View Full Version : Realistic Wounds and treatment for ARMA 3
Moved to http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?p=2016983#post2016983 as this thread is going off topic and has very misleading first 12 pages. Also New post updated heavilly.
Militantsausage
May 21 2011, 07:40
this has got to be in the running for most words in a single post, but anyway, I agree with you, aslong as this would be optional because I don't think most players could handle this.
Ebolavirus
May 21 2011, 07:46
dude thats a friggen thesis. where's your conclusion section? that should summarize everything i'm not going to read
Max Power
May 21 2011, 07:48
Realistic wounds in the game would mean packing someone up and sending them to the hospital if they get shot. Everything between them getting shot and being taken out of play is just busywork. What I think you're describing, and I tell you now I only read the first 10th of your post, is a wound treatment minigame to keep the medic players occupied, which I think could be fun. It would also serve to differentiate the player roles a little more. Don't think it's realistic just because it has realistic sounding names and procedures, though. Acknowledging that there are tumbling or fragmenting round really does nothing to increase realism. The medic would be treating airway, breathing, circulation, shock, and trauma problems, as well as other problems which do not come up in video games. In its most basic form, stopping bleeding requires you simply to put a telfon dressing on the wound and apply pressure and bandages and keep adding them until the bleeding stops. Seems like a bit of a waste of time. So realism is not really your friend sometimes.
Oh they could, it's not hard to learn. Memorise it and you're fine.
The only thing I would add is for this to work BIS must fix hitpoint locations. Construction, vehicular and soft tissue (human, animals) damage must be differentiated in the engine.
Smookie
May 21 2011, 07:55
Brilliant idea. I would probably also vote for a weighting scale that you will have to use prior to gaming that will gather your weight and fat % so that it can simulate how far can you run without running short on breath!
I am very positive for a medic system like America'a Army 3. But too much realism destroys the gameplay experience and fun. Some things have to be simple.
Militantsausage
May 21 2011, 08:04
don't see why there is negativity, he is suggesting something that could and probably would make the game more fun, and Ebolavirus, he actually did sum up a lot of the improvements that could be made near the bottom, keep an open mind, and if you don't want to read it cause it is too long, don't come here to post it, keep it to yourself.
Also a good idea would be getting rid of the wounded textures and adding a blood texture to a specific point where the soldier was hit, so it would be easy to determine how many times they were shot, where they were shot, possibly what caliber.
although all this is a good idea, it is still a game and would have to be simplified somewhat, but that doesn't mean that it should be so easy that everyone can learn how to be a medic instantly and maybe have more specialised people for the job that know the system, although if anyone here has played Americas Army 3 I thought that had a good wounding system, it doesn't tell you exactly what to do, but if you train on it for a little while you can become an expert.
Realistic wounds in the game would mean packing someone up and sending them to the hospital if they get shot. Everything between them getting shot and being taken out of play is just busywork. What I think you're describing, and I tell you now I only read the first 10th of your post, is a wound treatment minigame to keep the medic players occupied, which I think could be fun. It would also serve to differentiate the player roles a little more. Don't think it's realistic just because it has realistic sounding names and procedures, though. Acknowledging that there are tumbling or fragmenting round really does nothing to increase realism. The combat medic will not be performing surgery. He will be treating airway, breathing, circulation, shock, and trauma problems, as well as other problems which do not come up in video games.
Some combat medics have minor surgical kits, this doesn't mean they will be added but think along Arma 3's basis of future warfare. This will be important, especially in unconventional units.
No, hospital would not be involved, the medic could deal with the situation there and then - you wouldn't overcomplicate it and make it unplayable by sending them to the surgeon.
Tumbling and fragmenting causes more damage within soft tissue, common sense, it would make a difference and increase realism in terms of soft tissue wounding and damage.
No doubt it could be dumbed down and simplified for ease of gameplay.
Ebolavirus
May 21 2011, 08:14
he actually did sum up a lot of the improvements that could be made near the bottom, keep an open mind, and if you don't want to read it cause it is too long, don't come here to post it, keep it to yourself.
Well Mr Sausage I never said anything negative about what was in the post, other that its a friggen thesis! And having READ it i agree with some of the points. So no i wont be keeping it to myself thankyou.
Max Power
May 21 2011, 08:17
Some combat medics have minor surgical kits, this doesn't mean they will be added but think along Arma 3's basis of future warfare. This will be important, especially in unconventional units.
No, hospital would not be involved, the medic could deal with the situation there and then - you wouldn't overcomplicate it and make it unplayable by sending them to the surgeon.
Tumbling and fragmenting causes more damage within soft tissue, common sense, it would make a difference and increase realism in terms of soft tissue wounding and damage.
No doubt it could be dumbed down and simplified for ease of gameplay.
I since changed my post. What I meant was that medics in the game probably won't be, because that involves stabilizing the patient, which would be its own minigame, then performing the surgery. I wasn't suggesting that the whatever they do be 'too realistic'. In fact, more than even basic realism in first aid would be boring. First aid- real first aid- is boring, trust me.
11aTony
May 21 2011, 08:24
I would certainly not like to see this.
I since changed my post. What I meant was that medics in the game probably won't be, because that involves stabilizing the patient, which would be its own minigame, then performing the surgery. I wasn't suggesting that the whatever they do be 'too realistic'. In fact, more than even basic realism in first aid would be boring. First aid- real first aid- is boring, trust me.
I've done First Aid. I don't believe in the minor surgery side of this, and Tom's thinking I do not believe is a mini-game but more of an interaction system based on giving the correct treatment through a menu - like AA3. Surgery would be more of, have a hemostat in your kit, this opens up the option to "clamp" a blood vessel or similar. If not you could use Quick Clot or similar. I do not 100% support this part of his thinking but it's a good idea.
First Aid would be clicking a resusitation button, the character performs basic CPR and Rescue Breaths and ta da. The medic role would be much more vital but still simple enough for anyone to use, more complicated methods might be diagnosising a patient once given signs and symptoms.
I support his thinking and I hope you all will also, even if you do not agree with all of the points stated.
Militantsausage
May 21 2011, 08:30
dude thats a friggen thesis. where's your conclusion section? that should summarize everything i'm not going to read
You say that you never said anything negative, what I think is that you never said anything positive, there is nothing in your post that suggests being positive, and there are other ways you could have told him to include a summary without saying "friggen".
and Max, realistic wounds is actually fun in a game like arma to an extent, when you are playing multiplayer and someone is hit and they go "guys I need a revive" the response is "ok, i'll come and get you" then they are all fixed up with one buttom press, that is boring, when the medic has to deal with multiple injuries to stop the victim from dying, and trying to medevac under fire, it adds a whole new gameplay element, which I find very fun and I'm no wounding expert.
For everyone saying this is too complicated, these are the steps to treat a wounded comrade:
Drag to safety, apply field dressing, compress wound. If bleeding continues, apply a tourniquet and await a medic.
Seriously, a medics job is complicated, this is nowhere near as complicated. This is just apply specific treatment to different types of wounds that requires a little
a) practise or
b) prior knowledge
If a similar medical system like this was to be released with arma 3, it would be in the instruction manual. Rememebr this is a simulation game. Most extreme wounds can just be fixed by an ai medic if noone one your team is confident being a medic. Have to apply first aid, stabalise and continue to treat and examine casualties is very realistic compared to what we have now (and some alternatives like ACE and SLX).
@<hidden> I acknowledged that there are fragmenting and tumbling rounds because I have a fair bit of knowledge on the topic although I do not want to go over board in my first post with confusing stuff. My post may be long but it is very easy to understand.
Realistic wounds in the game would mean packing someone up and sending them to the hospital if they get shot.
Perhaps an advanced first aid module where a unit will still be required to go to a hospital after being stabilised would be fitting for us Warfare, CTI, MSO and COOP players?
I would like to ask everyone why they enjoy arma2?
Is it because of the realism? What makes it realistic? "The flow of combat and how it all plays out" is deffinitly the most common answer on the other ARMA3 threads (look for "am i the only one not liking this whole futuristic idea?" thread)
Well the flow of modern combat is heavilly effected by the status of the team members. Modern ammunition is actually intended to wound and not kill in order to slow down the enemy's manuevers and sen their morale to shit. A one hit, one kill system where no wounds (other than shaky aim from arm shots and borken legs from leg shots) are in the game and medics simply do something you would expect to only hear about in the bible when people with gun shot wounds to the legs are al of a sudden walking again is not realistic, it is my oppinion that an advanced medic system would be cool, but it is a fact that what we have now in vanilla arma 2 is unrealistic.
The ability to peform first aid (which ALL soldiers are trained in) and for medics to have a tougher, more realistic and immersive job would greatly increase realism. I am not saying it would have to be done my way, but an advanced, and yes, slightly complicated medical system would make the game a lot more realistic. And to be honest, if you don't want this because it is too complicated for YOU and you think it is just a game (rather than thinking it will decrease realism or have another constructive piece of critisism to give) and you would prefere to play a point and shoot, one shot kill fps, but on large maps, with vehicles and objectives, heavilly focused on team play rather than a full military simulation, then i would reccomend trying out BattleField 2, Project Reality. It is a great game.
I spent half the day just going through old first aid handbooks, research projects, PDFs, and other sourses to put this post together and make it really easy to understand for everyone rather than just chucking a heap of technical talk into the space of about a paragraph so everyone could read and hear my idea and oppinion. I do not appriciate these sorts of negative comments, if you don't like because you just don't like it, don't comment, if you don't think it will work and have a couple reasons why, please feel free to explain why in a nice tone and I will discuss.
@<hidden> Power, when you say that anything more than simple first aid is boring, don't play as a medic :) As a general soldier you only need to know how to put a dressing on, put pressure on it if you have time and otherwise chuck on a tourniquet and let a medic handle it. Also, I mean this will be like an interactive menu like ACE, Project Reality (some PR medic screens have been shown) and other mods have, rather than a full mini game.
ONLY CONSTRUCTIVE CRITISIM PLEASE
Max Power
May 21 2011, 08:45
I've done First Aid. I don't believe in the minor surgery side of this, and Tom's thinking I do not believe is a mini-game but more of an interaction system based on giving the correct treatment through a menu - like AA3. Surgery would be more of, have a hemostat in your kit, this opens up the option to "clamp" a blood vessel or similar. If not you could use Quick Clot or similar. I do not 100% support this part of his thinking but it's a good idea.
So you've clamped the blood vessel, now what? He gets up and starts running around the room, pwning newbs and so forth? There goes your realism.
and Max, realistic wounds is actually fun in a game like arma to an extent, when you are playing multiplayer and someone is hit and they go "guys I need a revive" the response is "ok, i'll come and get you" then they are all fixed up with one buttom press, that is boring, when the medic has to deal with multiple injuries to stop the victim from dying, and trying to medevac under fire, it adds a whole new gameplay element, which I find very fun and I'm no wounding expert.
Okay, so a guy needs a revive, so you run over to him and go to revive him and do the same 5 minute procedure you've done 1500 times before before he can actually get up and play again. Sounds so awesome. Wow, sucking chest wound... again. Blood loss, hypovolumic shock... no breathing. CPR, adrenaline, a flap-valve bandage, bandages, go get 'em tiger. Then the next guy. Unconscious, no breathing, gunshot wound. CPR, assisted breathing or compressions, bandages, go get em tiger. You could even have the awesomeness of using an AED. You could press a button to deploy a machine that will tell you if it can work or not. 'Shock advised. Stay clear.' or 'Shock not advised. Continue CPR.'
None of these people would be in any shape to fight afterward. I dunno, it seems like the system could be fun but it woudl take a lot of suspension of disbelief and a lot of careful planning by the developers to make it work without being silly.
Makink the medic system that "realistic" and complex would only work if the rest of the game would also be that "realistic"...
So as long as ArmA3 will not be the perfect simulation of land warfare i doubt that we need such a complex first-aid system.
Max Power
May 21 2011, 08:55
Moreover, first aid is simply a set of procedures. There's not really any creativity involved. It would basically just involve you doing a list of instructions in order.
So you've clamped the blood vessel, now what? He gets up and starts running around the room, pwning newbs and so forth? There goes your realism.
You're statement has no sense. This medical system would be more realistic than the current, to state the idea has no realism is silly when comparing it to the current system. Scroll -> Revive -> the guy runs around the room shooting people. That isn't realism, this is a next step up - not 100% realistic but it's a simulation game not real life and I understand that.
You stopped the bleeding or partially stopped it. There may be a short recovery period before the person can get up and walk - who knows? If that's what you suggest then that's your idea. Ask the person who posted this not the person who wants to see it happen.
And as I say for the last time, I do not 100% agree with the surgery idea but everything else sounds good to me. It's about time the medical system got some love.
Ebolavirus
May 21 2011, 09:04
you never said anything positive, there is nothing in your post that suggests being positive, and there are other ways you could have told him to include a summary without saying "friggen".
Ha. ok without placing my arm around your shoulder and saying "there there, even though i wasn't negative or positive, lets just leave it in the beige box mate."
indeed the level of knowledge require to effectively treat battlefield wounds could never really be matched within the scope of a virtual environment unless there was a feedback system that truthful to the full scope of medical treatment and patient responses. I personally don't see the role of having such a system in place, because the feedback system cannot be relied apon to give the administrator of dressings, drugs and other substances an adequate way of engaging with the type of wound he is attempting to treat and at the same time monitor if what he is doing is even appropriate for the task at hand. therefore a generalized system is adequate.
eb
Look Max if you aren't going to be constructive then please leave this thread. This idea is more realistic than any other mod I have played, yet is still simple for players who wish to still have a little bit of un-realistic fun. I myself would rather have a fully realistic system where a wounded soldier is good as dead and needs to be taken to hospital and will not be capable of fighting again, but I relise this is deffinitly not everyone's cup of tea.
