PR versus ARMA - Page 9

**Bamboo** · 07-28-2008, 04:20 PM

Player #s to me are more about quality than actual number. We could have 62 players in PR, but if they all do their own thing and there is no teamwork, or they are all sniper noobs, etc, then the number of players is no #1 in the Pros/Cons checklist.

I am more than happy with the 10-20 guys we have on most nights lately in ARMA, because they are all stand up guys. No lone wolfing, moving and sticking with your fireteam, etc. Read the ARMA general section and you will see tons of new posts from guys that in the last few weeks just found the server and were blown away at what a difference the TG way of doing ARMA is. (Also why we have the best PR server as well, by the way.

)

For instance:

Quote:

I ended up trying out Arma when the first 1.01 patch was released, which was quite a while ago, but due to the frustration caused by bugs, and what seemed to be a lack of decent mp, i had put the game down for many months. In fact, even after reinstalling and playing for a month or so after the latest 1.14 patch, i had began to lose interest due to the lack of strategic planning and tactics that were lacking in all servers.

Thanks to you're TG servers, I've actually started enjoying this game to a higher degree then what i thought was possible. So, thanks for the great servers, which i might add are very stable and fortunately, close by.

Quote:

Re: Hi all
hi sorvete, you have defenatly come to the right place!
i found these guys last week, and have had more fun playing the game alongside them, then i have in the several months since purchasing this title!

But again, PLEASE UNDERSTAND ARMA IS NOT LIKE PR. If you just started reading this thread, do not skip over reading the whole thread. You need to read the thread because it does give a balanced report on the game, and the game IS NOT FOR EVERYONE.

I also suggest you read through this thread from the TG general forum from a few months ago:
http://www.tacticalgamer.com/general...tml#post954180
That is a link to my post on page 2, where I threw together this graph to try and show why ARMA is not for everyone.

But, we are gaining new recruits every night, including last night where I said this in the ARMA forum

Quote:

Also want to mention a couple new guys got trained up tonight> TG-MD6| Bisclaveret and TG-XVth Tralic. Really did well for their first real night in with us and being thrown right into the fire. And they stuck with it through the usual random bugs they both caught. Had huge hassles just trying to get the server to let them in, but did great catching on once they were up and running. Looking forward to seeing them in the server more.

Turns out they both had the Gold Edition, and starting it from the desktop Icon was like loading a Mod (Queen's Gambit), and since our server 2 doesn't allow mods, it wouldn't let them in. Figured out they needed to use a different shortcut from the ARMA folder, and it worked.

Sabre_Tooth_Tigger · 07-31-2008, 09:27 PM

**Bamboo** · 07-31-2008, 10:08 PM

I actually just threw one together from some random clips from last night. Nothing special, was just board today.

Watch it while you can, cause the site is supposed to pull all game videos Aug. 1st

Click through to the actual video page for a much better version than the pop up window.

nthamma · 07-31-2008, 11:12 PM

This looks amazing... i just ordered the game from ebay... got to bid it for $6.50 excluding shipping which is $4.95. Thanks bamboo for all your vids and info! I will be looking forward in playing with some of you guys.

fuzzhead · 08-02-2008, 12:10 PM

well just had another go at it last night on TG server...

all the issues i listed about the game are still apparent... i'll write about some new things...

ArmA can be very good fun, and its very close to being something great, but theres a few key things missing IMO...

Domination - Inherently Flawed yet often prefered - why?

1) on this mission there was no in-game squad system, everyone is just a big giant unit. Its VERY difficult to organize and maintain cohesive units without some kind of in-game system. Not to mention everyone being forced to FLOOD the team VOIP channel. The amount of needless comms coming in on the server was really annoying. Its fine for small groups of players, or players that are used to playing together, but with 14 TG pubs, most of the times it was just large clusters of players with 1 or 2 "leader" types but no structure within it...

2) no real incentive to use realistic tactics due to unrealistic spawning mechanism. Players can choose to paradrop ANYWHERE they feel like. There was a couple occasions when we were engaging targets in a prety awesome fire-line, slowly advancing up a road to our targets, tons of suppressing fire, calling out of targets, etc.... it was very damn cool. Then out of nowhere we had blue troops PARADROPPING on top of the enemy positions we were shooting at, which looked totally retarded not to mention was the cause of several FF incidents. This type of respawn totally destroys any need for realistic tactics whatsoever... This apparently being the "preffered" mission on TG server is very troubling, basically it negates any real need to use team cohesion if you dont want to

IF a mission gives access to transport helicopters, I see no reason why you would need this paradropping gimmick. Get a damn pilot and have him transport the squad from mainbase to the objective, much more immersive, better for teamplay, fun for pilots, etc etc.

Ahh I got loads more to write about the problems from this mission but Im sure its already blindingly apparent. I had fun during my rounds but I know it would have not been nearly as interesting if I didnt join with quality players that I joined with.

