Arma 3 > Trash bin > Topic Details
Ivan Jan 9 @ 3:54am
WHATTTT? wtf? Are you serious?...No way...omg...LOL
TEST 001

-target CSET solder (behavior careless)
-distance 3 meters
-weapon 4-five .45

First shot in open face - target wounded bleeding, standing, looking not impressed
Second shot in left leg - target wounded bleeding, standing, still not impressed
Third shot in right leg - target wounded bleeding, still standing, he is sweating now!
Forth shot in left side of chest - target wounded bleeding, still standing, annoyed
Fifth shot in right arm - target wounded bleeding, runing without any panelty to speed

Never mind that he should be dead after first shot but he is running without any penalty to speed even tho he is shot in both legs. Shot five times and no penalty to his aiming and he is still holding his main weapon even tho he is shot five times and if he had any ammo he would drop 5 friendly units with only one magazine in seconds.

This is only one of many things on top of performance issues that make me doubt that Arma 3 is made by Bohemia i know and prevent me to connect to this game whatsoever. I will test more just to bring some of ridiculous stuff in my opinion to light. Anyone else thinks ballistics in this game is ridiculous? Imagine running in to 5-7 this übersolders and you are alone slightly wounded not anaf to heal but just anaf to ♥♥♥♥♥ your aim, yas do share your experience.
Last edited by Ivan; Jan 9 @ 8:38pm
Showing 1-15 of 47 comments
< >
Firmament Jan 9 @ 5:03am 
For many, many different reasons, the gameplay would be absolutely horrible if it went on total realism only. We don't need that.

What we do need is to have an extremely open, deep and always evolving milsim with all the things that made OFP/Arma great, plus new features. That simple.
Last edited by Firmament; Jan 9 @ 5:03am
I am Fluffy Jan 9 @ 5:10am 
Originally posted by Firmament:
For many, many different reasons, the gameplay would be absolutely horrible if it went on total realism only. We don't need that.

What we do need is to have an extremely open, deep and always evolving milsim with all the things that made OFP/Arma great, plus new features. That simple.

I don't remember the need of putting 6 rifle rounds in the enemy torso to kill him in OPF or ARMA 1/2. Arma 3 is borderline unplayable right now, your enemies are bullet sponges, it's a ♥♥♥♥ing Call of Duty where you need to unload half a magazine at them. Shooting at 100 meters and more is pointless, you are just saying "hi" to them.

Who exactly are those "we" you are speaking about that finds this behaviour valid?
Last edited by I am Fluffy; Jan 9 @ 5:10am
Theo Hardmeier Jan 9 @ 5:22am 
Are you on dev build or normal?

Last time I tested some guns on dev build a week ago I always got 1 shot kills in the face with the 4-five .45.
Though I did notice a standard blufor squad is better armored.
Last edited by Theo Hardmeier; Jan 9 @ 5:28am
Ivan Jan 9 @ 5:28am 
Originally posted by Firmament:
For many, many different reasons, the gameplay would be absolutely horrible if it went on total realism only. We don't need that.

What we do need is to have an extremely open, deep and always evolving milsim with all the things that made OFP/Arma great, plus new features. That simple.

Realism is only thing that can sell this series thay made wrong turn bringing arma in future anyone can tell you that. What are those many reasons? What is so bad bout using real names for weapons and vehicles? Once this game was considered to be a simulator today it looks more like mass effect. If they go in space someone else will take their place.
Last edited by Ivan; Jan 9 @ 5:38am
Firmament Jan 9 @ 7:39am 
Originally posted by I am Fluffy:
I don't remember the need of putting 6 rifle rounds in the enemy torso to kill him in OPF or ARMA 1/2.

Enemies were unrealistically hard to kill even in previous Arma games. You have no idea what you're talking about. Arma 3 makes it even more challenging, but Arma 2 was already quite harsh in that area.

I admit that OFP wasn't like that, though... I remember you could literally kill 6 or 7 guys in less than one second with a pkm... Those were the good old days (sarcasm)...


Originally posted by I am Fluffy:
Who exactly are those "we" you are speaking about that finds this behaviour valid?

They are the ones who understand that making Ai even a little unrealistically hard to kill can benefit to real ingame fight. We don't care about pure playtesting and what it would be implying on the gameplay's quality. This is not how Arma works and, again, you have to play it for real to understand that fighting in this game is much more exciting and challenging than in most other FPS.