The fact that there are medics in this game means that some sort of medical treatment will be included. Many games like bad company, battlefield, medal of honor, even call of duty, have their own revive systems because that's what people want. Many people also like how ace has an extremely simple yet descriptive system that makes the game feel more immersive (even though bandages fix 50cal bleeding :D) and others enjoy norrin's revive script. What do they all hve in common? Revives.
This system would be more detailed and immersive, realistic and yet still simple for new players, while offering advanced players interested in a challenge exactly that, a challenge.
Please take your negative attitude elsewhere.
---------- Post added at 19:10 ---------- Previous post was at 19:05 ----------
indeed the level of knowledge require to effectively treat battlefield wounds could never really be matched within the scope of a virtual environment unless there was a feedback system that truthful to the full scope of medical treatment and patient responses. I personally don't see the role of having such a system in place, because the feedback system cannot be relied apon to give the administrator of dressings, drugs and other substances an adequate way of engaging with the type of wound he is attempting to treat and at the same time monitor if what he is doing is even appropriate for the task at hand. therefore a generalized system is adequate.
eb
ACE did this, just this system will have more treatment items and more states of injury. ACE worked really well, this is just another step up, while keeping the system really simple for new players but unlike ACE, it allows advanced players to have a challenge and more fun.
Cheers
And you could always make basic and advanced versions in modules.
Maddmatt
May 21 2011, 09:45
Going overboard with things like this just sucks the fun out of it.
For singleplayer, having to wait for a bot to revive you is frustrating. I'd rather just die and load a savegame. It seemed cool until I actually had to experience it in the early days of ACE and the ArmA 2 campaign.
A wounding system where you can drag wounded buddies and revive them is great in multiplayer because, in a way, it replaces the savegame system and gives a better sense of teamwork. But again, overcomplicating it kills the fun.
Singleplayer couldn't or wouldn't have to be as complicated, same with AI. You can't expect them to make human-level decisions. This is just a more realistic "revive" process. This is more than just a sense of teamwork, it makes the medic role vital.
You could easily simplify it with only a few commands.
Max Power
May 21 2011, 09:54
Look Max if you aren't going to be constructive then please leave this thread.
lulz
To the people who are saying 'the system would be more realistic than the system we already have', I think we established a page ago that more realism != better gameplay.
Right now, the effects of being wounded are kind of glossed over for the sake of gameplay. The FA module plays animations of a soldier doing a primary and secondary survey and doing other live saving type activities, then you can move around again. Seems reasonable because it lacks detail.
When you go right out and say, 'this man has a compound leg fracture and a ruptured aeorta, and is missing 50% of his blood volume and is in deep hypervolumic shock', then you press some buttons and he's up and running again, you dash all the credibility you've just built up.
Nothing is wrong with NOT lacking detail. It could easily space itself out over time, not happen in a few seconds. You wouldn't actually create a system where you were in the hospital for a few months just for the sake of credibility or that you jumped up and were perfect, thanks for the opinions Max. Not appreciated.
It's the next step up for some type of realism, that is a big aspect of gameplay. That's why I personally play Arma. The wounds you talk of have a low chance of successful recovery, nevermind saving the patient there and then - take that into account.
Militantsausage
May 21 2011, 10:23
I think that having an advanced wounds module (that should be optional, so people like Max Power can enjoy simplicity) should have two goals:
1. To make the process of getting the casualty back to base very important.
2. To increase the depth and difficulty of a medics job.
this is good for hardcore groups that want realistic wounds, I think that making medevac required is very important, but the time they are at base could be reduced for gameplay reasons, so they can get back into a fighting ready condition in a minute or two, and for the medics job, instead of having an obvious scroll option that says "heal", there could be multiple treatment options, and you get an examination of their wounded state via text, so it is possible to get wrong, similar to AA3's wounding.
Once again I will say that Arma is a game about realism, simulation is obviously important, now having a flexible level of simulation is good, being able to give the hardcore players what they want should be fairly important, having an option for a limited simulation like now with the drag and revive is not a bad idea, but also adding an advanced portion is a good idea.
Today on the frontline casualty management is a very important part of Warfare, so giving players the option to simulate it as much as possible without removing enjoyment is a good thing.
Couldn't have said it better myself militant, check my first post, an alternate simple medic system has been added and everythign is more organised, clear and understandable and overall better.
Max Power
May 21 2011, 10:34
Yes we should make every feature optional :rolleyes:
I don't know if there's a problem with reading comprehension in this thread, but I was arguing for consistency, not simplicity.
We're definitely talking about different levels of realism here. And BIS (or the community) can implement a number of them, they've all get their pros and cons, and their audiences.
Way I see it:
As realistic as possible. This means if the systems are in place, survivors will be CASEVACed and triaged. They won't get back in the field, but their evacuation is there for realism's sake and as an objective of sorts. This would be especially suited to single player campaigns, where the killed:wounded ratio could have an influence on the overall outcome. Only minor injuries would allow a soldier back into the fight.
"Semi-realistic" co-op gameplay. Here you want a mix of realism, and gameplay. So you might still have CASEVACs and field hopstials, but the healing process would be sped up for the sake of gameplay.
You then have various levels of realism all the way down to infinite revives or instant respawn. At any point during this, any level of complexity could be used in the actual action of "healing" a player, from the simple HEAL option to a complex minigame. What actually determines the type of gameplay are the options I outlined above. The exception being the added gameplay value when playing a medic.
Breaking it into basic and advanced via modules will satisfy some audiences, it wouldn't matter as community modders will probably make their own revive systems anyway. To satisfy different audiences in terms of realism, gameplay and productiveness which would probably mean changing it out quite a bit.
It's only an idea though, it hasn't been made and if it was to then changes would probably be made to suit everybody. The base idea is good though - to improve the medics role and related scripts (e.g. hitlocations).
neokika
May 21 2011, 10:46
Hello,
Would be very nice to have a first aid & battlefield clearance implemented in the actual engine instead of the usual scripted solution. Or keep the same scripted solution, improving it a lot.
If rag-dolls are in fact included, would be nice to use it when dragging and carrying, lets say, when you want to drag a guy, if you are close to his head, you would grab him by the shoulder, if by side, you would grab a arm and a leg if near the feet.
Some kind of side by side animation would also be good, something like this (http://www.onefamilyfund.org/Portals/0/WWH_Pics/Sderot/1211_IDF_in_Gaza/Soldier_Wounded2.jpg), also keeping the traditional animation (http://www.officerpratt.com/TyeBandCom/wounded%20warrior%20menu.gif) for more extreme situations.
Some kind of bandage system, where medics actually carry a limited number of bandages etc. This should not be too much complex though, healing should be made simple, not forcing new players to have some First Aid lessons before they can heal in-game. :)
3D particles for blood and blood splatter on ground/walls, and maybe a tuned down dismemberment would also be very good.
_neo_
Yeah man animations deffinitly need work and would make this soo much more immersive.
Also a cool interaction menu would make medical treament more fun. I mean the ACE menu was great, but after some PR screenys I reckon a radial wheel with different colourful options is the way to go :D
I think this is a little much, and the word 'simulation' is thrown around all too often with the Arma series. The game still has to be fun and as many have pointed out more realism does not always equal more fun for most players. Don't get me wrong I would like to see a slightly more complex system than we have now but not to the level you are suggesting.
The A.I. just isn't up to scratch to support such a system. They don't have the desire of self-preservation that players do. Their go to move when under fire to just hit the deck or continue jogging where they were going, where as players sprint to solid cover. The A.I. are also unable to recognise a kill zone and will wander into an area where several of their buddies have already been killed and they don't stay in cover when under suppressive fire. What this means is that the A.I. get wounded, a lot, especially in larger engagements. This means that as a medic there is a good chance you would spend an unrealistic amount of time treating wounded.
In any case, further realism in the wounding and medic system must be optional (i.e. module based).
I think we can all agree though that without accumulatijg hitpoints killing us, proper body armour implimentation (explained how in first post), a damage formula involving how velocit effects damage and better animations will make arma 3 damn near perfect. I am going to try and make a poll and add it to this thread.
Maciek95PL
May 21 2011, 11:27
I'd really love to see more complex medic system, so not everyone could be a medic and the treatment wouldn't always be successful due to medic's mistake or fact, that wound was too serious. MEDEVAC sounds good too.
dale0404
May 21 2011, 11:30
The healing system needs to be reworked and I mean more than a tweak. I cant remember but I believe that if you are carrying out a heal animation on a player there is no way of ejecting from that animation until its complete, ie the soldier is healed by you.
There has got to be a way of cancelling the healing process if you come under enemy fire...
The healing system needs to be reworked and I mean more than a tweak. I cant remember but I believe that if you are carrying out a heal animation on a player there is no way of ejecting from that animation until its complete, ie the soldier is healed by you.
There has got to be a way of cancelling the healing process if you come under enemy fire...
You are absolutely right man. Arma 2 is great but everythign feels clunky. If physics and animations are improved to be less clunky, I am hoping the medic system will be too.
Maddmatt
May 21 2011, 12:07
The healing system needs to be reworked and I mean more than a tweak. I cant remember but I believe that if you are carrying out a heal animation on a player there is no way of ejecting from that animation until its complete, ie the soldier is healed by you.
There has got to be a way of cancelling the healing process if you come under enemy fire...
That's what the wounding system needs... to be fixed up and made more user friendly. You need to be able to run if you're giving first aid and come under fire.
We don't need all the overcomplicated shit. This is still a game, and development time can be spent on better things.
metalcraze
May 21 2011, 12:10
ACE2 system but with an agony state from BIS First Aid would be perfect.
AI medics know what and how to use those medical items in ACE2 so all BIS needs is 'copy-paste'
I simply dislike this eternal healing we have now in vanilla. Medics should run out of supplies so you will try to risk your squad less
That's what the wounding system needs... to be fixed up and made more user friendly. You need to be able to run if you're giving first aid and come under fire.
We don't need all the overcomplicated shit. This is still a game, and development time can be spent on better things.
Agreed while secretly wanting a realistic system. If BIS give us the basics though modders can improve on.
EDIT: And the above post, I agree fully. Good points.
Maddmatt
May 21 2011, 12:36
Agreed while secretly wanting a realistic system. If BIS give us the basics though modders can improve on.
That's the thing, modders will take things to the crazy extreme. It's up to BIS to get everything working well and make good game that appeals to a large variety of gamers.
Then mod teams like ACE expand on that with all the crazy stuff that the more hardcore among us can enjoy in our regular multiplayer sessions with our buddies :)
The more time BIS spends on crazy little things that only the hardcore crowd wants, the more important things get neglected like overall gameplay, performance and quality. That puts off the more casual players.
First up, thank you everyone for all the feedback, it has been nice to here positive and constructive remarks from all of you :)
ACE2 system but with an agony state from BIS First Aid would be perfect.
AI medics know what and how to use those medical items in ACE2 so all BIS needs is 'copy-paste'
I simply dislike this eternal healing we have now in vanilla. Medics should run out of supplies so you will try to risk your squad less
I agree although my suggestions can all be implimented really easilly and actually in the exact same way as bandages and bleeding have been implimented in ace (open up ace_sys_wound.pbo not as complicated as you would think) and more detail could have been gone into in ace's medical system, it feels really repedative like there is no challenge.
I reckon ACE 2 now should already have agony and although the ACE system works, it is missing stuff. Bleeding and pain is good but once you bring unconsciousness due to bloodloss into the picture, you are leaving out essentials such as breathing and cardiac arrest, which in a system like ACE can be treated easilly with the right equipment (just like bandages heal bleeding in ace, certain equiptment may heal breathing or cardiac arrest). Tourniquets, plasma/IVs and splint were all originally going to be in ACE2, and auto-injectors (a renamed epi) now having negative effects and being a last resort, adding AEDs (defibrillators) for cardiac arrest and smelling salts for breathing (like a bandage for bleeding) just go hand in hand with the current system.
And now that compression and CPR are in ACE all these new features I have put fourth don't seem so daunting or overkill afterall if you ask me, but this is my personal oppinion.
But to clear things up the advanced system I had in mind is based heavilly on how ace is now, just with more wounding types and corresponding treatment.
I want to point this out, and there's every chance I'm wrong about this, but wouldn't an extremely advanced wounding system lead to many units not actually being killed?
If so, then that's fine, it's realistic, we all know that in combat a bullet to the chest often does not mean you are instantly dead like ARMA2 portrays. I would love to see a more realistic portrayal of wounding and bullet damage instead of the stereotypical view ARMA seems to take which is "Well If a bullet hits you then you're instantly dead"...
The problem with this would be that in the context of the game and it's objectives, players would essentially be forced to become war criminals to accomplish their goals.
Say a mission involved capturing a town and the mission was set to accomplish this when 'Opfor not present'. The only way, unless wounded opfor would count as 'dead', would mean to execute every wounded opfor in the vicinity.
Realistically I don't see this as something that can be helped, in real life If a battle takes place at a town, then there are higher percentages of combatants being WIA than KIA, but in ARMA most missions require a 100% enemy KIA rate to accomplish missions. I'm not under the illusion it can be helped though, If it was then a lot of our time in-game would be spent treating enemy combatants who we've wounded and setting details to guard them until they can be handed over as POWs.
SgtBigRig
May 21 2011, 16:56
units not being killed? oh crap its brink all over again
That's what the wounding system needs... to be fixed up and made more user friendly. You need to be able to run if you're giving first aid and come under fire.