TG "Leadership" - questionable ethics and behaviour

A prety major thing I want to talk about is the leadership (or frequent lack thereof) on the ArmA server, esp. when it relates to members from THIS forum that promote and advertise ArmA frequently, and should be the shining examples of how to play the game. I really question their choosen play style and their ethics and behaviour in game. I dont want to turn this thread into a bitch fest, but my main source of constant frustration during ArmA TG is the seeming lack of solid leadership from the supposed TG squads that are dedicated to ArmA exclusively. IMO ArmA plays best when there is strong leadership present and orders are carried through and multi-unit tactics are used.

What I've seen often in the past and I saw last night, is the TG tag wearing crowd (not talking randoms here, Im talking regulars) taking sniper rifles, javelins, jets, and all other "leet" gimmicks of the game and boasting about their awesome skills, going off on their own, going for kills, not helping new players, not attempting to organize units, basically just playing the game like it was fking singleplayer. There is too much leet-recon-specops-sniper-armyofone attitude coming from these types, and I think it just stinks.

I think its really obvious that TG ArmA has a clear lack of leadership figures who have an open, friendly, helpful and disciplined mentality who are willing to help new members and push the gameplay forward towards a more teamwork orientated gameplay style. Judging from the map rotation and my experiences with the in-game performance from some TG clan tag wearing members, I think this has been apparent for quite some time, and it's surprising no one has spoke up about it before.

I'm not going to name names and point blame in this thread and turn it into a soap opera, rather I would like to keep it positive. Guys like Blackdog1 who are willing to step up and help out new players, willing to make plans and organize units, and try to play the game in a teamwork orientated realistic manner even though the missions are often easier to play as lone wolf, these are the types of players that TG ArmA needs more of. People who step up to a leadership role and get people motivated to play the game in an organised way, which is how I (and I assume others) always prefer to play ArmA. The players who are grabbing sniper rifles and javelins, with little care about teamwork orientated gameplay, are doing more harm then good on the server, especially when these are supposed to be the "leadership" figures of the community.

Anyways this was just my little rant dont take it too harshly, Ive not had a chance to play ArmA in a while and felt that this needed to be addressed as its been an observation of mine about TG ArmA for several months now, and I KNOW I am not the only one with this opinion. It seems things have been getting better recently and Im glad about that, but I dont see why it regressed so much in the first place, other than lack of leadership types, which should be addressed from the top.

Sabre_Tooth_Tigger · 08-02-2008, 01:40 PM

I think all of that might stem from playing vs the computer rather then pvp. You can be as unfair as you like against a computer and cut so many corners, etc
Most of all I like PR for its extreme competition, if arma was 32vs32 I would buy and try it but not until then, same for arma 2 or any other game I guess

commie2008 · 08-02-2008, 03:40 PM

First, I actually played Arma since it was released in North America before switching over to BF2/PR, yes a weird series of events but I never quite caught on to the notion that PR even existed until I read on an ARMA fansite about it (the irony). Secondly, I have read through the most important parts in the thread, and especially after reading fuzzhead's original post I have to say two things which were originally neglected.

The majority of what you consider BAD (which it is) is due to the overall lack of polish of the game, when the game shipped it was 1000x worse then its current version is, the warfare mp mode has injected life into what is undoubtedly a game losing fan's interest day in/ day out. The problem still remains though much like sabre_tooth_tiger says because the majority of Arma mp games are co-op missions with player fighting the AI. This causes problems because the AI in ARMA is atrocious, you only have to look at the singleplayer campaigns to see how horrible it is. Then you factor in their ability to shoot through smoke, score highly accurate shots from incredible distances, the ability to see & engage you when you can't even see them. It just makes the game more frustrating and less realistic. The only saving grace of ARMA is it's modding community, without this game would have died almost instantly when it shipped. Returning to the point about polish, while you have stated that the good things were the little details, you obviously seemed to forget certain things. Did you ever notice prior to 1.14 that an AI controlled vehicle could almost never cross a bridge? or If you parked some troops behind sandbags, that upon engaging the enemy they would immediately go prone and hide behind said sandbags until shot from behind by the enemy? or the fact that up until 1.14 you couldn't successfully climb up a ladder? indeed it was these little details (that were overlooked since release and all fixed by 1.14) that helped to turn me off from ARMA.

And the main reason why I like PR over ARMA is basically due to the fact that PR can be fun and tactical while ARMA just seems to be tactical and not much fun to play at all.

**TheSkudDestroyer** · 08-02-2008, 03:43 PM

Leadership is the only reason I'm not playing ARMA.

The devil's tried to hop on for domination a few weeks ago. Nobody gave a siterep as to what the heck we were doing. Everyone talked amongst themselves as they prepared to go to the next town. There was no real chain of command, so it was groups of regulars playing with one another while the rest of us were stuck lagging behind, trying to follow as best as we could.

Just the other night I joined because I saw small COOP missions. COOP missions back in the day were great - we'd get 15+ of us, have a CO, structure, specific roles, and go to work. But when I got on, it was just a big blob of people told what to do by one guy. Everyone died within a few minutes. Out of frustration I left - we had a CO and we all died! There was no plan! There was no clear organization of who would do what.