Originally posted by Ivan:
Realism is only thing that can sell this series thay made wrong turn bringing arma in future anyone can tell you that.

Realism? Yes. But I was refering to absolute, total realism, period. Something very close to a pure simulator. No, this is definitely not what the Arma community wants, believe me. Going that way would entirely change the game because, like it or not, while Arma's gameplay has realistic elements into it, it is far, far from being realistic. Why do you think tanks in this game have so much trouble killing the infantry using their main weapon? Because, even though this looks quite unrealistic ingame (obvious absence of splash damages in this very example), the developers had to balance vehicles not to make them absolutely over-powered. And this is but an example among many (I could go on with the artillery precision, vehicles' armor, first aid kits - LOL do you still think Arma is about realism only, like you said it, when you have nice kits able to heal any wounds in few seconds...? Are you kidding me or what?).

Bi had to make choices, and what makes Arma great is not that it's a 90% or even 95% realistic game, but rather that it provides realistic features most other games don't while keeping interesting, open and balanced at the same time.

This is also why a Arma game can also be set on a more or less close future with no problems, as long as its roots remain identical: open > balance > realism. In that very order.
Last edited by Firmament; Jan 9 @ 7:58am
Nephilim Jan 9 @ 10:22am 
try telling me saints row 4 is perfectly fine -,-
Spudgunner Jan 9 @ 10:47am 
This ability to soak up bullets only works in a zombie setting. You would think the improvement in body armor would go hand-in-hand with weapons technology.

Although I think the change was made recently. My last campign playthrough was much harder this time because of this. I now have to spam the single shot trigger to bring down the AI enemy quickly. That makes it like the burst mode without the aim penalty. Aim shoot, aim shoot will get you killed now.
Last edited by Spudgunner; Jan 9 @ 10:51am
Mirudes Jan 9 @ 11:16am 
I can understand that this was made due to game balancing.
But when the majority of the players are saying it is more of a game breaker, it used to be fixed.

After all, it's a simulation intended to act like a game but not a game that shows the player all the things that can go wrong.

Some bigger calibers are made with the "one shot-one kill" capability.
The enemy will simply not return fire when it was hit one time.

No matter what body armor will be developed in the year 2030 but a hit on a helmet is going to break the spine by the first hit.
Mirudes Jan 9 @ 11:36am 
By talking about opinions - I can't find yours in your posting.
Is it meant to be spam?
Mirudes Jan 9 @ 11:49am 
So you use a forum to tell other people to shut up?
Ivan Jan 9 @ 1:02pm 
Originally posted by Firmament:
They are the ones who understand that making Ai even a little unrealistically hard to kill can benefit to real ingame fight...We don't care about pure playtesting...This is not how Arma works and, again, you have to play it for real to understand....No, this is definitely not what the Arma community wants, believe me.

Fluffy question is still not unanswered "who are those we". It seems you are speaking for many and you know what community wants. Are you on of devs maybe (hope not) member of some Arma community? It is nice if you are modding for A3 but i think you missed a lot. I know you never played ACE2 right? You love Red Orchestra 2 but never played I44. Balancing is what is killing Arma 3 right now. In a real world there is no balancing. No two equally strong factions that use basically same weapons. That will never happen in real world. No body armor that will protect you from six shots or tanks that can take six and more shells. No need to defend friend i am not bashing Arma 3. I hope they will fix and add a lot with updates and DLC-s coz for now game is pretty much naked. I don't mind paying for all those good stuff we had in Arma 2 but one tank for each side one attack chopper and only one plane that is just weak (weak is me being nice:).
Last edited by Ivan; Jan 9 @ 1:34pm
Firmament Jan 9 @ 2:07pm 
Originally posted by Ivan:
In a real world there is no balancing.

Exactly. That's why you couldn't make a game like Arma if you were to focus on pure realism only. Arma always managed to find a cross between realism and balance. Those "we" are the ones who are happy with that.

Note that S.T.A.L.K.E.R games also have a system of bullets' trajectory that causes certain ones to "vanish" randomly when they "should" hit the target. It makes the game more hardcore, stressful, unfair and random, kinda like real gunfights should be. And S.T.A.L.K.E.R, while completely different, is basically praised for the same reasons as Arma: open, deep, challenging, realistic but not too much, artistically beautiful, and bugged (yes, some people like them!).