We don't need all the overcomplicated shit. This is still a game, and development time can be spent on better things.
what matt said
Brilliant idea. I would probably also vote for a weighting scale that you will have to use prior to gaming that will gather your weight and fat % so that it can simulate how far can you run without running short on breath!
So body fat percentage is an accurate measurment of how well conditioned you are? :D
SpetS15
May 21 2011, 22:36
a wall of text nobody is gonna read
I play with ACE2, and most of the players doesnt want to be medic, because the lack of action, he should be always in cover and behind, hidden from bullets. The ACE2 wonds system is good enough, if you want more realism for medics, then I suggest you to play Emergency something sim game
galzohar
May 21 2011, 23:26
The most unrealistic part of every medical system ever implemented or suggested is the fact that a treated soldier can fight again at one point or another, and IRL it could take days/weeks/months/never to recover depending on the injury.
So basically all those fancy "medical treatment" ideas to "improve realism" don't really improve realism IMO, because the most unrealistic part is still in the system. If you want to improve realism start by fixing the most unrealistic part of the system, then work on adding detail.
But I doubt anyone would want to play with a fully realistic medical system anyway because there's no real way to put one in a way that would work gameplay-wise anyway, which again leads me to saying that those systems are rather pointless.
So you've clamped the blood vessel, now what? He gets up and starts running around the room, pwning newbs and so forth? There goes your realism.
That sums it up pretty well IMO.
@<hidden>, very good point, maybe mortally wounded soldiers could count as dead? Or maybe the mission could use "captured by Blufor" instead of "OpFor not present" because this allows for wounded, dead, fleeing and surrendering units.
@<hidden>, i suggest you read through the entire wall post before posting, it explains that this system is very much like ACE 2 only with a small amount of extra wounded states and treatment options to keep the medics job slightly more interesting and keeping first aid simple, yet challenging and fun underfire. I do like the idea of ace, but once unconsciousness is brought into the game then breathing and cardiac arrest come into play (you don't die from being just unconscious :D). If ACE2 is a good system though I don't see why in the next installment it shouldn't get better :)
The most unrealistic part of every medical system ever implemented or suggested is the fact that a treated soldier can fight again at one point or another, and IRL it could take days/weeks/months/never to recover depending on the injury.
So basically all those fancy "medical treatment" ideas to "improve realism" don't really improve realism IMO, because the most unrealistic part is still in the system. If you want to improve realism start by fixing the most unrealistic part of the system, then work on adding detail.
But I doubt anyone would want to play with a fully realistic medical system anyway because there's no real way to put one in a way that would work gameplay-wise anyway, which again leads me to saying that those systems are rather pointless.
That sums it up pretty well IMO.
I deffinitly agree with you, although in modern combat ammunition is meant to wound not to kill in order to slow down the enemy. While yes, a unit can be healed and get back up and advanced system will still feature all of the important first aid steps that happen before MEDEVAC or whatever.
The point is, although it will never be super realistic, the more the better in some people's eyes, and if it simulates the flow of combat (remember ammunition made to wound not to kill to slow down enemy) then it would work well in a lot of situations.
Check out the simple first aid system I was talking about as well, it would probably appeal to you a lot more, and @<hidden> this simple wounding module would solve the problem of units not being dead and just wounded making more simple missions a little wierd.
I honestly will have more fun most of the time with the simple system although in big games like domination, Warfare, CTI, MSO and some more hardcore COOP missions the advanced medical system would be fitting, and it can always be disabled ;)
Anyway please give feedback on simple first aid module if the advanced system isn't your thing.
CarlGustaffa
May 22 2011, 01:47
I think I prefer varying healing abilities (also by class of aid), that gradually becomes lower each time you take damage. Events that take place:
1) You get shot in the arm and goes into agony.
2) Fellow soldier stops the bleeding, and takes you out of agony state, but your injuries persist.
3) Medic can now heal individual parts only to 80%. Next time if injury goes beyond the threshold, only restore to 60%, then 40% and so on.
4) Visiting a MASH typically doubles the effectiveness of a medic. So where a medic can heal you to 40%, a MASH can get you to 80%.
5) Going to a medical center (the really BIG medic tents usually in base), can get you fully restored.
However, it pretty much requires a huge change in how firefights go down in the game. Currently pretty much each time I do take a bullet, it's a fatal one (not using the medical system). In real life when you read about massive firefights going on for hours and hours, there are hardly any casualties, certainly not many actual kills. 10 hour fight, and they killed 4 having 2 wounded. In Arma, the ratios tend to be ridiculous. Now, it's not the real world, so maybe we get added kills for not being equally careful. But I do think there are too many hits and kills when the shooting starts. We need more sway, and farther detection range for supression effects.
Chortles
May 22 2011, 04:54
This should be an addon/mod, not "core/vanilla ARMA 3."
[GR]Operative
May 22 2011, 05:30
I can see a evac system and even a FA system implemented, but this of course would not put anyone back on the action, would only improve the survive probability of the individual.
In SP it's all fine, but what about MP, mainly COOP? Is it okay to put AI teammates to only drag dead/wounded personnel? I suppose fixing penalties for not helping teammates is not enough. Maybe optional?
But all this is up to the individual team organization, of course. Teams that focus realism probably don't allow respawns and would demand the members to give assistance to wounded mates.
This should be an addon/mod, not "core/vanilla ARMA 3."
It's ok saying that and I agree in someways, but then again what would people like to see from the vanilla wounding/medical system? Instead of putting a comment like this, add to it, what would you like to see?
I hate the idea of basic CPR as in vanilla you just heal the guy and move on, heal the guy and move on. The AI are annoying as they die or get injured frequently so with an improved medical system, say bandages, this would have to be accounted for as you'd surely run out before the end of the mission. :mad: Stupid AI.
It would also have to allow AI to heal you. Maybe it could be differentiated between SP and MP.
Operative;1933376']I can see a evac system and even a FA system implemented, but this of course would not put anyone back on the action, would only improve the survive probability of the individual.
In SP it's all fine, but what about MP, mainly COOP? Is it okay to put AI teammates to only drag dead/wounded personnel? I suppose fixing penalties for not helping teammates is not enough. Maybe optional?
But all this is up to the individual team organization, of course. Teams that focus realism probably don't allow respawns and would demand the members to give assistance to wounded mates.
Do you mean that units after recieving first aid will not be fighting? :confused:
In real life a unit who is shot and wounded will require medical attention, so first aid from his buddies and a medic as soon as possible. Then he will be extracted and go to hospital or whatever, if his injuries aren't too bad he can continue fighting and get extracted a bit later.
In the advanced medic/treatment system I have proposed, a soldier who is shot and wounded will require first aid and a medic as soon as possible, but after a medic has completely treated him he can fight again - for gameplay purposes. Maybe some wounds will stay (like shaky aim, just not as bad once treated) until a field hospital is visited, but otherwise after treatment even the most mortally wounded soldiers can fight, so nothing will change from what we currently have. The only thing is first aid will have more options, and being a medic will be more important, challenging and fun.
Many people have said "what is the point of all the detailed first aid if they are going to just stand up straight after?" My answer to that is for more realism. Yes, a wounded soldier cannot be treated for severe trauma in real life then just jump up and kill shit, but this happens in EVERY other wounding system for arma as well, and this is just to keep the game fun. The other way this is somewhat more realistic is, modern ammunition made to wound, not to kill will actually wound units and actually force the team with wounded to change their tactics/slow down in order to treat their wounded. Arma has been realistic in the sense combat and battlefield drills have been quite realistic, this addition will mimic real life in the sense that it changes the flow of the battle in favour of the side inflicting casualties.
@<hidden>, I would normally agree with you there, but seeing as wounds are quite a big part of realism, it would be better if it came out right. What I mean by this is ACE and SLX, however good they may be, still have AI issues involving treatment. AI will soemtimes not heal you, they wil sometimes not use required equiptment, and will sometimes even act retarded in order to treat you/after being treated. If the creators of arma 3, BIS, did a complex wounding system themselves these issues could be more thorughly adressed, fixed and ultimately understood by them.
And people please, I understand not everyone will like the idea of a complex medic system, which is perfectly understandable, but I have also proposed 3 other major ideas that seem to have been over looked. They are:
-Simple first aid system in addition to advanced so players have option to chose.
-No more accumulating hitpoint damage to legs kill people, only die from headshots, bleeding out and (advanced system only:) cardiac arrest and non breathing.
-realistic body armour: Units with modelled hard armour will have additional protection to front of torso. Body armour is much stronger than most are aware of, stopping 2-6 7.62x51mm ball rounds at 50 meters. This can be implimented with a seperate damage value in the ammo's config known as "bodyArmour Damage" that is put into the damage formula.
Body armour can stop rounds, but depending on the round (based of real life data, although not heaps can be found) the armour plates can be shattered rendering it useless.
With a body armour system obviously more variety of ammunition wound be added (ball, armour piercing etc etc)
For those of you/us who only/also enjoy simple wounds and treatment all the time/everynow and then, the simple first aid module is pretty much the entire BIS First Aid module we have now with some tweaks such as bleeding, soldiers stopping bleeding but only medics healing from incapacitation. So please, if you do not like the advanced medic system idea purely because it is not your cup of tea, please comment on the simple medic system, body armour ideas, and no more accumulating hitpoints idea. This wound be greatly appriciated and helpful for BIS if they took notice in this thread :)
---------- Post added at 17:01 ---------- Previous post was at 16:14 ----------
First post updated - Adds in some stuff I forgot to mention/ could have made clearer
- cardiac arrest can be treated but aslong as blood levels are still low, a unit will very quickly enter cardiac arrest again. He requires IV/Plasma to refill his blood levels, although IV/Plasma will not actually wake a unit from cardiac arrest, auto-injectors, AEDs and CPR are for that.
-AEDs can be used on anyone, unlike in real life when only certain heart rates or whatever can be shocked
-In the simple first aid module, units will bleed out after time, soldiers can still stop bleeding, and medics can still 'heal' incap/agony. Consecutive shots will make bleeding faster.
Fireball
May 22 2011, 10:05
-In the simple first aid module, units will bleed out after time, soldiers can still stop bleeding, and medics can still 'heal' incap/agony. Consecutive shots will make bleeding faster.
This is how it is in Insurgency right now, but scripted - not with modules. I'd be glad already if those FA/AFA modules would work fine in MP.
The scripted version works out pretty good, but there is desync sometimes and sometimes you can't heal someone - actually some unintentional realism, which could be very well built in into such a system - sometimes someone is wounded fatally and you can't treat him on the field.
If the advanced first aid system would be something along ACE2 simulates I'd be pretty fine with it - I find it already "complicated" enough for a game but still fun. I think (pseudo-)realism like you describe should not be in games, rather in VBS (where it's probably rather fully realistic) - but that's only my humbly opinion.
I'm rather on the bandwagon for gameplay > realism in this regard.
DMarkwick
May 22 2011, 14:50
I'm rather on the bandwagon for gameplay > realism in this regard.
Me too :) I say have it all moddable, but have the release version playable. In fact there's already a solution, the medical module right? Just refine that, job done. People can either use it or not right off the bat then.
For the realism nuts, the realistic way to play is to play up until the point where you get shot. Then you shut down your PC and go to bed :)
Maddmatt
May 22 2011, 15:11
For the realism nuts, the realistic way to play is to play up until the point where you get shot. Then you shoot yourself in the head :)
Fixed :cool:
Generally getting shot means a soldier is out of action and goes home in real life (if he doesn't die). So the current 1 or 2 shots = game over is best for single player mode I think.
For multiplayer, being revived via first aid is really just a way to keep you in the action, since you can't just load a savegame when you go down. There's no way it can be realistic, we just need to accept it as a way of sacrificing realism for gameplay and enjoy the sense of teamwork it adds :)
So if BIS give the basics (that worked correctly in MP/SP environments to gameplay standards) that are refined and reworked then modders can add on. Would an AA3-like system still be satisfactory for gameplay purposes or just stick to a basic first aid system, click and go?
I don't like the FA system as there is no player choice involved. It is the same with the ACE system but at least it is a little more realistic (apart from epinephrine), the AA3 system offers more of a penalty if you get it wrong, the patient dying or losing health, so players choice is crucial and it is fast for PvP purposes.
The AA3 system works great for a PvP and CO-OP environment, though they are the fastest medics I have ever seen put on bandages. :D It has a bit of player thought and skill set to go into it with the diagnosis and treatment process. It gives you a small description (symptoms) and four options off that - OPA, saline, smelling salts and splint.
Here are two videos:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lNVBzVC7tYE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oBO4qJgyf5w
What would you like to see refined within the medical module? And remember other features relate to it, say if BIS made a new interaction menu which was easy to use and quick loading then it would make the medics role a lot easier and it wouldn't seem as cumbersome.
Innomadic
May 23 2011, 03:35
I don't get the fuss. You're all complaining about "clamping blood vessel and getting up and killing everyone", however this doesn't have to be in every mission you play, since it is obviously not built for Dom, Warfare or Insurgency. Perhaps once you've been hit mobility is reduced, aim is thrown or something that simply indicates you can't play as you were a minute ago. You'd use this in clan nights where extreme realism is the go.
This does not mean the end of revive, i see this as simply another option that can be added to the game, and if it can be added at vanilla level there will be less conflicting issues with other mods that will certainly come down the pipeline.
I also don't understand how different it is to current vanilla which constitutes of "kneeling over casualty, wave magical hands and hey presto, up and walking again", and I don't believe anyone here is of the belief that an absolute 100% realistic system where you die you never play the game again is a good thing, but this is simply an effort to increase complexity/immersion/realism to those who want it.
Max Power
May 23 2011, 06:39
One potential problem is that you have extreme realism going into extreme unrealism, which creates a contrasting experience, which will give the player a break in immersion. I think I had talked about this before.
