How to fix Arma 2 in 11 easy steps...

[{USI}_Zombie 0]

Although, I have to disagree with the idea that the inbuilt modules need no configuration. How can you make the default revive function last longer before the player dies out? How do you get the secops module to provide missions which are further away from the players location?

I think we have a small communications gap. The 1st aid module and the secops module DO work with no need for configuration, but, what you are asking for IS configurablity. They work with no issues as designed, but, if we want to change they way they work, it is possible. I haven't experimented with the 1st aid modules, but I am certain they CAN be configured, and this thread explains how to configure the som module, blackalpha figured it out for all of us.

[Redfist 0]

Ethne,

That post (which is now deleted) was unnecessarily rude and personal. It just goes to prove my point. In what possible way was my post arrogant while your reply was not?

Criticisms of the game seem to be rebutted with criticisms of the people who made them. Where is the scope for constructive argument?

Do you personally dislike all of the suggestions I have made? Would any of them ruin the game. No, I do not think that the game should be changed to suit my playstyle and that failure to do this will result in it being a failure. It's just a childish blocking argument that you're using and that anyone can use to reduce a dialogue into a slanging match.

What changes would you like to see made to the game which would possibly be of benefit to the gaming community (which does include you and me)?

Ohh forget it. It's a mute point anyway. Nothing significant will be changed. Maybe, you're right. Maybe I am just being self-serving by expressing an opinion. I just spent a lot of time and money (ofp - all expansion packs, arma 1 + qg, Arma 2 beta release, computer upgrades to play arma 2 and server donations) on the game, and I wouldn't like to see it be smashed by competition.

[bangtail 0]

Ethne,

That post (which is now deleted) was unnecessarily rude and personal. It just goes to prove my point. In what possible way was my post arrogant while your reply was not?

Criticisms of the game seem to be rebutted with criticisms of the people who made them. Where is the scope for constructive argument?

Do you personally dislike all of the suggestions I have made? Would any of them ruin the game. No, I do not think that the game should be changed to suit my playstyle and that failure to do this will result in it being a failure. It's just a childish blocking argument that you're using and that anyone can use to reduce a dialogue into a slanging match.

What changes would you like to see made to the game which would possibly be of benefit to the gaming community (which does include you and me)?

Ohh forget it. It's a mute point anyway. Nothing significant will be changed. Maybe, you're right. Maybe I am just being self-serving by expressing an opinion. I just spent a lot of time and money (ofp - all expansion packs, arma 1 + qg, Arma 2 beta release, computer upgrades to play arma 2 and server donations) on the game, and I wouldn't like to see it be smashed by competition.

It's arrogant because you imply that A2 will fail and DR will prevail if changes are not implemented. I don't happen to agree with you and I have heard these misplaced contentions since the days of OFP. You are, however entitled to your point of view, which is why I edited my original post.

I just watched a video of Coop in DR and A2 has nothing to fear. No doubt DR will have its fans but it won't threaten the hardcore base of A2 players.

Eth

Edited August 30, 2009 by BangTail

[Redfist 0]

It's arrogant because you imply that A2 will fail and DR will prevail if changes are not implemented. I don't happen to agree with you and I have heard these misplaced contentions since the days of OFP. You are, however entitled to your point of view, which is why I edited my original post.

I just watched a video of Coop in DR and A2 has nothing to fear. No doubt DR will have its fans but it won't threaten the hardcore base of A2 players.

Ethe,

That really wasn't the point in my post. If you interpreted it that way, then I'm sorry, please don't misunderstand me. However, I would advise you to use the word 'arrogant' with caution and a little self-reflection. You have to be careful when using the term hardcore players, and I read into it that you include yourself in this category, as a synonym for people who refuse to acknowledge that the game has flaws and problems. Every review I have read of Arma 2 has mentioned that the game has an unusally high number of bugs or negative quirks, almost ever player I have spoken to about the game has expressed a similar sentiment.

Again, let's not turn this into a personal issue, attack the message, not the person. What is it about my suggestions would you say would result in the game being worse off if they were implemented.

