No more easy kills felas ))))

[Nate--IRL--]

It is weird though, all this time and no real ground capable radar..

 

It wasn't required.

 

Nate

[Kaktus29]

ooopss.. mistaken THAAD for THEL )) .. i meant THEL .. But what i said is still true, .. against manoeuvring targets THAAD is still a dud..

[Randolf]

I hope this thing adds more depth into the game when it comes to sams. Currently you only really lose in the game (this is especially true for the shark) because you didn't notice some sam and flew straight over it..

It's so tiresome to scan and scan the combat area for that little sam guy in a forest. Especially with those sh*tty shark optics.. Surely no commander in his right mind would put a lone shark pair into an area invested with 1000 iglas?

This is why I don't fly the shark much anymore. It's simply too ****king difficult to survive a mission.

 

This is why I need to know if combined arms comes with some sort of system which allows directing player airplanes? Like warning them of spotted sam threats and updating route plans real time? Information is they key to survive in a modern battlefid. Currently we have a modern battlefield, but the 2 pages of text during briefing is pretty much all the intel we get during the course of a mission.

Edited July 11, 2012 by Randolf

[Revelation]

Well with the Tungusta the operator can guide the missile onto you, so have fun - I know I will. I already know how to defeat it pretty easily. (looking at Viper with a smile)

[Hamblue]

It all sounds good but in order to get anything out of it I think you'll have to have near full servers of 32 people. Actually they should make that number higher. At the moment I don't see it since there aren't usually more than a few people in a server. They need to find a way to populate servers with a good mix of player types.

[Nerdwing]

ooopss.. mistaken THAAD for THEL )) .. i meant THEL .. But what i said is still true, .. against manoeuvring targets THAAD is still a dud..

 

You've gone from a great poster to horribly confused in a single topic. You're a hero.

[Kaktus29]

@nerdwing ..glad to be of service and amusment)) ..

 

anyway, .. yeah number number, ..how to populate 32 players in one game? ..well, is it really necessary? .. can't we play with 4-4 and have open/invite option .. all you really need with Combined Arms is 1 commander who will use AWACS info and give orders to Planes(AI or human) and guide the whole operation, also would be able to give orders to tanks, sam's(like where to go, use active sensors, don't use active s. , use passive instead etc.. ..and then if you want a player who is flying toward enemy airfield he is about to assault but it will take time-(like 20 minutes) he can for that time being jump to a tank or a sam and AI can take his plane over ..).. and you can have your fun there with the tank or if you will play the tank because you will be better-being smarter than AI and all that.. The commander could say .. look guys, we have problems with ground forces, they are merging, ..do we have anybody flying who is too far away and is doing nothing? ..if so, "jump" into the SAM or Tank units and do your thing.. help us win this one! ))

[Sierra99]

.. and here is my major point.. IF we -human players can control- SAMs systems such as active and passive systems i can't see the humans in planes can survive for long))) If you turn all your systems off, and just passivelly observing with optical systems, infrared systems, IIR systems, .. woow, .. those planes will fall like crap)) and i will be happy for that because too much have people started to believe SAMs are nothing but a "road bump"))

 

Yeah... Not so much. Spent about 3 hours in a COOP server yesterday... Here are the Takeaways I have for you from that time...

 

Client Vehicles are easy to spot. AI vehicles go Point to Point in a straight line, Client vehicles are all over the place.

 

Client vehicles seem to have one speed.... FLOORED. easy to spot.

 

Client players are no where NEAR as accurate with Guns and Missiles as AI. Once I have ya locked up with a Mav... You're done. Its not a fair fight. I stand off 7-8 miles and flip missiles at ya as I please until you die. Yes I got schwacked a few times by Clients playing the waiting game... But If Iferreted ya out with the TGP first and saw ya... You lost. (One guy tried to shoot down the Mavrick... Not sure if he was a bad shot or if its possible to shoot down an inbound missile)

 

Of particular note was the guy I spotted while limping home shot up. I'd jettisoned all my toys to stay airborne HOWEVER, I did have a buddy I talked onto the Tank and He proceeded to lock him up with a Mav... I want to thank the driver of the Tank for giving us a GREAT laugh...The TANK tried like hell to hide UNDER A BRIDGE... But the Mav still found him...

 

(Whoever had the map "Sandbox" Running, Thanks! Had a great time)

[ALDEGA]

Client vehicles seem to have one speed.... FLOORED

:D

[OpusTheFowl]

I'm still new around here but I already see the need for an organization like Charlie Foxtrot in ARMA2. A "body" that organized large scale operations, scenarios or even campaigns.

 

Now this would be very interesting.

[Revelation]

Couple of things...

 

For clients playing as AA it is more "fair" to give them TOR's. With a player manning a Tunguska, they are reduced to optical guidance.

 

Yes they can shoot down your Mavs. I have done it many times, the Tor can lock up your Mav shoot at it then lock you up and shoot at you. The missile from the TOR will sometimes miss the Mav, so the operator has to pay attention.

 

Also server admins should turn labels off and fog of war on. Then it becomes a much "fairer" fight.