Sc[ + ]pe · 08-02-2008, 09:54 PM

I'm on the fence with ArmA. I loved OFP, and I'm a hardcore realism nerd, but $40-$50CD is too much for a game that is based on OFP's engine, and with twice the bugs.

I'd happily pay $20-$30 for it, if I didn't have to go through eBay or similar to get it. I'm okay with direct download, though.

Ed: Is it possible to play with "beta" patches using the Steam version, or will Steam's autoupdate F(that)UBAR?

**TheSkudDestroyer** · 08-03-2008, 03:00 AM

Patches work fine with the steam purchased version. I have the steam version.

Sc[ + ]pe · 08-03-2008, 06:03 AM

So, I redownloaded and replayed the ArmA demo today, in an attempt to make up my mind. It still sucks. Can anyone remind me just how much of the demo still correlates to in-game problems?

How optimized is the retail game now? Playing on high settings with an X1900 brought the game to a 20FPS train-wreck. Have significant-enough improvements been made so that I could play at a reasonable frame-rate?

I think that's about it. It's probably worth my time, and $30, just to find some new TG guys to play with, but I'm holding judgment until I know I can play it with a decent framerate.

Sabre_Tooth_Tigger · 08-03-2008, 11:03 AM

Dont play the demo, to complain about it is practically trolling

http://video-games.search.ebay.com/a...insifQQsascsZ2

Its $10 not 30

**Bamboo** · 08-03-2008, 11:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sc[ + ]pe

So, I redownloaded and replayed the ArmA demo today, in an attempt to make up my mind. It still sucks. Can anyone remind me just how much of the demo still correlates to in-game problems?

Again, you didn't even bother to read this thread, and just jumped to the end. If you had read it, you would have seen us say over and over

DO NOT TRY THE DEMO AS IT SUCKS ASS!!!

If you want it cheaper and are afraid of E-bay (though I know a dozen guys that have gotten it from there for under $5 and no problems) then go through Amazon.com
http://www.amazon.com/Atari-ARMA-Gol...7773893&sr=8-2

http://www.amazon.com/Atari-ArmA-Com...7773893&sr=8-1

You can even buy used through their extended network as cheap as $3.97

Finally, as for Fuzz's post. Your right Fuzz, I felt the same way about that night's missions. They weren't great, and we were actually talking about that in teamspeak. That was the worst night I have had in weeks. And when I saw you were in game, and were going to be a fireteam leader, I was kind of excited. But instead of running a tight ship like you do in PR, you let the grunts run wild and didn't say a thing to them. I was actually staying quiet mostly to see how you handled it, but a couple of the kiddies, like the brat with AT. Don't worry though, if he acts like he did the other night again, goofing off and talking non-stop, I will kick him until can grow up.

As for the paradroping in, I have no clue about that either. My only guess is they don't know how to control them selves in the air yet, and ended up missing the landing zone. I was annoyed by that as well.

And as for taking new players under our wings and helping them, don't even try that. I have personally taken 7-8 players that had never even tried MP and showed them from start to finish how to play, and that is just in the last 2 weeks or so. Nerdydodge from the last page is just 1 example, and we ran though everything on Fri.
I would have done the same thing for anyone that night if someone had asked, but the only 1 I heard say they were rusty was you.

As far as domination goes, most nights lately when we see we have some good players on, we actually start playing co-op missions or some TvT.
Here is a video of just a couple missions from Wed (nothing fancy, just playing around with movie maker):

Came in late on Fri. night, and the plans for a Dom. mission were already going on, so went with it. But that was a good thing after seeing some of the players obviously need more practice before doing co-op. Think about what would have happened if we did co-op and they ended up having to sit in spectator mode for 20 mins. Domination is a great way to get people to see a lot of action and get lots of practice quickly, so when we do something like Co-op or TvT, they don't die in 2 mins.

Sc[ + ]pe · 08-03-2008, 04:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bamboo

Again, you didn't even bother to read this thread, and just jumped to the end. If you had read it, you would have seen us say over and over

DO NOT TRY THE DEMO AS IT SUCKS ASS!!!

I didn't just "jump to the end", and I've taken a look both at this thread, in its entirety, and the ArmA forums here at TG. Not playing a demo seems a little silly to me, since while the demo is obviously, from reports, a very unpolished version of the product today, it still outlines the basics of the game, or so I'll assume, like combat, movement, etc. I didn't say "the game obviously sucks as much as the demo", I said "this demo isn't all that great, but I trust you guys when you say it's far worse than the actual game today. What poor qualities about the demo remain in the final version?".

That being said, I'll pick it up today. Hopefully I haven't angered the ArmA community enough to keep me from playing with them. :-P

**Bamboo** · 08-03-2008, 05:06 PM

Of course you haven't.

The demo to me was and still is a huge turn off to people who try it. I really wish they would just pull it and ask mirrors to do the same. I tried it when it came out and reported back to my squad at the time not to even waste their time downloading. I'm quick to admit the game wasn't really that great till the 1.09 beta patch fixed some things, and the final 1.14 recently fixes a lot of others. They just announced work on a new patch as well.