Some suggestions for this game to be a realistic military simulator

IwanczukIwanczuk Posts: 10Player
edited August 3 in General Discussion
Remove revive feature. When you get shoot to death, you're dead, just wait for the next round.

Remove kill hud. If you kill someone through leaves, wood, heavy fog, or anything else, you must personally check it. (Show score at the end of the game)

Remove hip crosshair.

Also add classic AK-47 for terrorists would be amazing!
«134

Comments

  • nL^Z0naGaming_nL^Z0naGaming_ Posts: 663Player
    Iwanczuk wrote: »
    Remove revive feature. When you get shoot to death, you're dead, just wait for the next round.

    Remove kill hud. If you kill someone through leaves, wood, heavy fog, or anything else, you must personally check it. (Show score at the end of the game)

    Remove hip crosshair.

    Also add classic AK-47 for terrorists would be amazing!

    Game has 300+ players for pc, adding these things will make it 20+ players.
  • LWOF_BrOkenArrowLWOF_BrOkenArrow Posts: 278Player
    Just go play COD on hardcore if you want that stuff. The game has little content/features as is, there's no need to take away anything..
    Teamwork is essential, it gives the enemy other people to shoot at



    P0asKE2.jpg
  • IwanczukIwanczuk Posts: 10Player
    edited August 3
    Iwanczuk wrote: »
    Remove revive feature. When you get shoot to death, you're dead, just wait for the next round.

    Remove kill hud. If you kill someone through leaves, wood, heavy fog, or anything else, you must personally check it. (Show score at the end of the game)

    Remove hip crosshair.

    Also add classic AK-47 for terrorists would be amazing!

    Game has 300+ players for pc, adding these things will make it 20+ players.

    I don't think so, it will attract people that are searching for a close combat simulator experience. Who aren't playing the game right now because although the game is realistic in many ways, it still has too much arcade features as mentioned.
  • Dct.F|LeventeDct.F|Levente Posts: 441Beta Tester
    This game was never intended to be a sim. It is build differently from it's core. Weapon mechanics, maps, movement, etc... they are simply not for a military simulator IMO.

    Being a military simulator needs a lot more than limited/no HUD and no revives.
    Theory and reality are not that different. In theory.
  • IwanczukIwanczuk Posts: 10Player
    This game was never intended to be a sim. It is build differently from it's core. Weapon mechanics, maps, movement, etc... they are simply not for a military simulator IMO.

    Being a military simulator needs a lot more than limited/no HUD and no revives.

    I mean a realistic shooter not a complete military simulator as Arma 3.

    The physics and weapon damage in this game are very realistic. At least much closer to reality than any arcade shooter. Remove the features i mentioned would be enough to have a realistic shooter.
  • frankoffrankof Posts: 931Moderator
    All of those things are configurable server side(at least most of them), so you are free to setup a server like that.
    We had(have?) servers like that, hardly anyone played them, not worth the effort unfortunately.
    ss_4_frankof.png
  • IwanczukIwanczuk Posts: 10Player
    edited August 3
    frankof wrote: »
    All of those things are configurable server side(at least most of them), so you are free to setup a server like that.
    We had(have?) servers like that, hardly anyone played them, not worth the effort unfortunately.

    At least give only a medic class the hability to revive, and not every single soldier. Would make more sense.


    It's weird that nobody played in those servers, because there is a big community who enjoy realistic shooters.
  • frankoffrankof Posts: 931Moderator
    Iwanczuk wrote: »
    frankof wrote: »
    All of those things are configurable server side(at least most of them), so you are free to setup a server like that.
    We had(have?) servers like that, hardly anyone played them, not worth the effort unfortunately.

    At least give only a medic class the hability to revive, and not every single soldier. Would make more sense.


    It's weird that nobody played in those servers, because there is a big community who enjoy realistic shooters.
    Every soldier have a first aid kit irl somewhere accessible, the first thing you do as a soldier is to grab the wounded soldiers pack and use that on him, you dont use your own, thats whats portrayed in the game.
    Its not a combat medic(68W), just regular soldiers.

    As for a dedicated medic class, it come with up's and down's, if youre forced into that role you are not likely to perform to your teams expectations and grieving would be the result.

    Back in the days of AA2 "some" would even start new accounts without medic training just to get out of that position.(i wasnt the only one)


    ss_4_frankof.png
  • ={101st}=Whiplash27={101st}=Whiplash27 Posts: 1,938Player
    We had very long and in depth discussions throughout the life of AAPG regarding the medic class and ability to revive. Most competitive oriented players wanted revives out of the game and to be more like AAO/2 and more casual players wanted it to remain. The game originally had two revives and it eventually cut down to one. I've never liked revives and always preferred playing in servers that turned them off.

    I always wanted a medic system that involved healing players who are active rather than downed (similar to AA2). I think that the medic role in general works best in respawn based games vs. round based. AA2 style medics had the issue where certain players who didn't care about being medic wouldn't heal anyone or late in the game you got shot and had no way to heal and risked bleeding out. In a round based game with revives, a medic becomes a VIP type player because if you lose him it can completely change the balance of the round when one team can revive and the other can't. An AA2 style medic system at least avoids that since bleed out deaths weren't super common.