One potential problem is that you have extreme realism going into extreme unrealism, which creates a contrasting experience, which will give the player a break in immersion. I think I had talked about this before.
So what meets in the middle.
Max Power
May 23 2011, 07:13
I don't know if there is a meeting in the middle. That would be for a game designer to figure out, I think.
Smookie
May 23 2011, 11:54
So body fat percentage is an accurate measurment of how well conditioned you are? :D
It's a factor, yes...
Splintert
May 23 2011, 22:26
I think the current system is quick and easy. There's no reason for any player of a game to be 'out of action' while another sits there and works on them. In real life (though i have no experience, don't take my word for it) I highly doubt that combat medics perform more than basic stopping of bleeding/preparation for transport and actual treatment after they are flown out of the combat.
Sure, it would be more realistic, but when does it cross the line between realism and not fun?
Well then, give an alternative. This vanilla system is shot -> down -> first aid -> good to go. Or shot -> down -> dies. There is a big reason to be out of action, you've just been shot. If it was based on the percentage of damage then that would be reasonable because if it was a minor or non-life threatening would you could obviously fight back, depending on the severity it might be actually getting up and fighting back or staying prone. But you do not want a COD-like system of taking many rounds and carrying on operating like normal - that is stupidity.
There is no basic stopping of bleeding in the vanilla version, and medics perform a variety of tasks as well as what you stated. I personally don't care about medevac, I don't agree with that side of the advanced system - I think the person should be able to operate, move around, maybe to be 100% healed (they would be shaking, have bad aim) they must visit a medic tent. But for gameplay purposes they should be healed there and then.
If there was a way to stop the bleeding state via bandages then at least it would be feasable. You would have limited numbers of bandages so it wouldn't be unlimited. This is like norrin's revive system with a number of revives but only put into the vanilla game.
You could easily add in advanced or basic modules to fulfill all levels. I don't care if it's not realistic, as long as the F/A system get's a bit of work. The bandages system could be classed as the advanced version; though it is not that difficult, and the basic version being the F/A system.
And by the way this advanced version is nothing but a diagnosis menu with a bunch of options off that. It's not too difficult, the good things it adds is replicating somekind of real soft tissue damage based on hit location (which is hard to do in A2 due to the engines bugs with hit location). If you don't like it then fine but for BIS to fix and add some engine features that would be great; like fixing hit locations, differentiating soft tissue, vehicular and construction material and damage, improving the medical module, improving of wound ballistics and terminal ballistics based on the ammunition you use (this could open up for adding different kinds of small arms ammunition) and finally implementing a basic system for body armour so modders can improve upon. Not all may be feasable in the engine or popular, that's for developers and the public to decide but giving the basics will allow modders to do a heap!
And by all means fix it where getting shot in toe sends 0.2 damage to the head. This system is not good for the medical treatment or wounding.
No Use For A Name
May 24 2011, 01:30
I want a more realistic system, but not full realism. I hate shooting moving targets several hundred meters away, and only seeing a little puff of blood while they seem unaffected. I want to see some more REACTION to getting shot besides heavy breathing and blur.
Also, I would like to be able to at least limp my way to safety if one of my legs gets hit...as it is now you either can still run full speed or can't walk at all.
Basically I just want to see some better wounding effects, not a fully realistic first aid system
So better blood splatter, identifable, maybe like the ACE system where if they run you can see it on the ground. The reaction sounds great, this would be good with new animations - you can tell if you have hit or not in the way the character acts, big point.
Militantsausage
May 24 2011, 02:10
I want a more realistic system, but not full realism. I hate shooting moving targets several hundred meters away, and only seeing a little puff of blood while they seem unaffected. I want to see some more REACTION to getting shot besides heavy breathing and blur.
Also, I would like to be able to at least limp my way to safety if one of my legs gets hit...as it is now you either can still run full speed or can't walk at all.
Basically I just want to see some better wounding effects, not a fully realistic first aid system
I agree with this for sure, probably even more important than a realistic first aid system, but the two could go hand in hand, once again, in a game it is more about realistic gameplay than actual treatments, realistic gameplay would mean, making medics job harder and the potnetial to get it wrong, and also having to medevac wounded, although I think it would be fine with this, but then at base say they go into a medic tent for a minute or two then they are good to go, but reaction to getting hit is very, very important is isn't something I see much of in Arma 2.
I think arma 3 needs a medic system similar to the one in americas army 3, but more complex....
Rick Rawlings
May 24 2011, 04:34
I think the system should be changed to something like this:
Open console
Type "this setDammage 0"
Close console.
Seriously, I have to say that this is a case where more "realism" does not equal more fun. If you want to go to a system like AA3, fine, but anything more than that would detract from the experience. At the end of the day, either the guy can get up to fight again or he can't. For most people who forked over $60, they are going to want to get back up, or if they have to wait through a lengthy heal phase, they will just hit respawn. As soon as we agree that wounded soldiers will be back in the fight, we are just arguing about realistic unrealism that ends up with the same result: a recovered fighting soldier or a dead respawning one. I would rather have resources spent on something like a working m203 sight, or windage on scopes, or realistic accuracy on AI or the ability to drop a grenade while moving or the ability to peek over grass or turn around elegantly in a hallway or have non-clunky dialogue like "hi, THERE" or CQB AI or undercover operatives or any number of other polishing touches to a great series.
my $.02
RR
If you want to go to a system like AA3, fine, but anything more than that would detract from the experience.
And what should an AA3 like system have in it?
Rick Rawlings
May 24 2011, 05:46
And what should an AA3 like system have in it?
America's Army 3. It should have the stuff it already has in it. I am quite content with that stuff. Anything more than that prolongs the "He can fight/He's dead Jim" situation that we must have for an entertainment product. How viable would a "Wow, my femur was shattered and I have to sit here for the rest of the mission" situation be from a gameplay point-of-view?
RR
Innomadic
May 24 2011, 05:52
Yeah the medic system in AA3 is about the only thing they got right, you actually learned something in those training scenarios.
America's Army 3. It should have the stuff it already has in it.
OPA, Saline, Smelling Salts and Splint.
So OPA for non-breathing/airway management, saline for weak/dehydrated/in shock, smelling salts for unconscious and splint for broken or fractured bones, they had it this way in AA3. Bandages were there but not used in the action menu, you just held down a key and it told you what part of the body it was bandaging and bandaged it up in three seconds. And it was also randomised, I don't think it cared about where you were hit, it would just generate something wrong with you.
I believe there could be a better system than that as in the hitlocations knowing where you were hit and it would adjust off that. To me at least this would be better, it would cause more severity of wounds when you hit AI/players in a good wounding location - instead of them taking it like it was nothing as seen in AA3.
P.S. No one said you sit there for the rest of the mission, the post said "Splint can applied in a short amount of time to a unit with a broken leg to help them walk once they have been treated for pain. Be advised though walking without bleeding being treated to first will only increse the severity of the bleeding." but I understand where you are coming from, if you can self-treat that would be better - with better animations of limping and what not, even though with a broken femur you wouldn't be able to limp nevermind anything else - it is better for a gameplay choice.
I think the system should be changed to something like this:
Open console
Type "this setDammage 0"
Close console.
Seriously, I have to say that this is a case where more "realism" does not equal more fun. If you want to go to a system like AA3, fine, but anything more than that would detract from the experience. At the end of the day, either the guy can get up to fight again or he can't. For most people who forked over $60, they are going to want to get back up, or if they have to wait through a lengthy heal phase, they will just hit respawn. As soon as we agree that wounded soldiers will be back in the fight, we are just arguing about realistic unrealism that ends up with the same result: a recovered fighting soldier or a dead respawning one. I would rather have resources spent on something like a working m203 sight, or windage on scopes, or realistic accuracy on AI or the ability to drop a grenade while moving or the ability to peek over grass or turn around elegantly in a hallway or have non-clunky dialogue like "hi, THERE" or CQB AI or undercover operatives or any number of other polishing touches to a great series.
my $.02
RR
Look mate I am sick to death with people like you coming here and complaining about an advanced system. IF YOU ACTUALLY READ THE FIRST POST YOU WOULD SEE THAT THERE WOULD BE AN OPTIONAL ADVANCED SYSTEM AND AN OPTIONAL SIMPLE SYSTEM. I completely understand that many people may not like this idea, but instead of talking shit about it give some feedback for the system that you would use (the simple one). Seriously that is the same as a straight man dissing on gay porn on a porn site, he isn't ever going to use it so it shouldn't bother him, but by complaining that it shouldnt be allowed he is screwing it up for homosexual people. Use a little bit of common sense mate before posting.
Well at the end of the day wounding depends on shot placement and especially on low FPS or low performance servers and computers you tend to see AI act all fine when shot in a perfectly acceptable place for them to drop to the ground. I think this is an important factor also, it's definately related to hit locations and hit detection.
this is a good idea.. complexity is what sets arma apart from other games. Having this would actually give the medic a true role and would reserve the role for people willing to learn, furthermore it would allow a natural dynamic treatment governed by the efficiency and skill of each person, which would add to the medics value and individual player value..
If you don't like it don't be a medic... simple as that...
same should be said about pilots.. make the aircraft too complex to use to prevent people with obvious flight incompetence from flying.
Its a military sim.. im real life if your too dumb you become a rifleman or a latrine operator...
Innomadic
May 24 2011, 07:57
latrine operator...
Hey, thats hardcore shit, don't dis it.
:yay:
Hey, thats hardcore shit, don't dis it.
I suppose its pretty technical, may require someone 'special'.
eddie247
May 24 2011, 11:13
I see this episode as a last stand type of combat so realism like soldier is shot then goes home to recover would not be an option.
That being said, ironing out the current medic glitches like in insurgency where healing fails and you pretty much have to rejoin the server, and adding a little more complexity to the injury system with possible addition of defribulator and heart/blood monitoring and blood transfusion if neccesary would add a little more skill and interest to the medic role.
Is there currently no simulation of body armour in the chest? Mb i'm thinking of another fps which in noob mode takes about 5 shots of 7.62 in the chest to kill someone, however frustrating it can be is probably more realistic than many other games however i struggle to believe than 2 shots of the same ammo does not dismember a limb or render it completely incapacitated.
Total limb dismemberment is not something I would put a priority on (albeit adding to RL factor) but the ability to disable a limb would nicer and especially if it reduced the speed of say reloading afterwards as the soldier could only use one arm.
I guess i would like to see injuries affect stamina/ balance as well much like it does in ACE.
Will keep watching this space though, looking forward to many marine assaults, walking out of the water to slit enemy patrolmens throats and james bond style underwater harpoon gun fights LOLLOLOLOLOL
ZacharyHawk
May 24 2011, 11:45
Wow! thats gonna be hard.Because im not experience with medical stuff lol anyway who cares atleast you get to know or understand it and atleast we can enjoy "BIS" new mil sim."ArmA III"
Rick Rawlings
May 25 2011, 00:26
Look mate I am sick to death with people like you coming here and complaining about an advanced system. IF YOU ACTUALLY READ THE FIRST POST YOU WOULD SEE THAT THERE WOULD BE AN OPTIONAL ADVANCED SYSTEM AND AN OPTIONAL SIMPLE SYSTEM. I completely understand that many people may not like this idea, but instead of talking shit about it give some feedback for the system that you would use (the simple one). Seriously that is the same as a straight man dissing on gay porn on a porn site, he isn't ever going to use it so it shouldn't bother him, but by complaining that it shouldnt be allowed he is screwing it up for homosexual people. Use a little bit of common sense mate before posting.
Hey, if you are sick to death, try this:
Open console
Type "This setDammage 0"
Close console.
I did read most of the first post. I don't think I "talked shit" about it, I think I expressed my opinion that it would be a waste of resources to tart it up too much for something that essentially boils down to "He can fight\he's dead". The server list I can access is already pretty bare with ping, mods, number of people playing and other stuff factored in, so a split like this would reduce it even more so it would affect me. I am all for a more realistic implementation when it adds to game play, but you could literally come up with a more complete role for everybody in the squad. I think a massive expansion for just the medic doesn't make much sense. Having said that, I do usually jump on as a medic when I play as I enjoy helping people out and playing that role. I don't really see how making it into a huge mini game would enhance my enjoyment when there is so much else to shore up in this series, which does tend to suffer from mission creep. That's my opinion and I think my sense has just the right amount of common in it. I might as well say "I'm sick of people starting posts and then dictating how people can respond to it in a discussion forum."
RR
I don't really see how making it into a huge mini game would enhance my enjoyment
Its not just about you as a medic. It would also be to make death more distasteful. As it is just a game people are less concerned about the idea of being shot at. Allot of people go rambo-ing into a town just to get shot then revived.
If reviving was such an ordeal then people would think twice about wandering off by themselves and incline people to be more combat cautious and work as a team... This is why "revive" was introduced in the first place and it works great.
I think it would enhance the game play on many levels...
hmmm I think we need a poll ?
Rick Rawlings
May 25 2011, 03:27
Its not just about you as a medic. It would also be to make death more distasteful. As it is just a game people are less concerned about the idea of being shot at. Allot of people go rambo-ing into a town just to get shot then revived.
If reviving was such an ordeal then people would think twice about wondering of by themselves and incline people to be more combat cautious and work as a team... This is why "revive" was introduced in the first place and it works great.
I think it would enhance the game play on many levels...
hmmm I think we need a poll ?