OFP2 is going to be a bigger commercial success because of the fact that Codemasters had a heap load more money for advertising and development, and also it is going to cater for a more main-stream market. OFP2 will surely beat Arma 2 in sales and profit. Nothing that I, or you, say can change that fact. I would personally prefer it if Arma 2's gaming community was not sucked away by a game that they perceive to be superior. I am sure OFP2 will not affect hardcore (in my understanding of your sense of the term) players, but that is surely not the point. The game needs to be more attractive to new players in order for it to be a real success. More players, means a larger community, which in turn might lead to further development etc.

I do NOT in anyway want Arma to be dumbed down or to sacrifice any gameplay elements which make it so cool. I would simply like to see a better version of the game.

If any of what I have written seems arrogant to you, I don't know how to express it in a different way.

[bangtail 0]

It's arrogant because you imply that A2 will fail and DR will prevail if changes are not implemented. I don't happen to agree with you and I have heard these misplaced contentions since the days of OFP. You are, however entitled to your point of view, which is why I edited my original post.

I just watched a video of Coop in DR and A2 has nothing to fear. No doubt DR will have its fans but it won't threaten the hardcore base of A2 players.

Ethe,

That really wasn't the point in my post. If you interpreted it that way, then I'm sorry, please don't misunderstand me. However, I would advise you to use the word 'arrogant' with caution and a little self-reflection. You have to be careful when using the term hardcore players, and I read into it that you include yourself in this category, as a synonym for people who refuse to acknowledge that the game has flaws and problems. Every review I have read of Arma 2 has mentioned that the game has an unusally high number of bugs or negative quirks, almost ever player I have spoken to about the game has expressed a similar sentiment.

Again, let's not turn this into a personal issue, attack the message, not the person. What is it about my suggestions would you say would result in the game being worse off if they were implemented.

OFP2 is going to be a bigger commercial success because of the fact that Codemasters had a heap load more money for advertising and development, and also it is going to cater for a more main-stream market. OFP2 will surely beat Arma 2 in sales and profit. Nothing that I, or you, say can change that fact. I would personally prefer it if Arma 2's gaming community was not sucked away by a game that they perceive to be superior. I am sure OFP2 will not affect hardcore (in my understanding of your sense of the term) players, but that is surely not the point. The game needs to be more attractive to new players in order for it to be a real success. More players, means a larger community, which in turn might lead to further development etc.

I do NOT in anyway want Arma to be dumbed down or to sacrifice any gameplay elements which make it so cool. I would simply like to see a better version of the game.

If any of what I have written seems arrogant to you, I don't know how to express it in a different way.

Again, it's not a fact and CM's dishonest use of the OFP franchise name gives them a VERY unfair advantage (that they are milking for all it's worth). If it's such a great game, why must it rely on the OFP name? If it was simply called Dragon Rising, it wouldn't be getting 1/3 of the attention it is getting. I am not out to make this personal, I am taking issue with your assumptions which, for the moment, have no basis in fact.

I've been playing co-ops all weekend and I'm not sure what would make A2 "better" which is why I take issue with what you are saying. You think A2 could be "better", and as I've said, you are entitled to your opinion. I think A2 is one of the best games I have ever played (if not the best game of it's type that I have ever played, and that's including OFP) so I don't share your view that it has to be changed to "compete" with DR.

A2 has sold very well by all accounts and, like OFP and A1 before it, they were NOT aimed at the BF2 crowd which DR (under the deceptive title of OFP) very obviously is.

Eth

Edited August 31, 2009 by BangTail

[nyran125 10]

hmmmmmmmmm, i kind of disagree actually. I dont think Operation Flashpoint 2 DR is Aimed at BF2 people lol. It doesnt even look like BF2. It still looks more authentic than Bf2 will ever be. BTW younger people and there sALOT of people that will be playing Operation flashpoint 2 that have no friggin IDEA what operation flashpoint is. It wouldnt make a difference with or without operation flashpoint name. I know loads of gamers that never even played Operation Flashpoint before. They know what counter strike is,lol.

