in the Program list and then select Run as administrator. If you are prompted for an administrator password or for confirmation, type your password, or click OK, or else click Yes. In the Command Prompt, type the following command, and then press ENTER: sfc /scannow See if that helps or does anything. Report back with results or if you have more details.

A screenshot or recording would probably help. The only instances with wrongly tagged players I remember, was this one, and that bug was fixed.

Thanks for the clarification!

If it happened on Clash it was most likely not a bug, but a feature. I don't remember the exact values, but if Defender leave a certain area around their fight zone their location will be revealed to the enemy team.

I agree. Additionally to an automatic temp ban triggered by excessive team-killing I would like to see a [15 - 30 minutes] temp ban on server leave while in a match. If you have valid reasons to leave you won't mind the temp ban, if you are an angry rage-quitter you should pay for it, instead of being able to join another server and ruin another team's match.

The Server Browser might be the tool you are looking for.

In my opinion the best way to find a sever is the server browser ('Official servers' tab). However, player numbers are always pretty low, so there is a chance that not enough people were playing when you tried to find a server. Right now, there is one full Clash server, and a Mixed server is filling up slowly. Generally you will have more problems finding many servers in US peak times. EU peak times are not that bad.

No, Project Argo is a dip into the waters of (somewhat) competitive games. That's funny, because I personally consider 'Mil Sims' PvE Roleplay. To each their own, I guess, eh. To answer your question from a non-developers point of view. Removing certain spots by blocking them is supposed to give the game modes a certain flow, and balance Hotspots (such as Flags in Clash) by keeping, both, the defender and the attacker side in mind.

I hundred-percent agree with you. Who do they think they are? Trying to survive by making a living as game developers? The nerve of those people. Unbelievable. And what kind of price tag is 'Free'? That's an awful lot of characters for what is basically an Arma 3 copy.

Thanks for fixing the problem. I appreciate it. :-)

I wouldn't necessarily go so far and call Link a 'glorified deathmatch without teamplay'. Raid you can theoretically win alone 1v5 due to the setup, and Clash, while it can profit from team play, is too open and random for team play to have any real effect. Link was and is probably the game mode where good teamplay would be mandatory to succeed under ideal circumstances. Link is brutal and unforgiving, the team that doesn't work together or makes too many mistakes loses, really badly. The problem with teamplay in Argo is not the game or a game mode, it's the player. The average Argo player is too bad, lacks common sense, doesn't want to improve, and gives up too easy too fast while going down the path of convenient excuses to shift the blame to the opponent or the game (all of it which really is typical for the average player in any multiplayer game, not just Argo). This is being supported by the fact that Clash is the most popular game mode. While I have no current numbers to back this up and come from a place of anecdotal evidence and the results of old twitter polls, this really comes as no surprise. Of course I do understand the reasons behind why the player base is what it is, and that it is most likely not going to change any time soon. I just want to offer a different perspective on this topic. ---- Regarding multiplayer stats: I agree, stats can and will be distracting for the player, especially K/D brings out the worst in players. However, I think that removing them completely from the game or a specific game mode would not be beneficial. Statistics and numbers, even K/D, are a valid indicator of skill progress and a tool in understanding and reflecting on one's game play. I would suggest a combination of nerfing point rewards of player-actions (like kills) and buffing point rewards of team-actions (like saviour-kills, objective-based actions, etc), which as far as I know has been already at least partially implemented in the game, and hiding certain stats (K/D for example) on the scoreboard in an active game, but displaying them after the match ended and using those stats for general leaderboards (which will/could be part of the so called "Meta game").

I am curious if anything is happening on this front. Using Firefox Beta I haven't had access to https://www.projectargo.net/ for the longest time now, but four days ago Firefox 51 was released (not to mention all the other browsers following suit), which is going to increase the number of affected people tremendously.