I certainly don't disagree with this sentiment, however, I think that there are a host of issues that need to be taken into consideration before death is made more punitive. In real life, I have a much wider field of view than even my 16:10 monitor field. My resolution is much higher, there are no LOD's to worry about when I am trying to identify friend or foe, people don't actually warp across time and space when I am trying to aim at them, etc. Just Sunday I was plunking away at someone when my rounds kept "sparking" off them. I aimed down slightly and my shots were hitting the "dirt" even though the "dirt" strike was in mid air in front of his face. I then got a couple of blood spurts out of him but he managed to find the magic pixel to shoot to kill me before I got him. The warp on a 69 ping at sniping distance was impossible. I totally agree about getting people to play more milsim and coordinated, but I already feel punished enough when I am killed in this game. If they lock all those issues down for the 3rd iteration of this series, then I would be up for some more difficulty :D
RR
p.s. I can't resist... what are they wondering about?
I certainly don't disagree with this sentiment, however, I think that there are a host of issues that need to be taken into consideration before death is made more punitive. In real life, I have a much wider field of view than even my 16:10 monitor field. My resolution is much higher, there are no LOD's to worry about when I am trying to identify friend or foe, people don't actually warp across time and space when I am trying to aim at them, etc. Just Sunday I was plunking away at someone when my rounds kept "sparking" off them. I aimed down slightly and my shots were hitting the "dirt" even though the "dirt" strike was in mid air in front of his face. I then got a couple of blood spurts out of him but he managed to find the magic pixel to shoot to kill me before I got him. The warp on a 69 ping at sniping distance was impossible. I totally agree about getting people to play more milsim and coordinated, but I already feel punished enough when I am killed in this game. If they lock all those issues down for the 3rd iteration of this series, then I would be up for some more difficulty :D
RR
p.s. I can't resist... what are they wondering about?
LOL sure ok, i do understand but you cannot detract from features because of bugs. The annoying issues you describe I feel do need to be tended to, but you cannot allow those issues that are not in anyway shape or form designed to be that way to punish you.. As for your peripheral perspective and load issues you also cannot use it as an excuse to dismiss a feature.. otherwise games in general will be featureless..
To remedy your field of view try a 3 monitor setup ? and a beefier system for lod issues ? I have no issues with IFF as a rag on head is pretty easy to spot :p
As for my wondering issues.... I was wondering if wander was what I was wondering about...:D
Rick Rawlings
May 25 2011, 05:08
LOL sure ok, i do understand but you cannot detract from features because of bugs. The annoying issues you describe I feel do need to be tended to, but you cannot allow those issues that are not in anyway shape or form designed to be that way to punish you.. As for your peripheral perspective and load issues you also cannot use it as an excuse to dismiss a feature.. otherwise games in general will be featureless..
To remedy your field of view try a 3 monitor setup ? and a beefier system for lod issues ? I have no issues with IFF as a rag on head is pretty easy to spot :p
As for my wondering issues.... I was wondering if wander was what I was wondering about...:D
Fair enough, although I would counter that many of those bugs have been around long enough to qualify as features at this point! :nener:
Sorry Rick, Bush is a clan member of my clan and he stated over skype it wasn't aimed at you, it was aimed at other people who come and say something but do not add to the discussion.
It's all about asking what people want and trying to push the system a little bit more, if people come on and say 'no I don't like this' or another repetitive comment without reading any posts then fine but put down what you would like to see, it is about Arma 3's medical system - not just a system like this with both advanced (realistic) and basic modules.
It's not just expanding the medics role either, it's expanding the engine and fixing common gamebreaking, feature-breaking bugs like hitlocations and hitdetection not working 100%. The engine doesn't always know where you have hit and it sends some amount of the damage to the rest of the body even if you were hit in the toe, you'd get damage to the head.
This would make it hard for modders trying to mod a realistic system of treating an injured part, say the leg, instead of the leg, chest and head because it can't calculate that properly.
Do not worry about ping as of now. This medical system (which won't be implemented but should be discussed) wouldn't be the ping heightening, lag increasing problem of the game. But I agree, the netcode needs work and other multiplayer issues like this would fix a whole lot of problems.
Hopefully the blood splatter, animations and sense of getting hit will be improved. But you can only hope. :D
Fair enough, although I would counter that many of those bugs have been around long enough to qualify as features at this point! :nener:
True, true enough :rolleyes: hopefully that will change...
Hey, if you are sick to death, try this:
Open console
Type "This setDammage 0"
Close console.
I did read most of the first post. I don't think I "talked shit" about it, I think I expressed my opinion that it would be a waste of resources to tart it up too much for something that essentially boils down to "He can fight\he's dead". The server list I can access is already pretty bare with ping, mods, number of people playing and other stuff factored in, so a split like this would reduce it even more so it would affect me. I am all for a more realistic implementation when it adds to game play, but you could literally come up with a more complete role for everybody in the squad. I think a massive expansion for just the medic doesn't make much sense. Having said that, I do usually jump on as a medic when I play as I enjoy helping people out and playing that role. I don't really see how making it into a huge mini game would enhance my enjoyment when there is so much else to shore up in this series, which does tend to suffer from mission creep. That's my opinion and I think my sense has just the right amount of common in it. I might as well say "I'm sick of people starting posts and then dictating how people can respond to it in a discussion forum."
RR
First of all, I appologise for snapping, I was tired and grumpy at the time, although it is still no excuse for typing without thinking. I will discuss all issues you have since brought up further down this post. Please read carefully, as us arguing isn't going to do anything other than get us even more pissed off and possibly get this thread locked.
The advanced system would be optional, and you could always use the simple system if that is your taste. The medic system would not be like a minigame but more like AA3's or ACE2's system, more similarilly set up to ace but more like AA3 in the sense that there is more for the medic to do and a medic can make mistakes leading to negative consequences, making the game more challenging, especially under stress. I understand how you may not want this, but please remember that it [the advanced medical system] is not being forced upon you, but it is only an option for hardcore players who do enjoy the extra realism/challenge.
I would really appreciate it if you (and others) would refrain from getting oppiniated and coming on just to blurt out how this wont make the game any more realistic in your oppinions or how it will ruin the game for you because, quite frankly, you never will be forced to play with it. Instead of complaining about a system you will not use, thus giving this forum bad reputation, (hiding other various game improvements that we can all agree would help the game, e.g. body armour simulation or no accumulating hitpoints to legs killing someone outright) please give feedback on the system that you will use and tell me how it could get better be constructive.
I understand how the advanced system will not be fully realistic in the sense it involves medics realistically trating someone, but then the patient will suddenly rise up and be good as new, thus contradicting any realism before hand but this is not the reason I am proposing an advanced system. The reason I am putting this idea out there is because although many players think that the current flow of combat in arma (while sped up with insane amounts of casualties :D) is realistic, it is missing some vital elements. "Find, fix, flank, finish" works well in theory, but what happens when ou come under fire? You obviously have break fire drills and each clan probably has their own variation of break fire manouvers, but what happens when someone gets hit?
In real life, ammunition is actually designed to cause extreme wounds rather than outright death. (Yet we have can't use hollow points because it is inhumane :j:) This is because a wounded soldier will require a combat effective soldier to tend to and trade the majority of his attention to the wounded soldier, thus slowing down his squad. It will put the team who inflicted the casualty at an advantage as the team with the casualty is now technically two men down. And in massive scale battles that only ever happen in vietnam and WWII movies (and real life :p) a wounded soldier will require two men to be carried off in a stretcher. While massive scale battles do not happen often in arma 2 (sometimes in warfare or MSO, mainly MSO), squad on squad certainly does happen and the idea that a wounded soldier is eqal to two men down will still apply with the advanced medical system. (although perhaps stretchers could be put in aswell :))
When it comes to potential problems with a system like this, I don't see what could really go wrong as long as BIS fix their netcode issues. ACE AI know how to treat a unit, the major issues in ACE wounds relating to AI could easilly be ironed out if ACE wounds were in vanilla arma 2 by BIS pre or post-release. Other issues like lag, warp and other stuff (this system on with arma2's engine would fail due to desync causing someone to be unable to treat someone else) will still be there if BIS decide not to work on their netcode issues but otherwise a system like this would go reasonably well, any bugs would eventually ironed out and AI would work well, rather than if the game was made by third-party addon makers.
Having multiple options of treatment would benifit arma because if the medic does something he shouldn't, he may kill or further wound the patient. This is so in AA3 (America's Army 3) and works very, very well. The ACE2 mod's wounding system also works quite well, and a cross between the ACE interface and the multiple treatment options/window for medic failure from AA3 would make a perfect wounding system. Now, some players may see this as a little set back if they at first beleive all the fancy language (believe me this is simple stuff if you are interested and easy to learn.) and some may see it is unneccesary, although I am going to suggest play ACE2 with ace_wounds activated, but every time you see the words bleeding, bandage, pain, morphine, unconscious, epinephrine, I would like to to replace those words with these:
bleeding - poisoned
bandage - antidote
pain - Low mana
morphine - mana potion
unconscious - possessed
epinephrine - revival herb
medkit - health potion
I bet playing like that with the whole dungens and dragons theme would have really screwed up any immersion the medic system would otherwise have, which is why I for one believe having realistic treatment names will just go to make arma 3 more realistic. And at the end of the day the simple system will still be an option (probably best if itis default and the advanced system is an option but either way they are both options) and any problems such as warping, lagging and other netcode related issues will not affect. Netcode needs to be fixed in the next game regardless of whethe the medic system is payed any attention to, and I for one have got my fingers crossed. :p
Foxtrot litter stretcher by TacMed Solutions can be used by one man, you attach it over your body and just pull it with your body so apparently you can still have you weapon up but it rocks it quite a bit....
ACE wounds was a lot better, I agree. If BIS ironed out the bugs for them. :) Only problem I had was the use of epinephrine all the time, smelling salts could be semi-realistic like that and be used without actually using medication. I can't be bothered going into detail but great job by the ACE devs. IT certainly stopped us getting shot as much... :D
Better simulation of Medevac and the whole logistics would indeed be very interesting. The measures and logitical steps involved are in every aspect equal to air operations or large Infanrty operations. It's a aspect can could indeed be very interesting ...but not from the perspective of the casualty.
Also an addition, some vehicles could have life support, call in a medevac for critical casualties that medic cannot fully resolve.
Innomadic
May 25 2011, 15:41
...but not from the perspective of the casualty.
i.e me, i always seem to get shot first, even if i'm pulling the rear of a formation...and shot again as i get up...thankfully dom is revive, but still, its irritating.
The good thing about this would be actually testing the skills of the pilots in landing in a hostile environment. Perhaps the heavily wounded player could simply respawn once taken to the correct spot so that he can keep playing?
I mean THATS not realistic, but you've still gone through the motions of a medevac, leaving a team 2-3 (depending on method of transport on foot) men down for a time. Make it challenging. So the best way this can be implemented is if the AI is tweaked so there aren't any BS kills. I think the entire level needs to be raised in terms of quality before we can fit this in without hassle.
Ohhh nearly missed the discussion on my favorite topic......:)
I agree here is something where ARMA could stand out again and be the first to make revolutionary game play changes!
I hate this magic healing thing too and I agree that making the magic healing more complicated does not really help.
It should not be possible to heal in the field only stabilizing should be possible.
And no I do not like to play a incapacitated soldier but it should be possible to switch over to a new (AI) soldier while the AI overtakes the role of the wounded. Of course you do not have to you are free to continue with the wounded character - especially with minor injury.
You could eather bring a number of AI soldiers to the front or just deposit some at a base. The point system should be based on number of Soldiers wounded, killed or MIA.
The most important feature here would be the feature to not only drag but also Transport the dead and wounded.
It would put the player in the role to take care of all casualty's and to organize their treatment and extraction (possibly under fire).
I made several posts on this topic before.
here is one:
http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?t=106757
Yokhanan
May 26 2011, 01:45
Foxtrot litter stretcher by TacMed Solutions can be used by one man, you attach it over your body and just pull it with your body so apparently you can still have you weapon up but it rocks it quite a bit...
Funny enough I decided to Google that to see a picture and came across this:
http://i3.ytimg.com/vi/t3K6whhsTjA/0.jpg
I take it this isn't the "litter" you spoke of? :p
Rick Rawlings
May 26 2011, 04:32
I understand how you may not want this, but please remember that it [the advanced medical system] is not being forced upon you, but it is only an option for hardcore players who do enjoy the extra realism/challenge.
I would really appreciate it if you (and others) would refrain from getting oppiniated and coming on just to blurt out how this wont make the game any more realistic in your oppinions or how it will ruin the game for you because, quite frankly, you never will be forced to play with it. Instead of complaining about a system you will not use, thus giving this forum bad reputation, (hiding other various game improvements that we can all agree would help the game, e.g. body armour simulation or no accumulating hitpoints to legs killing someone outright) please give feedback on the system that you will use and tell me how it could get better be constructive.
First of all, I had no problem with your first post, you are free to post how you feel, it keeps things interesting if we don't censor ourselves too much beyond basic civility. Second of all, I have already said that an AA3 system would probably be fine as long as it wasn't too complicated, as that would just be something else that could go wrong. As I have stated before, I would have to play it at some point. In the western US, I usually have exactly 1 server with a decent ping/anybody on it/non-password protected/non-ace mod/non sahrani life. So if we split on simple vs complex med system, I would have exactly .5 servers to choose from. The one I have is usually a Domination server and I usually play as a medic and I can say that this advanced system would probably affect only 10% of the population, based on number of medic slots. It's a fine idea that I don't have any real problem with on paper, but my hopes for Arma III is that it will be Arma II done flawless. I would rather have a smaller feature set done well. Development on a medic system would take away from development of something else. I have bought in since Operation Flashpoint hoping that each version would live up to my hopes. I would love to see one version with a killer campaign, strong, tight multiplayer, convincing movement, clean interface and competent voice acting. Only at that point would I want development centered on more complexity.