Operation flashpoint 2 DR is aimed at people that want a Ghost recon Original type game with extreme realistic weapons and vehicles incorporated into its gameplay that has a more open ended environment.

BF2 players want flags, Big maps, Lots of running and heaps of vehicles to drive and lots of people to shoot in the space of 5 seconds.

OPeration Flashpoint 2 DR AND arma is made actually for an alternative to the all out action genre that BF2 repesents. Actually if anything, Operation flashpoint 2 DR and Arma etc, are more aimed at the one shot and its all over crowd, one mistake and your dead crowd, and the realism crowd, that ISNT the BF2 crowd at all. The BF2 crowd THINK they are playing something realistic. When they are really just playing a 3d soldier version of PACMAN,(flags being the little dots pacman runs around collecting).

Bf2 you can make a million mistakes and have Zero consequences, just go grab another flag. I think its unfair that you have put Operation Flashpoint 2 DR or Arma 2 into the Ea games's Battlefield series catagory or even comparing it, BF2 is purely a multiplayer game and Operation flashpoint or Arma is more a single player game that LETS you have a multiplayer game in there aswell. The only multiplayer game worth playing is small co-op missions in Arma 2. That domination mode and Evo modes are awful. Im a new player by the way.

Operation Flashpoint 2 DR is the best FPS game to probably ever hit consoles. EVER. Console players are in for a real treat. The game looks more like the original Ghost recon, than it does BF2. I loved the original Ghost recon. I also wouldnt knock it until its released. YOu have absolutely no idea what it going to be like.

Arma 2 is really made for the editing suite. You can create your own missions (Without the editing suite in Arma 2, I would never have played it after the demo, ever again, period, i would never have bought it. Im glad i bought it , BECAUSE of the editing mode)

That single player mode i havent even bothered playing since it crashed so much, that ISNT good for new players at all, new players will NEVER EVER play Arma 2 again after the single player experience, that cant be good for future business. Most people that are new to Arma 2 didnt even know the editor existed, they just saw the awesome graphics on You Tube and thought it looked awesome. Little did they know that arma 2 was only really good for the editor mode, also little did new players know was the videos that they were watching on You tube before they bought it, were ALL the editing mode. They thought it was just the single player or multiplayer game.

SO there are definately things i agree with (Apart from the grass thing, you shouldnt be trying to shoot people out in the open and starting an engagement in the first place, unless absolutely necessary) here at the OP.

The only reason to play Arma 2 is the editing mode, that is it. The Multiplayer game of Arma needs to be massively better than the EVO and Domination modes i personally do not like running around in a 255KM environment to get to objectives UNless there are certain missions at certain objectives where the stakes are high.

The warfare mode should of been put into little chunks around the large map, so new players had a better multiplayer experience out of the box. BF2 is known for flag grabbing. Counter strike is known for Bomb defusing and hostie rescuing. Arma needs to be known with Warfare and co-op mission modes only, nothing else for multiplayer mode. I think Arma 2 has confused alot of new players into what Arma 2 is trying to do. Because they didnt realise that arma 2 IS the editing mode, without it, Arma 2 is nothing.

[bangtail 0]

hmmmmmmmmm, i kind of disagree actually. I dont think Operation Flashpoint 2 DR is Aimed at BF2 people lol. It doesnt even look like BF2. It still looks more authentic than Bf2 will ever be. BTW younger people and there sALOT of people that will be playing Operation flashpoint 2 that have no friggin IDEA what operation flashpoint is. It wouldnt make a difference with or without operation flashpoint name. I know loads of gamers that never even played Operation Flashpoint before. They know what counter strike is,lol.

Operation flashpoint 2 DR is aimed at people that want a Ghost recon Original type game with extreme realistic weapons and vehicles incorporated into its gameplay that has a more open ended environment.

BF2 players want flags, Big maps, Lots of running and heaps of vehicles to drive and lots of people to shoot in the space of 5 seconds.