    My thought was to just allow medics to heal active players, meaning stopping their bleeding and maybe restoring a small portion of life, while a player could bandage themselves to greatly slow the bleeding with a cap of either the bleed damage (that red bar that shrinks over time) or 1HP. In terms of downed players, allow medics to stabilize downed players for points, remove points from players who bleed to death within a certain radius of the medic. Some players will care, others won't, but it at least instills the leave no man behind mindset.

    Removing kill feed? Against it. I remember trying it back in AA2, people hated it. People don't like not knowing whether a pixel half way across the map is dead.

    Remove Hip crosshair? Useless. Many monitors these days come with a way to just add it back.

    AK-47? Wouldn't be against it. I remember one of the best things about AAO was having a burst fire M16 and then killing a guy and picking up his full auto 7.62 AK. That feature was sadly missing in AAPG since the M4 was always better than any OPFor weapon you could pick up. At least in AA2 the SF maps still gave incentive to pick up OPFor 5.56 AK-74s because when you either a) spawned with the attachment-less AK-74 or because you may get a shot or two with their unused grenade launchers.
    You joined the world's greatest army to become a graphic artist? Outstanding!
  • IwanczukIwanczuk Posts: 10Player
    Whiplash27 wrote: »
    In terms of downed players, allow medics to stabilize downed players for points

    What do you mean with stabilize downed players?
    Whiplash27 wrote: »
    Removing kill feed? Against it. I remember trying it back in AA2, people hated it. People don't like not knowing whether a pixel half way across the map is dead.

    Arcade players hated it.

    Anyone who really wants realism would love it, because thats how it works in real life.
    Whiplash27 wrote: »
    Remove Hip crosshair? Useless. Many monitors these days come with a way to just add it back.

    This one wouldn't have impact in gameplay. It's just for the game to look more realistic.

  • IwanczukIwanczuk Posts: 10Player
    edited August 3
    frankof wrote: »
    Every soldier have a first aid kit irl somewhere accessible, the first thing you do as a soldier is to grab the wounded soldiers pack and use that on him, you dont use your own, thats whats portrayed in the game.
    Its not a combat medic(68W), just regular soldiers.

    I understand but, in real life you can't revive a soldier who got shoot 5 times by a 5.56 in the head with a first aid kit.
    frankof wrote: »
    As for a dedicated medic class, it come with up's and down's, if youre forced into that role you are not likely to perform to your teams expectations and grieving would be the result.

    If the medic doesn't reach team expectations then vote to ban the player from using this class in the current game, and that's it, problem solved.
    frankof wrote: »
    Back in the days of AA2 "some" would even start new accounts without medic training just to get out of that position.(i wasnt the only one)

    I never played another AA game, but there's no need to force the player to play as a medic.


  • ={101st}=Whiplash27={101st}=Whiplash27 Posts: 1,938Player
    edited August 3
    Iwanczuk wrote: »
    Whiplash27 wrote: »
    In terms of downed players, allow medics to stabilize downed players for points

    What do you mean with stabilize downed players?

    The player is down, but still alive. Medic stabilizes the wounds to help the player get evacuated after the round is over. This is in contrast to miraculously having a soldier get shot like 5 times and then have them back in the fight.
    Iwanczuk wrote: »
    Whiplash27 wrote: »
    Removing kill feed? Against it. I remember trying it back in AA2, people hated it. People don't like not knowing whether a pixel half way across the map is dead.

    Arcade players hated it.

    Anyone who really wants realism would love it, because thats how it works in real life.
    Most players hated it. I remember running a server in the AA2 days and trying it. When we had the setting enabled anyone who joined the server would ask about it and then leave a round or two later. People did not like it. I tried all of the so-called realism settings that the game would allow and people hated it.


    America's Army isn't Arma or a full blown simulator, nor did it ever try to be. It always tried to have a balance of realism and arcade features. It would lean more on the realism side compared to a lot of other games in the market, but never to the point that the game couldn't be played in somewhat quick rounds and so that various gameplay styles couldn't be employed.
    You joined the world's greatest army to become a graphic artist? Outstanding!
  • Dct.F|LeventeDct.F|Levente Posts: 441Beta Tester
    Iwanczuk wrote: »
    This game was never intended to be a sim. It is build differently from it's core. Weapon mechanics, maps, movement, etc... they are simply not for a military simulator IMO.

    Being a military simulator needs a lot more than limited/no HUD and no revives.

    I mean a realistic shooter not a complete military simulator as Arma 3.

    You literally titled your post "Some suggestions for this game to be a realistic military simulator"...
    Iwanczuk wrote: »
    frankof wrote: »
    As for a dedicated medic class, it come with up's and down's, if youre forced into that role you are not likely to perform to your teams expectations and grieving would be the result.

    If the medic doesn't reach team expectations then vote to ban the player from using this class in the current game, and that's it, problem solved.
    frankof wrote: »
    Back in the days of AA2 "some" would even start new accounts without medic training just to get out of that position.(i wasnt the only one)

    I never played another AA game, but there's no need to force the player to play as a medic.