Summing up:
I like the idea of an advanced medic system.
I would play it if available.
I would almost certainly enjoy it at least to some degree.
I do not think it is a good use of development time when there is so much else to shore up, especially since it impacts such a small number of players at any given time (and I would probably be one of them when playing online).
I also wanted new Star Wars movies. Sometimes wants should go unfulfilled.
Thanks,
RR
there's some pretty interesting ideas circulating... But if they added them all and injured soldier would take hours to recover..
there needs to be a balance..
It needs to be more penalizing than the current revive but I think there should be a level of severity where the casualty can be patched up and become combat effective again until more convenient treatment can be applied for a full recovery... like fore example limping around like in ghost recon..
As for more severe cases a medevac should be required, either by chopper or support vehicle. Recovery should be quick to prevent annoyance..
Treatment and severity should be dynamic so it is interesting and challenging every time.. As for how the medic treats the casualty I think there's plenty of good ideas already been said for that...
@<hidden> ...LOL. This - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=snOi4BXfes0.
@<hidden> Good ideas. Just reading up on "having to find them" - great idea as I hate the way when they are down a big medic symbol comes over their body that you can see from kilometers away. This would put a sense of teamwork into the mix and no running around like headless chickens. That is one improvement they can make to the current, maybe based on difficulty, e.g. "Expert".
@<hidden> - hours to recover? We don't want that, me and Tom fully agree - minutes maximum and no longer than 5, we're impatient haha. :D Medevac would be cool if improved upon.... but that could be done by modders and mission makers, we're improving it on the MSO as we speak. If animations were improved for it also, especially when including a stretcher - hopefully modders will do this with ease with the updated engine. I agree, limping, hit detection on where you shot.
Population will make the choice - I think they'd go for a very simple system, probably one that wasn't improved at all! If A2 medical system could be improved as of now, I wonder what people would want...
An improved system with multiple treatment options and the possibility for a medic to stuff up with negative consequences, no more instant healing, first aid for everyone, actual treatment for medics only, extreme cases need medics to stand close by to continue to stabalize. Those are the main things I would reaaally like to see, the rest is just an idea that could be used.
What does everyone think of the body armour idea? As now body armour might as well no be there as it doesn't do much in arma 2.
---------- Post added at 14:11 ---------- Previous post was at 14:09 ----------
I am quite busy this week, but if we could keep the suggestions rolling I shall update the first post with all the favourite ideas.
What does everyone think of the body armour idea? As now body armour might as well no be there as it doesn't do much in arma 2.
yeah I suppose. Bis said in their features that soldiers have customizable load outs hope that includes body armour, light to heavy affecting movement maybe ? I don't have any personal experience with body armour so im not sure on the penetration values, but I'm pretty sure it is useless against a 7.62
Depends what type, material and level. Tom has all the statistics. But some do not stop AP 7.62. They are only resistant to multiple hits, they may have a good ratio to stop one hit but they are not 100% bullet proof. Some do stop regular 7.62 and above, there are some that can stop quite a lot of rounds, the reason they don't use other types? Weight, cost, practicality, a lot of things.
And you have to differentiate soft armour from hard, soft being kevlar and such - easily penetratable by 5.56/7.62 but it can resist the impact of a 9mm, shrapnel impact and such.
level III armour (used by USMC, ADF, UK, most US Army etc) will stop 2-6 M80 7.62x51mm ball rounds (standard 7.62) at 50 meters depending on how far apart the impacts are. ;)
Body armour makes a HUGE difference, trust me, with proper body armour implimentation USMC versus Russia in arma 2 would require a shit tonne of those black tipped M995 5.56x45mm rounds that only special forces get to use every now and then in their m249s... expensive.
---------- Post added at 16:04 ---------- Previous post was at 15:54 ----------
But with a good wounding system, (one that features an agony system) AP rounds aren't too bad, they atleast tumble more often than the older M855 (being phased out for m855a1 and mk318) meaning it will statistically give a bigger wound profile (although the m855a1 (or m855 when it works properlly) will fragment causing massive a massive permanent cavity (partly because the fragments soften tissue before it is stretched by temporary cavity, meaning unlike other wounds the temp cavity will actually do alot more than stretch the tissue ;)) and will be much harder to treat and will cause more bleeding etc etc.).
Laqueesha
May 29 2011, 06:22
yeah I suppose. Bis said in their features that soldiers have customizable load outs hope that includes body armour, light to heavy affecting movement maybe ? I don't have any personal experience with body armour so im not sure on the penetration values, but I'm pretty sure it is useless against a 7.62
There is a body armour simulation in ArmA 2. It's basically increased hit points for body armour equipped infantry.
There is a body armour simulation in ArmA 2. It's basically increased hit points for body armour equipped infantry.
Which isn't what you want. If it penetrates it should cause the damage... increasing hitpoints doesn't work because you begin to see them take hits they shouldn't.
Laqueesha
May 29 2011, 06:34
Which isn't what you want. If it penetrates it should cause the damage... increasing hitpoints doesn't work because you begin to see them take hits they shouldn't.
Exactly.
Even with the current 'system' for body armour the armour is penetrated wayyyy too easilly.
They should make it; head shot, instant kill, no matter the arguement. You hit the brain group, you are down and out. If it penetrates it should do a great deal of damage; if it doesn't then it doesn't. You could simulate them getting hit by their body moving to the impact, say for instance hit the shoulder and their shoulder is knocked back. It should have no blood splatter when it doesn't penetrate.
They need to have a better formula with multiplyers or something for different ammunition types. So the engine can differentiate AP from ball. If it penetrates it should do a good deal of damage. And better hitlocations/hitdetection so there is no more 2 shots in the head to kill just because they have 'simulated' body armour values.... You can then detect if the place the projectile hit was armoured or non-armoured.
There are some vital places that should be accounted for, brain and spine (CNS), aorta and heart, very high chance in the neck... even a .22 from a weapon with a homemade suppressor can kill when it hits in neck - as heard of in Chechnya.
Other than that I really have no ideas how to simulate body armour in game.
easy, look at ACE's vehicle damage system. They achieve this by adding another damage value to the ammo's config called vehicleDamage and then shove that in a formula that determains the damage dealt. Do the same for body armour and you have an improved body armour system.
Laqueesha
May 29 2011, 18:36
Maybe make the torso and head invulnerable to bullets (but not explosives and incendiaries) and only have the legs and arms exposed? It's rough, but it gets the job done when it comes to more powerful body armour. Or, instead of invulnerable, half the damage or lessen by even more, say three quarters? Getting hit in body armour by a bullet still hurts and can do some damage even if the projectile does not penetrate.
AirborneCowhead
May 29 2011, 23:26
I'm all for adding to the Medic player's experience, but i'm not sure whether all the OP's points would be the right way to go (although there are some good ideas).
From a realism point of view, if you're hit it's game over. You don't keep playing with splinted legs or a tourniquet on (everyone i've ever splinted in real life has gone on to lose limb(s). Even a non-penetrating hit to your body armour would probably be a show stopper, and can still kill you. If the in-game outcome of the OP's suggestion is that a splinted/tourniqeted/AED'd (Dismounted medics wouldn't have these) casualty gets to carry on after successful treatment then that's just not realistic. In striving for realism it would push the game the other way.
Ways to implement the OP's ideas might be that a player dies and leaves behind a treatable AI avatar that a medic scores points/unlocks benefits for the team by saving, although I guess the saved 'casualty avatar thing' would just have to disappear once that was done. Or get loaded onto CASEVAC for bonus points : ).
I have to admit there was a lot of stuff to read and I skimmed far from all of it, but I wasn't sure if the OP was actually a developer for either the game or a mod, hence I felt the need to reply. I do think there's some good ideas, the medic could do with being sexed up a bit. : ).
Oh, and I don't think anyone uses Quik-clot anymore (the UK doesn't, although there's old stuff still kicking about).
Maybe make the torso and head invulnerable to bullets (but not explosives and incendiaries) and only have the legs and arms exposed? It's rough, but it gets the job done when it comes to more powerful body armour. Or, instead of invulnerable, half the damage or lessen by even more, say three quarters? Getting hit in body armour by a bullet still hurts and can do some damage even if the projectile does not penetrate.
That wouldn't be very realistic though. Modern body armour can stop multiple rifle rounds from close distances, and a non-penetrating round will only bruise and wind th target at worst. When talking about modern body armour, it is important to remember that we are not just talking about kevlar vests, which are designed mainly to reduce the probability of shrapnel and pistol rounds penetrating, in this case rifle rounds (because of their shape) will easilly penetrate the kevlar vest.
Hard armour plates on the other hand are very very tough and will stop multiple rounds and therefore allowing non penetrating rounds to still do damage isn't really realistic, and making a unit invulnerable (except arms and legs) is unrealistic too as the ceramic will crack and shatter allowing rounds to penetrate AND seeing as today (not to mention in 10-15 years time when arma 3 takes place:p) many big and modern militaries are fielding hard armour (USA, UK, Aus & NZL, Russia, Germany... heh, even China) obviously armour piercing ammunition will be used when fighting another 'armoured force'.
@<hidden>, I do believe Quik Clot is still used occasionally as a last resort because it is very dangerous (due to it having to be completely removed before surgery:p) and other methods of administering hemostatic agents (other powders, injections and even bandages and field dressings) are being tested and fielded although the same principles would still apply to a game; haemostatic agents are used to stop bleeding:p
Please read up on the first post, as I am about to update it with some important information mentioned elsewhere in this thread that may be missed by people who don't have time to read more than just the opening post.
I have said this before but the point of a medic system like this is not to make the wounds and treatment super realistic (because in real life the casualties do not just get up and continue fighting) but to improve the realism and authenticity of the flow of modern combat. Modern ammo is designed to wounds and not kill because a wounded man is essentially two men down as atleast one man is required to administer first aid and further medical treatment by a combat medic will slow down the squad thus disrupting their movement/plans. Some have suggested MEDEVAC, and although this is a good idea for single player, in my oppinion it wouldn't work to well in a good chunk of multipayer games as many do not have respawns (hardcore clans and communities that is, the MEDEVAC idea would work wonders in public games with AI that can be switched to and played as by a wounded soldier). Maybe if the MEDEVAC was a module to be put in by the mission designer that had to be synced with an existing (or non-existing just like the artillery module) MEDEVAC vehicle (helicopter, ambulance Humvee, BMP etc etc) that had to be set up would work?
Although a unit getting up and walking after having a medic do his thing is unrealistic, it would still add playability to the game while at the same time giving consequences to the wounded player and every other medic system in arma 2 allows wounded units to get treated then fight, so it is nothing new:p
a wall of text nobody is gonna read
I play with ACE2, and most of the players doesnt want to be medic, because the lack of action, he should be always in cover and behind, hidden from bullets. The ACE2 wonds system is good enough, if you want more realism for medics, then I suggest you to play Emergency something sim game
I love playing medic. I even led the SSG medical group for a while. Now I have to admit, that was boring. But that had more to do with how the group operated and not the medic class itself. If im a medic on the front lines, but stay behind the formation of my group, thats fine. As long as i SEE some action, im totally fine with it. I don't necessarily need to fire my own gun during an operation to find it exciting.
We have an ongoing joke within SSG, it comes from a member who asked this, although i don't care to reveal who (and i don't remember anyway) .. "Can I run ahead with ACOG?" Basically.. "Can i go on a lone wolf rambo mission?"
Which is not how we do business lol..
Please dont take notice of previous comments, entire suggested system has been redone and made much much more simple. Read from here on.
---------- Post added at 07:00 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:30 PM ----------
Post name changed to clear any confusion too :)
Bee8190
Jul 19 2011, 19:25
Sounds fun but pardon me if i dare to twist it a little:D
wounded by small arms fire - medic have limited bondages, epipens...you name it and is able to treat such wounds in the open battlefield.
Wounded by multiple small arm fire - medic has the ability to stop heavy bleeding and keep soldier alive by using many bondages and morphine from his limited invertory untill medevac chopper arrives and take soldier back to main base hospital where soldier get healed after some period of time.Medic must look for resupply at this point.
Wounded by heavy caliber or/and explosives - medic needs help with wounded by nearby soldiers, or another medic as soldier bleeds out heavily and must be taken to main base hospital ASAP.Soldiers health regaining slower (simulating operation/s?) or simply takes longer to revive.Both medics must resupply their invertory.
I believe this would bring a lots of fun to the fields for even non medic dudes out there as it would involve real teamplay and pilots would find their job exciting just one more bit too.:yay:
No epipens, epinephrine is for severe allergies and if used on a bleeding casualty it would make them bleed out quicker. They are not used on these kind of casualties. There are other ways of re-awakening an unconscious casualty like smelling salts, etc.
All wounds would depend on area hit, which could be improved heavily in A3 if the hitdetection was improved upon. We could then know area hit and that alone would allow modders to improve the medical system dramatically, using certain kit for certain areas and conditions.
You mention explosives and I notice no burn treatment is given, but it can be applied the same way as any other treatment, just with specialised items for that category e.g. steroid injections, burn bandages, burn dressings. But it doesn't really matter, a simplistic approach is best.
Xiones11
Jul 20 2011, 06:23
Will a bullet being fired out of range (you won't implement truel rifle kill ranges of a mile+ on assault rifles will you?) cause the pain mode of damage or will it just bounce off the vest. I'm asking because getting ing hit by a 50 cal at 4 miles has gotta feel lik getting punched by a train
ghostnineone
Jul 20 2011, 06:33
i like americas army's system, it has an injury system and you have to treat injuries a certain way, like an injury would be "gunshot chest, bleeding, patient is not breathing/is having trouble breathing" and you'd have to administer an NPA and treat the gunshot, i havent played it in awhile so i dont remember the specifics, but it doesnt take forever to revive someone, only as long as the medic takes to pick the appropriate options, but i like it because you actually have to assess the patient rather than just press heal or administer bandages and epi
Max Power
Jul 20 2011, 07:44
No epipens, epinephrine is for severe allergies and if used on a bleeding casualty it would make them bleed out quicker.