OPeration Flashpoint 2 DR AND arma is made actually for an alternative to the all out action genre that BF2 repesents. Actually if anything, Operation flashpoint 2 DR and Arma etc, are more aimed at the one shot and its all over crowd, one mistake and your dead crowd, and the realism crowd, that ISNT the BF2 crowd at all. The BF2 crowd THINK they are playing something realistic. When they are really just playing a 3d soldier version of PACMAN,(flags being the little dots pacman runs around collecting).

Bf2 you can make a million mistakes and have Zero consequences, just go grab another flag. I think its unfair that you have put Operation Flashpoint 2 DR or Arma 2 into the Ea games's Battlefield series catagory or even comparing it, BF2 is purely a multiplayer game and Operation flashpoint or Arma is more a single player game that LETS you have a multiplayer game in there aswell. The only multiplayer game worth playing is small co-op missions in Arma 2. That domination mode and Evo modes are awful. Im a new player by the way.

Operation Flashpoint 2 DR is the best FPS game to probably ever hit consoles. EVER. Console players are in for a real treat. The game looks more like the original Ghost recon, than it does BF2. I loved the original Ghost recon. I also wouldnt knock it until its released. YOu have absolutely no idea what it going to be like.

Arma 2 is really made for the editing suite. You can create your own missions (Without the editing suite in Arma 2, I would never have played it after the demo, ever again, period, i would never have bought it. Im glad i bought it , BECAUSE of the editing mode)

That single player mode i havent even bothered playing since it crashed so much, that ISNT good for new players at all, new players will NEVER EVER play Arma 2 again after the single player experience, that cant be good for future business. Most people that are new to Arma 2 didnt even know the editor existed, they just saw the awesome graphics on You Tube and thought it looked awesome. Little did they know that arma 2 was only really good for the editor mode, also little did new players know was the videos that they were watching on You tube before they bought it, were ALL the editing mode. They thought it was just the single player or multiplayer game.

SO there are definately things i agree with (Apart from the grass thing, you shouldnt be trying to shoot people out in the open and starting an engagement in the first place, unless absolutely necessary) here at the OP.

The only reason to play Arma 2 is the editing mode, that is it. The Multiplayer game of Arma needs to be massively better than the EVO and Domination modes i personally do not like running around in a 255KM environment to get to objectives UNless there are certain missions at certain objectives where the stakes are high.

The warfare mode should of been put into little chunks around the large map, so new players had a better multiplayer experience out of the box. BF2 is known for flag grabbing. Counter strike is known for Bomb defusing and hostie rescuing. Arma needs to be known with Warfare and co-op mission modes only, nothing else for multiplayer mode. I think Arma 2 has confused alot of new players into what Arma 2 is trying to do. Because they didnt realise that arma 2 IS the editing mode, without it, Arma 2 is nothing.

Who cares what you think tbh. Aren't you the same guy who said that an 8800 is better than a 260?

The whole point of A2 is the editor. If you bought it for the SP or campaign, you wasted your money and you will never understand why it is in a class of it's own.

Eth

Edited August 31, 2009 by BangTail

[JackandBlood 10]

Er dude, very few things on that list are "easy". Just the improving the AI given the scope and depth of the game is a daunting prospect. Voice work, well thats money money, so spread the word, get ppl to buy. Maybe BIS will convert good sales to better voices in patches, maybe they'll use it to take a week vacation :D.

[Flash Thunder 10]

Er dude, very few things on that list are "easy". Just the improving the AI given the scope and depth of the game is a daunting prospect. Voice work, well thats money money, so spread the word, get ppl to buy. Maybe BIS will convert good sales to better voices in patches, maybe they'll use it to take a week vacation :D.

Ha BIS would have alot of sales if their US Publisher would actually ship the game to retail, I want a physical copy of the game not some download version.

Anyways BIS is good at improving their games via Expansions, OA will bring alot of wanted features and fix alot of complaints like Armed Assaults expansions did.

[m5holmez 10]

I've been playing co-ops all weekend and I'm not sure what would make A2 "better" which is why I take issue with what you are saying. You think A2 could be "better", and as I've said, you are entitled to your opinion. I think A2 is one of the best games I have ever played (if not the best game of it's type that I have ever played, and that's including OFP) so I don't share your view that it has to be changed to "compete" with DR.

