Posted: 18 May 2008 06:35

Hi,

its just a suggestion but i thought it would be cool to have some coop snipermission.
(like a mission where 2 soldiers have to find a good spot, take out a target and get out of there.)

grtz

Posted: 18 May 2008 07:03

*Smells COD4 singleplayer map*.


Uhh badly enough the US army doesn't have Snipers.

Only Advanced marksman's.

But still, would be a great idea until the "Sniper" and Spotter are getting spotted so the enemy will alert and they'll come towards you.

Posted: 18 May 2008 07:45

You can never have a map with only 2 slots. 2 people and your server is full :S On the other hand what would be possible is 1 team with 2 adv. marksman's and the rest crappy weapons and the other team a full M4Mod team trying to hunt them down.

Posted: 18 May 2008 15:20

Quote:

Uhh badly enough the US army doesn't have Snipers.

since when...


the truth is that actual sniper missions are not suited for online play. nobody online (at least a very low percentage of players) has the patience for setting up overlooking a target for nearly a week, LITERALLY.

thats why the Dev team has decided to only include the advanced marksman, which is tied to a squad, in the game. it is far better suited for online play and is basically the real role that is portrayed in the game now.

Posted: 18 May 2008 15:59

PingWing / Christiaan wrote:

Uhh badly enough the US army doesn't have Snipers.

Thanks for the new quote.

And Field pretty much nailed it.

Posted: 18 May 2008 18:28

Reguardless, I think it would be quite nice to have some co-op sniper missions - not like Call of Duty 4, but at another level. To show what it is REALLY like in the U.S. Army.

Posted: 18 May 2008 18:35

so you want to hang out in dusty insect infested hides waiting for hours/days watching a particular NAI/target for something to chance by?

I will pass for a bit more action in my video games thank you.

Posted: 18 May 2008 22:09

Well, this isn't a video/PC game. It is a recruitment tool for the army am I not correct?

It would be good to show people who have no idea of what the army does or what they are capable of.

Posted: 19 May 2008 05:20

tox_ wrote:

Well, this isn't a video/PC game. It is a recruitment tool for the army am I not correct?

I think you'll find this IS a game, even if it does double up as a recruitment tool.

Blackbear, one of our resident veterans, has just told you what being an advanced marksman entails. This type of mission would not fit into an FPS game.

Posted: 19 May 2008 07:31

}L^D{Gen.Rebellion wrote:

Hi, its just a suggestion but i thought it would be cool to have some coop snipermission. (like a mission where 2 soldiers have to find a good spot, take out a target and get out of there.) grtz

Great suggestion!

Ignore the anti-teamwork crowd-- they're not a part of the solution as much as the reason this game is failing. They want more action and teamwork isn't I their vocabulary.

Head over to the link below and post your suggestion, joining the few of us still hoping AA will create levels designed for teamwork.

http://forum.americasarmy.com/...hlight=

Posted: 19 May 2008 07:41

-eXplicit wrote:

tox_ wrote: Well, this isn't a video/PC game. It is a recruitment tool for the army am I not correct? I think you'll find this IS a game, even if it does double up as a recruitment tool. Blackbear, one of our resident veterans, has just told you what being an advanced marksman entails. This type of mission would not fit into an FPS game.

That is not correct, not even close. For starters...

• Advanced Marksmanship is a course, not a title.
  
• Sniper is a common reference for Designated Marksman or DM.
  
• Sniper is marksman rating currently used in the US Army.

Posted: 19 May 2008 07:59

misquote?

anyways it would be cool, but impractical. as BB said, it wouldnt fit in and would be quite boring to sit days upon days waiting for a target.

Posted: 19 May 2008 08:23

iamthelordhitman wrote:

misquote? anyways it would be cool, but impractical. as BB said, it wouldnt fit in and would be quite boring to sit days upon days waiting for a target.

You think its cool. I think it's a cool idea, too. If both of us, and others think so, head over to that link I provided and post your own idea.

Popular opinion is what drives AA and AGP, as has been shown and demonstrated time and time again. If we rolled over every time one individual said so, nothing would improve, the game would become stagnant, and no one would post in the forums. While some feel sniper missions would be boring, I think its a great idea, folded into its own co-op, or integrated in a squad mission, who's to say the dev's might be waiting for more opinions and comments to explore this.

I can certainly tell you that if we hung our hopes on one individuals opinion, none of us would be here giving our two cents worth towards AA3, let alone AA2.

Remember, its about popular opinion so let the dev's here them!

Posted: 19 May 2008 12:07

I really hope that his whole sniper/designated marksman thing gets sorted out soon.

Right now it's still too much of the bastardised mixup that was going on six or so years ago.

When the 2ID at Ft. Lewis was testing out what were to become the Strykers, they elminated the platoon machine gunners. Instead they were going to use the 35mm cannon on the Strykers for SBF. Instead of the machine gunners, they would have two designated marksmen, equipped with the M24 SWS. I happen to know a guy that was part of that testing, and was one of those designated marksman that went through the local course.

Well, of course things changed. The M242 was replaced by a M2, and the two DMs didn't stay. The machine guns were back in the platoons.

And the Designated Marksmen ended up just being a guy in the squad with an ACOG on his M16 or M4, and some advanced training for the greay areas farther than 300 meters, but less than 600 (or was it 800?).

Even in the game, two terms are used. It still shows as a sniper slot, but in the briefings it doesn't state that the squad has snipers attached, but marksman or something like that. instead.

At any rate a pure sniper map would be very underplayed. Especially if it were at all realistic. Taking a half hour to crawl inches at a time into position. Then an inch at a time, bring the drag bag up. Setting up, then waiting while alternating between the sniper and the spotter watching for a target. And waiting. And watching. And waiting. Then finally being able to take a shot, then getting out of the area.

Perhaps a short video that was part of training on what snipers do would be better? When you do the advanced marksman course, you see a video about 5 minutes in length showing what a sniper has to do, and a little of how.

Posted: 19 May 2008 14:34

Similarly, joint services discussions in 2006 began experiments with autonomous platforms to include DM integration as a necessity.

Reference wrote:

Collaboration and autonomy of UMSs is a necessity. The current Infantry Platoon consists of a Platoon Headquarters, three Infantry Squads and a Weapons Squad. The Infantry Squad consists of nine personnel, the squad leader and two 4-man fire teams. Each 4-man fire team consists of a team leader, grenadier, and an automatic rifleman. The fourth man within each team is either the squad’s anti-tank specialist or the squad’s designated marksman. [Emphasis mine.]

That was 2006. Today, the AUMS project is anyones guess but the concept and focus would be unchanged. I personally see the reasoning for advancing technology on this front. However, AA does not address these concerns, showing human interaction as key and vital to such weapons as CROWS and Javelin, bringing full circle the application of a sniper team as necessary and indicative of this games focus.

Now, if the DOD wanted to remove that asset, reintroduce AA as a technology driven game platform, we'd be sitting in CP, sipping ice tea, manipulating our joysticks. That isn't the case, and this back and forth about what the DM's role is and isn't should be seriously addressed and put into the development as necessity or removed altogether. Clearly, it is obvious the AGP has not been given a green light to highlight this asset.