No. Epinephrine is administered to treat shock to constrict blood vessels to increase blood pressure, and to open constricted bronchioles in the lungs. If the shock is hypovolumic shock, someone with a basic knowledge of first aid would treat things in the primary survey first, those being the ABCs. Once those are addressed, then you treat for shock. So, in your scenario, the medic finds someone who has been shot and the first thing they do is smack an epipen into their thigh and call it a day. Obviously, the first thing to treat would be the bleeding if there is not an airway or breathing problem.
Furthermore, epinepherine is used to treat cardiac arrest, including cardiac arrest due to low blood volume.
No. You don't use it on a casualty who has been shot. It is strictly used for anaphylactic shock and cardiac arrest for combat medics:- and for cardiac arrest it is hardly used at all as it is a very high-risk procedure for a combat medic. Epinephrine would be a last resort and combined with cardiopulmonary resusitation (CPR) and possibly vassopressin - there is such a high chance of messing it up and causing serious problems and it doesn't even have a 100% chance of restarting the heart even if you do get it right, there is no way it should be used like that.
You don't go around sticking Epipens into people's thighs after they've been shot.
---------- Post added at 06:13 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:07 PM ----------
i like americas army's system
It's a great way for PVP, really quick and simple. Because they are on such small maps they need to be like that. Arma could easily make it a little bit longer, not to the point of being frustrating but just as AA's version is way too quick. The diagnosis tool on that thing is great, shame it only has 4 options.
Max Power
Jul 20 2011, 09:01
No. You don't use it on a casualty who has been shot. It is strictly used for anaphylactic shock and cardiac arrest for combat medics:- and for cardiac arrest it is hardly used at all as it is a very high-risk procedure for a combat medic. Epinephrine would be a last resort and combined with cardiopulmonary resusitation (CPR) and possibly vassopressin - there is such a high chance of messing it up and causing serious problems and it doesn't even have a 100% chance of restarting the heart even if you do get it right, there is no way it should be used like that.
You don't go around sticking Epipens into people's thighs after they've been shot.
Risky, but somewhat more effective than CPR alone.
So what you're telling me is if you have epinephrine and a man who is in cardiac arrest due to hypovolumic shock, and you don't have vasopressin, you check your watch and continue CPR? Despite its 10% success rate? And this is without the added bonus of low blood volume?
If it's not in the medic protocols, then okay. But seriously? They don't get any deader than dead.
@<hidden>, for high calibre weapons like 50cals and 308s we can look at real world statistics and make estimated guesses on how the patient will end up after taking a hit, but I can assure you that the majority of targets who take a 308 or larger to the torso wont live to tell the tale, although there may be some cases which I am happy to look into where 762s and similar rounds may not outright kill a man.
For your second point it sounds like you are talking about a system in which medics are used to stabilize the casualty and are forced to stay near them in order to monitor them and make sure they stay stable until a field hospital/medevac/ambulance heals them, I love the idea and it was actualy included in my previous suggestion (which also had multiple treatment options for wounds so medics had the chance of screwing up - just like in america's army 3 (@<hidden>) and also had stuff like AED portable defibulators, cpr, smelling salts, IV bags of plasma, cardiac arrest, not breathing status, tourniquets, and more) but my previous suggestion, while much more realistic and in my oppinion would be more fun, it was not everypone's cup of tea and many people did not like the idea, and in heinseight it was too complicated and different for BIS to add as it would also involve ai changes, whereas this new system is perfectly doable for BIS.
I will do some thinking as to how stabalization could be implemented into this system using only first aid kits, morphine, medkits and feild hospitals/medevac/ambulances and reply ASAP, feel free to share any ideas although please dont go off track with stuff like epi and plasma etc, some BIS devs may even think having morphine alongside firstaid kits and medkits may already be unneccesary.
The main intention of this suggestion is to make the flow of the combat more realistic rather than the treatment (rather than previous suggestion which aimed at getting both realistic), but a stabalisation system without going off track could be an awesome addition to the system.
You do CPR first if there was no pulse. What you administer depends on cardiac rythmn (AED can detect this) - it could be epinephrine or atropine or both in order but they are seriously last resorts, this is advanced life support and very risky.
As a practical matter, anyone without a pulse in a firefight is dead. Epinephrine usage in a tactical environment is a high-risk procedure with a low percentage of success (particularly since anyone without a pulse in this setting probably doesn't have an intact cardiovascular system). Possible exceptions might be if the medic and casualty are in a "tactical medical care" phase (under good cover/concealment, fire superiority assured by the team). You could get an assistant to begin administering IV drips, stopping and controlling bleeding or even using blood substitutes etc, for hypovolemic shock.
In my opinion it wouldn't be used in game, nor when dealing with gunshot wounds, and it isn't mentioned in this threads OP to be used and there are plenty of other methods for going about it which do the job and allow for a simplistic approach that people can easily get used to:- like CPR for no pulse, smelling salts for unconscious, OPA/NPA for not breathing, anyone can get used to this stuff and making those decisions and that would make the medics role a lot more interesting.
@<hidden> although alot of data talking about ammunition versus body armour is not floating around the internet, enough is to get a rough idea on how many shots at what speed will destory armour/ penetrate. I did some simple 'philosophying' :p on the first post talking about how many 5.56, 5.45 and 5.8 shots will be required to break the armour (standard ball rounds) which is decent in my oppinion. Stuff like 762 is much easier as that ammunition is what the armour is tested against and that information is readilly avaliable.
When it comes to 50cals, there isn't much that they wont penetrate regardless of range, I don't know heaps about 50cals and other sniper ammunition but Rye might be able to give some detailled information if he wants as he knows his 50cals very well :)
In the previous more realistic suggestion unpenetrating rounds would still 'wind' the player which was simulated by reduced stamina but this is probably unnessecary, a simple "ouch" could show that you have been hit.
DMarkwick
Jul 20 2011, 09:35
Well, regardless of medic complexity developed, it should remain in the realm of the module IMO. Sometimes, in a game, you should accept the fact that the avatar you control has these skills, and that when you apply them, they get used. As such a medic should really be a "heal" only function.
But, all this good stuff can go into a module for sure. I'd just wouldn't like to see it forced onto the default gameplay.
But a medic has the skills but still the diagnosis process takes place and then applying what is needed off that, it's not too complex in my opinion but I'd have to agree with you if people did consider this complex. This could just be the advanced version, the basic being click a button. Fine by me, I'm sure the guys who support this thread would agree also.
@<hidden> What do you mean, other than the morphine the first aid kits used by soldiers and medkits used by medics essensially only give units the same capabilities they have now, its just that with these items it not only feels more authentic but it will open a widnow for animations and also the possibility for medics and soldiers to run out of medical supplies making the game more challenging and giving medic backpacks a purpose but without actually changing any vanilla mechanics at all, asides for improved incapacitation and body armour which would benifit everyone by making the game more realistic and authentic.
DMarkwick
Jul 20 2011, 09:48
@<hidden> What do you mean, other than the morphine the first aid kits used by soldiers and medkits used by medics essensially only give units the same capabilities they have now, its just that with these items it not only feels more authentic but it will open a widnow for animations and also the possibility for medics and soldiers to run out of medical supplies making the game more challenging and giving medic backpacks a purpose but without actually changing any vanilla mechanics at all, asides for improved incapacitation and body armour which would benifit everyone by making the game more realistic and authentic.
If the gameplay itself remains a simple "heal" action choice, then fair enough. If you need to make a decision based on what the injury is, then it's outside of default game territory I feel. But, a module solves all that. No-one plays the game unless they're in a mission created by someone, and thus a module will either be there or not. Any realism-based mission will have that module. But I feel it should be a mission design decision, not a default gameplay feature.
Yeah I feel the same way, my previous idea for a much more advanced system could be discussed with the ace team closer to release, but a simple yet improved medical system is what IMO arma 3 vanilla needs.
Andersson[SWEC]
Jul 20 2011, 17:03
Im all for realism. But not to the extent that the game becomes unplayable...(Crosshairs)
This is a milsim game, and as such they should strive to add "all" the
aspects of such a game.
A medicalsystem were you actually HAVE to take wounded and other
casualties in to count is way high up on my wishlist.
"The best way to take out a group is to wound 2-3 of them"
But for that to work you need TEAMPLAY (pvp) and
an SUPERAWSOME AI engine..
Let say you play Domination.
Sure the PLAYER team knows how to take care of wounded.
But the AI seems reluctant to treat their comrads in pain.
So advantage AI...Should be EQUAL for "Balance"...
AI should try to help friends, and they do, or at least with Zeus AI.
Just gonna give a bit of a medical rant.... Fentnyl should be used instead of morphine because it works faster in the field that morphine. Morphine takes a while to take affect (5 minutes), with fentnyl it only takes 1 minute, if you DO use morphine a player should have thje pain slowly go away over 5 minutes.
ghostnineone
Jul 20 2011, 20:52
what does morphine even do in ace? ive tried leaving my character with pain but it doesnt seem to effect anything at all.
i dont think they need to implement casevac and stuff because you could already implement that yourself, i think most players would be kind of annoyed by getting shot, having the medic take a few minutes to heal them, and then after that they cant even respawn or whatever until they get moved back to an aid station, that seems a little too overkill imo, plus in story mode that would be annoying as hell.
a system like AA3s would be perfect, where you have injuries and symptoms and have to treat them properly, like someone else said if they made it a little bit longer (i dont even think the actual healing part takes more than 30 seconds) it would be perfect, i havent decided on whether or not they should have to carry supplies, and what happens if you die? because if you respawn then medics arent really needed that much as people would just respawn
Xiones11
Jul 20 2011, 21:26
Isn't epinephrine a synthetic version of adrenaline?
ghostnineone
Jul 20 2011, 22:16
im pretty sure it is adrenaline, its pretty dangerous to use on someone with a gsw because your heart rate increases which means you bleed out faster, and if they have a pneumo or hemothorax (air or blood in the chest cavity), then the increased respiratory rate as a result from epi will cause your chest to fill with air faster and kill you, or the increases heart rate causes your chest to fill with blood and you either bleed out or the blood suffocates you/crushes your lungs, unless the medic runs a chest tube (which is usually done by doctors), certain blood vessels and veins and arteries will either expand under epi or contract (too much blood flowing through a vein could cause you to bleed out, and effect your blood pressure), epi is only used for cardiac arrest along with a defibrillator and CPR, your heart is not contracting properly, ventricular-fibrillation (v-fib) , or Pulseless Ventricular Tachycardia (PVT or V-Tac) , you can attempt to shock v-tac and v-fib back into a normal rhythm, but you cannot shock asystole or pulseless electrical activity (defibrillators do not work if there is no heart activity, so they dont work if you dont have a heart beat) epi would be used to increase the heart rate so the above actions have more of an effect (CPR is essentially used to manually circulate blood and oxygen to keep you from going brain dead, it doesnt save people that much like it does in the movies, so the increased blood flow is a positive) or anaphylactic shock or superficial bleeding.
but its been awhile since ive had to think about any of this stuff so i may be wrong :p
Max Power
Jul 21 2011, 03:25
Isn't epinephrine a synthetic version of adrenaline?
They both refer to the same thing. There is a trademarked product called adrenalin (without the e), which might be what you are thinking of. My textbooks all refer to the neurotransmitter it as epinephrine, tho.
Surgeons prefer to add epinephrine to the lidocaine in order to help stop any superficial bleeding, I don't know about combat medics. It really is a last resort, do or die situation and you'd have to take your chances. All manuals I have read state first and foremost, for use when a patient is in anaphylactic shock - basically a severe allergic reaction. It CAN be used for other things but is normally mixed or at certain doses to do the job, and it is hardly ever used for cardiac arrest because of the chance of cocking things up but if you had to then you'd have to. It's made for the professionals is all I can say.
In emergency medicine, including both trauma and clinical settings, any individual that undergoes cardiac arrest has to receive epinephrine, regardless of the cause. It's is indeed part of the ACLS protocol. Epinephrine is a natural hormone produced by the body itself (more precisely by the adrenal glands) that acts on the metabolism of several tissues. Most importantly of all of its functions, it stimulates cardiac tissue contraction and blood flow to specific organs, including the heart itself and the lungs. In the case of wounds caused by gun shots or debris from grenades such as does that usually occur in ArmA, the most important thing to do even before administrating such drug is to control the bleeding otherwise increasing heart rate and blood flow could cause the patient to bleed out and die. So, yes epinephrine must also be used in this setting if the patient is in cardiac arrest but only after bleeding has stopped or at least diminished.
CameronMcDonald
Jul 21 2011, 08:39
Surgeons prefer to add epinephrine to the lidocaine in order to help stop any superficial bleeding, I don't know about combat medics. It really is a last resort, do or die situation and you'd have to take your chances. All manuals I have read state first and foremost, for use when a patient is in anaphylactic shock - basically a severe allergic reaction. It CAN be used for other things but is normally mixed or at certain doses to do the job, and it is hardly ever used for cardiac arrest because of the chance of cocking things up but if you had to then you'd have to. It's made for the professionals is all I can say.