A2 has sold very well by all accounts and, like OFP and A1 before it, they were NOT aimed at the BF2 crowd which DR (under the deceptive title of OFP) very obviously is.

Eth

I dont see why you or anyone else would think ofp2 is aimed at the bf2/cod crowd? I must admit to begin with it defintely seemed that way although after more info and trailers it actually seems quite the opposite. OFPDR doesnt allow run and guns as one bullet can end your game so that in itself steers DR away from the COD crowd and more toward the sim crowd.

On topic though i agree with almost every point made in the first post and can only hope the new patch brings us closer to the game arma2 was supposed to be. Due to its issues it has been sitting on the shelf for quite a while and until the majority of issues are rectified it will remain collecting dust.

[-DirTyDeeDs--Ziggy- 0]

I roll my eyes at ppl talking about Evo or Domination and saying multiplayer sucks. You forgot Chenaurus Life, lmfao !

AAS is a great game mode, with a large selection of missions

CTF can be good, depending on the mission and the playable slots (usually 10v10 is best for CTF)

PvP scriptpack is a good way to MAKE YOUR OWN MISSION! and much of the editing work is done for you, thanks to SBS.

I would rather have a smaller community that played more PvP, than a large community that played mostly Domination.

[Herbal Influence 10]

US Zombie - I really thank you for doing all the typework.

I was quite embarrassed when I first read Redfists thread opener, which included some wrong and quite basic misinformations - like there would be no wizard for editing.

When reading "A default revive module which is easy to configure ..... Why do players, who pay for the game, have to rely on the skills and work of a community?", I simply gave up the thought of commenting it all by myself. "Would this be another of that annoying lamentos from cogamers, whining about a non-ready-to-big-blast-away-the-enemy-in-full-unnatural-but-bombastic-consumers-service-kiddy-games?"

No, it is not that. It's a serious and a engaged post. Not only for he has shown the most important character trait we all need - building and being a community: He seriously and fast admitted when he was eventually wrong on subjects. I seriously hope I can do so too.

And my only 2cents to this all is now, that the discussion has been lead to quite an end, to again lead the focus on what we do have here, with the BI games and why you quite NEVER payed enough for it and why you quite NEVER should ask something to work like you want it to!

be aware:

Herewith I do not mean the essential bugs, the game sure had!

These bugs have been erased in *such* a short time, big enterprises would be happy to have debugged their daily-run-enterprise-software (paying a 20.000,00 Euros per month basic plus working hours of the software specialists (100 - 400 Euros/h net).

And what are we here to deal with ?

It's the leading edge of "software",

it's the crown jewels of software,

it's the open end at which noone knows whether we will call it software within the next decades of developement anymore: Is it still common software, if 'things' in it act independently and the course of action cannot be foreseen by anyone? Is it a 'machine' like we are educated to think of hardware running a certain software?

It's not about doing routine work - like Microsoft's operation system or SAP CRM-Software or .. or ... it's more like that which is developed at the MIT of Cambridge or the DFKI in Germany (both easy to google), so called Centers of Excellence on artificial intelligence: Systems open to the world, interacting, giving a surplus on the "user generated content".

Only one though the greatest of it's aspects is: the openess of its world:

Lately people here discussed the problem of parachuters falling into trees.

AA2 did react correctly. Physically.

Though (!) possibly no developer ever did foresee or test this situation. It's a complex moddeled world where things can happen that noone ever did foresee.

Now consider this a bug!

Because - well, hanging around in a tree ... it's not much fun then ... might happen to you (though not toooooo probable .. but there ARE trees in the desert) - in a desert far away from your colleagues: Noone to save you by shooting you (down ... ).

But ... ahm ... lez wait ... a week or two .. there will be someone who opens a thread:

"Hey! I PAYED for this game 50 bucks!! And now I am hanging in a tree in a desert all-mission-long ??!! How CAN that be!!"