    Yeah... so if someone plays as medic and doesn't meet the team's expectations is voted off the medic slot. Sounds great... (not)
    The thing is, teammates tend to be quite critical, especially when it comes to reviving them. So the guy playing as medic would be under constant verbal attack and ultimately voted off. Yes, sometimes you would run into "dream-teams" where this system could work, but consider the average player. Who would take the medic role willingly? The medic would have to deal with a lot of players, who "know everything" about playing as medic, but never play as medic.

    I think if a significantly part of the playerbase would enjoy this "realistic" gameplay, you could find at least 1 server running these rules. I don't remember any... Unfortunately/Fortunately you have many more realistic games on PC.

    I'm enjoying the game in this state. However, I'd not mind a more hardcore experience (closer to Insurgency/AA3) but you cannot turn AAPG into that by flipping a few settings for the server IMO.
    Theory and reality are not that different. In theory.
  • IwanczukIwanczuk Posts: 10Player
    frankof wrote: »
    Yeah... so if someone plays as medic and doesn't meet the team's expectations is voted off the medic slot. Sounds great... (not)
    The thing is, teammates tend to be quite critical, especially when it comes to reviving them. So the guy playing as medic would be under constant verbal attack and ultimately voted off. Yes, sometimes you would run into "dream-teams" where this system could work, but consider the average player. Who would take the medic role willingly? The medic would have to deal with a lot of players, who "know everything" about playing as medic, but never play as medic.

    Make the game to chose the medic randomly, just like the VIP is chosen already.

    And if a player don't do what he must do for the team to win, voteban.

  • IwanczukIwanczuk Posts: 10Player
    edited August 3
    Iwanczuk wrote: »
    This game was never intended to be a sim. It is build differently from it's core. Weapon mechanics, maps, movement, etc... they are simply not for a military simulator IMO.

    Being a military simulator needs a lot more than limited/no HUD and no revives.

    I mean a realistic shooter not a complete military simulator as Arma 3.

    You literally titled your post "Some suggestions for this game to be a realistic military simulator"...

    Because many people call it a "mili-sim", and because it's a official USA Army shooter.
  • nL^Z0naGaming_nL^Z0naGaming_ Posts: 663Player
    Iwanczuk wrote: »
    Iwanczuk wrote: »
    Remove revive feature. When you get shoot to death, you're dead, just wait for the next round.

    Remove kill hud. If you kill someone through leaves, wood, heavy fog, or anything else, you must personally check it. (Show score at the end of the game)

    Remove hip crosshair.

    Also add classic AK-47 for terrorists would be amazing!

    Game has 300+ players for pc, adding these things will make it 20+ players.

    I don't think so, it will attract people that are searching for a close combat simulator experience. Who aren't playing the game right now because although the game is realistic in many ways, it still has too much arcade features as mentioned.

    Well, I know so.. People aren't playing because of issues with this game and it's development over the years, not because it's not simulator enough.. Players are already dropping out every month on PC, and it will happen to on the PS4 at some point when they realize the issues are not being addressed as they should have been because people keep asking weird stuff like this to be added/changed in the game.

    Ask anyone who played beta, most of them say they want that version of the game back.
  • SimonSaizSimonSaiz Posts: 45Player
    Yeah closed Beta was the best version
  • Hey.I.Have.A.GunHey.I.Have.A.Gun Posts: 575Player
    Iwanczuk wrote: »
    frankof wrote: »
    Yeah... so if someone plays as medic and doesn't meet the team's expectations is voted off the medic slot. Sounds great... (not)
    The thing is, teammates tend to be quite critical, especially when it comes to reviving them. So the guy playing as medic would be under constant verbal attack and ultimately voted off. Yes, sometimes you would run into "dream-teams" where this system could work, but consider the average player. Who would take the medic role willingly? The medic would have to deal with a lot of players, who "know everything" about playing as medic, but never play as medic.

    Make the game to chose the medic randomly, just like the VIP is chosen already.

    And if a player don't do what he must do for the team to win, voteban.

    You clearly didn't read his post.
    Iwanczuk wrote: »
    Iwanczuk wrote: »
    This game was never intended to be a sim. It is build differently from it's core. Weapon mechanics, maps, movement, etc... they are simply not for a military simulator IMO.

    Being a military simulator needs a lot more than limited/no HUD and no revives.

    I mean a realistic shooter not a complete military simulator as Arma 3.

    You literally titled your post "Some suggestions for this game to be a realistic military simulator"...

    Because many people call it a "mili-sim", and because it's a official USA Army shooter.

    I've seen it called a "tactical shooter." I'm not sure I've ever seen anyone prior to now call it a "mili-sim."
  • -ew.theseer!^-ew.theseer!^ Posts: 52Player
    SimonSaiz wrote: »
    Yeah closed Beta was the best version

    +1
  • IwanczukIwanczuk Posts: 10Player
    You clearly didn't read his post.

    My english is not very good, but you said people wouldn't want to play as a medic.

    I aswered, then make the game to force people to play as a medic, randomly.

    Just like today players are forced to play as the VIP although they may don't want to...
Sign In or Register to comment.