In emergency medicine, including both trauma and clinical settings, any individual that undergoes cardiac arrest has to receive epinephrine, regardless of the cause. It's is indeed part of the ACLS protocol. Epinephrine is a natural hormone produced by the body itself (more precisely by the adrenal glands) that acts on the metabolism of several tissues. Most importantly of all of its functions, it stimulates cardiac tissue contraction and blood flow to specific organs, including the heart itself and the lungs. In the case of wounds caused by gun shots or debris from grenades such as does that usually occur in ArmA, the most important thing to do even before administrating such drug is to control the bleeding otherwise increasing heart rate and blood flow could cause the patient to bleed out and die. So, yes epinephrine must also be used in this setting if the patient is in cardiac arrest but only after bleeding has stopped or at least diminished.
Goddamn it, you Australian, it's adrenaline and lignocaine. :p
Just because the rest of world is incorrect doesn't mean you have to be as well.
I'm British born and have American friends, I can't help it. :D
DMarkwick
Jul 21 2011, 09:15
IMO this thread is a good example of (potential) medical systems being too complex. IMO the medic should "know" what to do in the same way that a pilot "knows" what to do, but the player just flies.
Medic should heal, he does what he can with what he's got and with the injury he's presented with, and the results calculated from that. Getting the player to administer various drugs dependant on type of injury is far far overkill.
ghostnineone
Jul 21 2011, 09:35
IMO this thread is a good example of (potential) medical systems being too complex. IMO the medic should "know" what to do in the same way that a pilot "knows" what to do, but the player just flies.
Medic should heal, he does what he can with what he's got and with the injury he's presented with, and the results calculated from that. Getting the player to administer various drugs dependant on type of injury is far far overkill.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SQ3_vrnBeLY
that is pretty much exactly the medical system i want in arma, earlier on they explain why you have to treat shallow breathing with an OPA or labored movement with a splint, etc. there are only 4 options so its not that difficult to remember, and you treat the actual injuries by holding a button, i think it has a good balance between not being a magic heal, and is more realistic than ace's "put bandages, epi (which medics almost never use), and morphine (which takes too long to be effective) on everything" system of treatment (i never get the CPR option)
arma should take a page out of AA3s book because all of their tutorials are really good and actually help you play the game better and i really love their lean and fire drill with the m4 as its really good practice for reaction time and accuracy
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xbdYfSV_NyA
DMarkwick
Jul 21 2011, 09:44
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SQ3_vrnBeLY
that is pretty much exactly the medical system i want in arma, earlier on they explain why you have to treat shallow breathing with an OPA or labored movement with a splint, etc. there are only 4 options so its not that difficult to remember, and you treat the actual injuries by holding a button, i think it has a good balance between not being a magic heal, and is more realistic than ace's "put bandages, epi (which medics almost never use), and morphine (which takes too long to be effective) on everything" system of treatment (i never get the CPR option)
arma should take a page out of AA3s book because all of their tutorials are really good and actually help you play the game better and i really love their lean and fire drill with the m4 as its really good practice for reaction time and accuracy
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xbdYfSV_NyA
This is why it should remain module-based. That video made the medical system look tedious and overdeveloped. I'm all for extra features but as far as default gameplay goes, the medic should just "heal". It's difficult enough getting people to play medics in the first place :)
There are really, pragmatically, only two steps for medical healing, get into safety, and heal. So a drag system needs to be implemented that is easy to do and quicker than the current ArmA2 drag, and then a heal that leaves the injured soldier in an appropriate state for his injury and the medic's supplies.
All that other stuff - module it.
See that would be good. A training session at the start of Arma to get this stuff. It's not hardd at all -> Cardiac arrest = x item, not breathing = x item, these conditions = x problem.
ghostnineone
Jul 21 2011, 10:07
i dont see why they cant implement a system like aa3s with the medic modules, as the people who want realism are going to turn them on, and the people who dont will leave on the magic heal, thats essentially what i would prefer, i always like the option of being able to not use something if i dont want to (i really dont know what the 3 modules even do apart from them being able to fall over and wait to be healed), i just think a little bit more realism would be nice since it looks like theyre fleshing everything else out a bit more (like putting in ToH's flight model)
I post an advanced and complex system and get bad feedback on how it is unneccesary, now i get feedback for a simple medic system and get feedback saying that more realism would be better :p
IMHO a system like AA3 in the sense medics have multiple treatment options and the possibility to screw up would be sick, and I will try and find a backup of my previous suggestion and post to show you what I mean, although a really different system involving changing the AI a lot is going to mean a lot of work for BIS and lots of problems ironing out bugs after release.
Yes havign it optional in a module would be cool, but the modules we currently have don't make massive changes to the game when activated, but rather some small changes similar to the default game. Vanila arma 2 there is no incapacitation (asides broken legs) and medic can heal this, in the module there is only really two differences, soldiers can heal to a certain extent (not fix broken legs though) and people who are shot in lower body become incapacitated with a different animation and can crawl about ect ect, medics can still fully heal.
My point is having a module that adds a lot of treatment items, states of wounds, AI changes, lots of scripts when activated, and having one - two shot kills with no medics (asides broken legs) or any treatment options at all when deactivated is a lot for BIS to work on too very different systems both with working AI, especially when in the campaign it wouldnt be used, and both AI systems (very very different to each other) need to be working up to scratch.
It would be great if BIS did do something like this, although in reality it is quite unlikely they will, although if you want you can join me and nag ACE team closer to release :D
The current suggestion is just an upgraded AIS module (those three modules in editor) which would further increase the realism, the realistic flow of combat and also realistic prioritising (I have an idea for implementing stabilisation into this system) casualties and fighting.
On another note, what are everyone's thoughts on adding body armour? Now that we can select our gear we may even be able to take it on and off (saw a screeny of selectable ammo vests).
---------- Post added at 03:50 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:40 PM ----------
Changes made to first post, these changes will force players to stay by fallen comrades to make sure they stay stabilised unless they want their friend to die:
Treatment:
First aid kits - carried by soldiers used to temperailly stop bleeding.
Morphine - useable by everyone, carried by medics, negates pain effects.
Medkits - upgraded first aid kits carried and used only by medics, permanently stops bleeding and replenish 50% of blood meter.
Field Hospitals - Same as medkits only heals arms and legs as well and refills 100% of blood meter. Field hospitals, MEDEVAC choppers and ambulances can all do this.
The medical system in AA3 is FAR from being too complex or tedious in my honest opinion... The only difficult part of it is memorizing what you need for the indicated symptom, which is VERY EASY to do. If you are unwilling to spend five minutes memorizing something like the medical treatment for a wounded soldier in AA3, then I have no idea how you even manage to play arma with all of the waiting for combat... Here's what you do, print out a sheet of paper with the necessary info on it, and while your moving towards your objective look down and memorize things on it every now and then... You will maintain situational awareness, but also memorize what to do... See problem solved...
I don't think you understood what I tried to say...
I really like the idea of a more realistic system like aa3, and it is far from being too complex for me.
What I was saying is that it will be very difficult to work on a module with AA3 style wounds and treatment and work on vanilla with 1 or 2 shot kills and almost no medic involvement.
This is due to AI, it would be extremely tedious to make two seperate systems each with different AI and get the game working to the same quality.
I am all for a really realistic system, but this is much more likely to happen with mods, and therefore I am making a doable suggestion for BIS because it is a lot more likely to be taken up.
Beleive me though, if arma 3 had the medic system of AA3 I would be more than happy :)
Don't worry Tom, you won't please all people. The same could be said about any system.
Tom1 I wasn't replying to your post... At best I was replying to DMarkwick's post, but even then I wasn't really... I was making a statement...
BTW DMarkwick I would be MUCH more willing to play as medic in Arma 3 just by adding this system, I think others would too...
DMarkwick
Jul 23 2011, 22:06
Tom1 I wasn't replying to your post... At best I was replying to DMarkwick's post, but even then I wasn't really... I was making a statement...
BTW DMarkwick I would be MUCH more willing to play as medic in Arma 3 just by adding this system, I think others would too...
IMO the module option is the best implementation.
AI should try to help friends, and they do, or at least with Zeus AI.
Just gonna give a bit of a medical rant.... Fentnyl should be used instead of morphine because it works faster in the field that morphine. Morphine takes a while to take affect (5 minutes), with fentnyl it only takes 1 minute, if you DO use morphine a player should have thje pain slowly go away over 5 minutes.
Yup, sorry I just noticed this post. One thing I love is fentanyl "lollipops" that you stick in the side of the patient's mouth, and it gets absorbed through the cheek. Works quite fast, and you can stop administration easily if they're starting to get too much, just take it out of their mouth. It's a little kinder to patients with hemodynamic instability. Plus morphine shouldn't really be administered to a person with a gun shot wound to the stomach, chest or head area.
BobcatBob
Jul 29 2011, 02:39
Yup, sorry I just noticed this post. One thing I love is fentanyl "lollipops" that you stick in the side of the patient's mouth, and it gets absorbed through the cheek. Works quite fast, and you can stop administration easily if they're starting to get too much, just take it out of their mouth. It's a little kinder to patients with hemodynamic instability. Plus morphine shouldn't really be administered to a person with a gun shot wound to the stomach, chest or head area.
How come?
ghostnineone
Jul 29 2011, 02:49
How come?
probably because it can cause kidney failure, respiratory depression (inadequate oxygen, you dont want to combine that with a lung injury or anything that makes it hard to breathe, like broken ribs) and it can increase intracranial pressure and head injury (brain is already screwed from gunshot, you dont want it to have even more pressure against it)
could be wrong though
Cardiac and respiratory depression. It's lowering blood pressure, which has already been lowered due to mass bleeding and trauma. It will change mental status as well, it has been suggested you must disarm all patients who have been administered morphine as it will mess up judgement, clear thinking and motor skills. It's reducing the brain's awareness of pain, it doesn't mean you will not still feel it, and it shall cause the person to feel sleepy, or like they are drunk along with other mental conditions.
They may be allergic too, it has been known to cause some patients to itch intolerably and many other conditions which you just don't need on the day. You defend this by avoiding the problem drug, having back-up medications and knowing your patient(s).
If the patient is in shock, then he/she probably doesn't need morphine. He/she is probably not having much pain. If the patient is suffering from hypovolemic shock and you administer an intramuscular shot of morphine then it does not absord easily and this can lead to the patient getting extra doses out of your care which can lead to an overdose. Overdosing can happen and is a serious concern (one of the many reasons why you mark the patient; drug, dose and time etc).
And there are other things you can administer instead of, though it can be used, it would be a risk for some cases and fine in others. An injury say to the foot or hip with a lot of pain, it would be a good pain reliever. Like all things, it's made for some situations and not all but it is a good general pain reliever.
ghostnineone
Jul 29 2011, 05:44
all of this medical talk excites me :p
Yes, an improved wound-system would definitely rank high on my wishes for ARMA3. Especially if it came with an appropriate AI that would also move wounded to safety, and later extract them by any vehicle back to a real on-map base.
However, both SLX and ACE have neat wounded modules that almost suffice. I think this is something the community can rather do by scripting, and would wish the devs to concentrate on things we cannot achieve without hardcoding ability (such as improved flight models, interactive cockpits, improved vehicle damage and armor models, digging holes and trenches etc.)
what are everyone's ideas on body armour? no matter what direction the wounding system takes body armour is always in war and should imo be implimented. How could body armour be improved people?
Before they do that - improve hitdetections overwise it wouldn't work effectively. And improve the damage system, e.g. detecting where you got hit, not transfering damage to the WHOLE body (e.g. shot in the foot, 0.2 dam to the head) but to that set area, affecting that set area.
MEV Striker with one of these
http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/gadgets/4220163
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4391161.stm
After all its in the future, this is not too far ahead of its time. All they are trying to do is shrink it. If you do think this is too much future for you... Then please open your mind, and look around you....
CarlGustaffa
Aug 6 2011, 19:02
And a Big Dog (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cHJJQ0zNNOM) to carry our backpacks and/or squad weapons/CSWs? :p
CameronMcDonald
Aug 7 2011, 04:38
Damn those dogs are scary. If I saw that ambling towards me, I'd go cyclic, and end up putting a 66 in it to be sure.
Lugiahua
Aug 7 2011, 16:45
I haven't read all the pages, but this is what I think:
(inspired by ACLS simulator on my Iphone)
characters in the game should be categorized into different medical level
and depends on the level, they could apply different methods
and the menu should be marked as A,B,C for easy understanding.
something like this
- Lay people (minimum training)
e.g. Civilians
A: NPA
B: None
C: pressure dressing
- TCCC (non-medical military personal, civilian EMTB)
A: NPA, surgical Airway
B: Needle Decompression, Chest Seal
C: Pressure Dressing, Tourniquet, Hemostastic agents(Combat Gazue, Celox..etc), IV
- Advanced (68W, 18D, civilian EMTP, doctor)
A: NPA, surgical airway, artificial airway (LMA, King, Intubed..etc)
B: Needle Decompression, Chest Tube, Chest Seal
C: Pressure Dressing, Tourniquet, Hemostastic agents, IV (with PRBC or medication)
I am not sure if CPR or any BLS stuff should be included in a military simulator since it's basically useless on battlefield unless cardiac arrest happens during evacuation phrase or an AED is nearby.
But maybe Precordial thump (as a last resort) could be included.
minor leg wounds = limp
major leg wounds = sit here and bleed out
Sucking chest wounds = natures way of saying ..."slow down"
Good ideas Lugiahua. Differentiating civilian from military and medic from non-medic is a good idea, that would definately make the medical role more vital of which it is in reality.
Damn those dogs are scary. If I saw that ambling towards me, I'd go cyclic, and end up putting a 66 in it to be sure.
It's not just me then. My first though when I saw one was "KILL IT WITH FIRE!!"
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.0 Copyright © 2013 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.