In other words: Each AI you placed on the map in the editor, may it be with or without vehicle or weapon, has its own "life" - he reacts 'on its own' to all environmental influences. Noone knows the concrete developments of reactions for he is only told to react this or that way to enviroment, but environment changes from second to second especially for it consists of other AIs acting the same way "independently" and also onf avatars acting by direct steering through humans.

There cannot be no "bugs".

There cannot be each and every "module" to handle this and that special situation.

For each second there can be new situations never experienced by anyone but you.

Well, don't take this too serious, it's got quite an essay now. Sure quite a helpless attempt to explain what's exciting about BI games ... but I didn't have the time to say it clearer and shorter ... ;-)

Edited September 1, 2009 by Herbal Influence
fallen into dessert ;-))

[bangtail 0]

I dont see why you or anyone else would think ofp2 is aimed at the bf2/cod crowd? I must admit to begin with it defintely seemed that way although after more info and trailers it actually seems quite the opposite. OFPDR doesnt allow run and guns as one bullet can end your game so that in itself steers DR away from the COD crowd and more toward the sim crowd.

On topic though i agree with almost every point made in the first post and can only hope the new patch brings us closer to the game arma2 was supposed to be. Due to its issues it has been sitting on the shelf for quite a while and until the majority of issues are rectified it will remain collecting dust.

I guess YOU define "how it's supposed to be"? I hope it's never the way you or the OP would like it to be (and given BIS track record, those of us who like it are safe).

I've watched plenty of DR videos as well and I don't like the look of it. I'm not going to get into why as this isn't the thread for discussing DR.

Eth

Edited September 1, 2009 by BangTail

[KingN 249]

2) Fix the AI and the grass/vegetation problem. It is insanely frustrating to be shot by AI who can see you when you cannot see them. It seems as though hiding in the grass does nothing to hide you from them. Same goes for the smoke.

Very good points there Redfist. Personally the most frustrating thing for me in Arma 2 is the grass issue. It looks very good and makse the nature more realistic looking but there are a lot to improve in it. People here argue about wether the ai sees the player behind the grass or not but IMO the problem is that the ai can detect you with pinpoint accuracy only by hearing no matter which direction it was facing. It would turn around and put a bullet in your head behind the grass. This should be fixed.

Secondly the grass disappears further away so in pvp gaming the grass gives you no cover whatsoever, only obstructs your own visibility. Some forum member here once offered a suggestion that some sort of mask would be applied in front of a hiding unit which would make it partially transparent to others. This would simulate the grass layer and save cpu performance. I thought this idea was brilliant. I don't know if the current game engine supports this kind of solution though.

I liked your other points too. :)

[bangtail 0]

Very good points there Redfist. Personally the most frustrating thing for me in Arma 2 is the grass issue. It looks very good and makse the nature more realistic looking but there are a lot to improve in it. People here argue about wether the ai sees the player behind the grass or not but IMO the problem is that the ai can detect you with pinpoint accuracy only by hearing no matter which direction it was facing. It would turn around and put a bullet in your head behind the grass. This should be fixed.

Secondly the grass disappears further away so in pvp gaming the grass gives you no cover whatsoever, only obstructs your own visibility. Some forum member here once offered a suggestion that some sort of mask would be applied in front of a hiding unit which would make it partially transparent to others. This would simulate the grass layer and save cpu performance. I thought this idea was brilliant. I don't know if the current game engine supports this kind of solution though.

I liked your other points too. :)

Sorry, but getting shot by an enemy you can't see is just part of combat. Sometimes they see you first, sometimes you see them first.

Stop "running and gunning" and you'll stay alive a lot longer.

I've had the AI walk right past me when I've been prone in cover so the game works fine.

Eth

[KingN 249]

Sorry, but getting shot by an enemy you can't see is just part of combat. Sometimes they see you first, sometimes you see them first.

Stop "running and gunning" and you'll stay alive a lot longer.

I've had the AI walk right past me when I've been prone in cover so the game works fine.

Eth

Did you even read my post through? It would just be good if the grass would work in a realistic way, no ai glitches and some solution to the grass disappearing further away. I've used proper tactics always, don't rambo around so it's not about my tactics in any way. You're missing my point.

[bangtail 0]

Did you even read my post through? It would just be good if the grass would work in a realistic way, no ai glitches and some solution to the grass disappearing further away. I've used proper tactics always, don't rambo around so it's not about my tactics in any way. You're missing my point.

No, I'm not missing your point. I'm saying that if you use cover properly, you can effectively avoid getting detected.

Secondly, grass is not cover. I've seen people crawling around in the grass at well over 100 metres before (IRL), so it's not a stretch that the AI sees you. It's not long grass that you can effectively hide in.

I will agree with others that say the Ghillie suit should have a higher concealment rating than it does and I'm sure that will get added before long.

[{USI}_Zombie 0]

The current grass system is one of my least favorite aspects of ArmA and ArmA2. While it is beautiful and adds to the immersion, it can be annoying as well. I do agree the AI are a little too good at finding you in the grass after only 1 shot out, but I have tried to adjust my tactics to compensate. I really have no viable solution. I usually just turn the grass way down with setTerrainGrid, an imperfect solution. That being said, I would rather be "forced" to compensate tactically or by scripting tricks than to have the whole concept of the grass being nerfed.

[KingN 249]

No, I'm not missing your point. I'm saying that if you use cover properly, you can effectively avoid getting detected.

Secondly, grass is not cover. I've seen people crawling around in the grass at well over 100 metres before (IRL), so it's not a stretch that the AI sees you. It's not long grass that you can effectively hide in.

I will agree with others that say the Ghillie suit should have a higher concealment rating than it does and I'm sure that will get added before long.

What is it that you don't understand? I'm talking about the grass not working properly: ai can detect through it way too accurately and other players will see you further away very clearly while the grass obstructs your visibility to see others in many occasions, even when not using such tactics where you would intend "to use grass as cover". I'm not referring to inproper tactics used, only that these issues involving the grass should be fixed.

[mils 10]

I agree so very much with norrins revive should be an optional module that is part of arma2 and thus less prone to bugs.

Couldn't agree more about grass, I use fps helper to negate the grass as its current logic is retarded

either way they have 4 weeks to do some of these things or people will just walk away.

(not that they care as you already paid! :P)

[bravo 6 0]

You know i succesfully ignored these comments for a while, but now i just cry again everytime i read this.

Don't worry mate, it was promised BIS would fix the problem.

edit: let me add, just to clarify some doubts: Its clutter (tall grass, grass and all kind of weat) that have the problem. Not trees or bushes like some referred before.

Edited September 1, 2009 by bravo 6

[LeadCommando65 10]

Sorry, but getting shot by an enemy you can't see is just part of combat. Sometimes they see you first, sometimes you see them first.

Stop "running and gunning" and you'll stay alive a lot longer.

I've had the AI walk right past me when I've been prone in cover so the game works fine.

Eth

What about this?

[bangtail 0]

What about this?

Not sure what your point is, It's daytime and the AI was 75m away when he spotted you.

That's not out of the realm of possibility.

And "superpowers", puhlease, it took him almost a whole mag to kill you.

Turn the AI down if it's too hard for you.

It could use a little work but this business of being able to see when you are lying in tall grass is just stupid. Go out IRL and lie in tall grass and you'll see that A2 models it very well. Now, if the AI can see when they are lying down in the grass, then that's an issue that needs fixing.

Eth

Edited September 1, 2009 by BangTail

[KingN 249]

What about this?

Exactly.

[bangtail 0]

What is it that you don't understand? I'm talking about the grass not working properly: ai can detect through it way too accurately and other players will see you further away very clearly while the grass obstructs your visibility to see others in many occasions, even when not using such tactics where you would intend "to use grass as cover". I'm not referring to inproper tactics used, only that these issues involving the grass should be fixed.

I haven't experienced what you are describing and as I said before, I've actually had the AI walk right past me before (about 10m away).

Eth