Back on topic, this is how I understand the "vanishing bullet" thing: it is impossible to reproduce what a real gunfight should be like in reality, so, in order to get closer of it, instead of working on a super clever Ai, extremely advanced ballistics, ultra realistic Ai detection and reactions and all these features which would be extremely hard to implement, the devs have to "cheat" to make it technically more difficult and also a little longer.
Why longer? Because I can guarantee you that, in real life, when people are fighting with AK74s inside streets, it takes ages for them to do anything when compared to a game where you can move quickly and sometimes not even taking proper covers.
And most important, most of the time people in real life do miss their target. I mean, they miss it *hell a lot*. Seeing how many people are already complaining about their low hit percentage when using weapons in Arma, I just can't imagine how mad they would get if the game was to become even more realistic, doing everything possible to make us gamers to miss our targets *like soldiers in real life miss theirs* (no offense to them, btw, this is just how real war works...).
So, in Arma, you are meant to shot, miss, reload, go prone, find cover, ect... And all this must take some time and patience, just not as much time and patience as in reality. I'm not a dev, but I'm almost convinced that one of the reasons they made soldiers more resistant than in Arma 2 is due to the fact that Arma 3 has better controls, and a better playability - closer to classical FPS than any previous Arma/Ofp games in that area. See what I mean? They didn't want close fights to happen basically like in BF or whatever paced FPS, but in the same time they wanted to grant the player better controls and movements than before. I'm not saying that the way they've balanced weapons and armors is perfect, far from it, but things will certainly get improved in the future.


Overally though, I find it pointless to compare a game with the real world. No balancing in real world, so maybe we should ask the devs to make Arma unbalanced? What is that logic? There are no respawns, no super aid kits, no hud, no icons for mines, no special damages for tanks, no super accurate artillery, and no Ai either in the real world... What to do with those, then?
Last edited by Firmament; Jan 9 @ 2:39pm
I am Fluffy Jan 10 @ 5:37am 
Originally posted by Firmament:
Enemies were unrealistically hard to kill even in previous Arma games. You have no idea what you're talking about. Arma 3 makes it even more challenging, but Arma 2 was already quite harsh in that area.

Oh I do have quite an idea. I have spent many hours in OPF, ARMA 1/2, both single and multiplayer, belive me I DO have an idea.
Enemies were always hard to kill - yes, that is correct. But they were never terminator-like bullet sponges. They were hard to kill because:
a) they were hard to spot;
b) hard to actually hit when you spotted them, given the ranges of engagements;
c) they were equally good or even better marksman then you.
However when you did hit them and they didn't manage to hit you faster, they died. Simple as that and exactly how it always been and how it should be.

Hell, in ARMA 3 alpha and beta this wasn't a problem, everything worked ok back then. Now I came back to it after few months break and after playing for a few hours I thought steam switched my games from ARMA to Call of Duty.

Again those "we" you are speaking about - I have still no idea who they are. ARMA community? I'm a part of it and somehow I don't find your words true. Who else then? People that appriaciate that ARMA has become CoD?

Even on BIS forums and support pages are tickets regarding this issue. This has nothing to do with "balance", this series never required you to put half a clip to kill someone (granted the bullets hit the target of course) and somehow the balance was there.
Last edited by I am Fluffy; Jan 10 @ 5:38am
Firmament Jan 10 @ 7:15am 
Oh I do have quite an idea. I have spent many hours in OPF, ARMA 1/2, both single and multiplayer, belive me I DO have an idea.
Enemies were always hard to kill - yes, that is correct. But they were never terminator-like bullet sponges. They were hard to kill because:
a) they were hard to spot;
b) hard to actually hit when you spotted them, given the ranges of engagements;
c) they were equally good or even better marksman then you.
However when you did hit them and they didn't manage to hit you faster, they died. Simple as that and exactly how it always been and how it should be.

Like I said it, considering that it's impossible to reproduce in a game what a gunfight should be in real life, I like the idea of making it kind of unfair and very challenging, even if the devs have to cheat a little... Being a huge fan of the S.T.A.L.K.E.R games, I have been used to fight against ultra resistant enemies, and seeing Arma 3 going in that direction doesn't annoy me in any way. But there, I must admit that this is a very personnal opinion.
You will notice however that both Arma and S.T.A.L.K.E.R are well known for being quite hard and ruthless. Again, I see nothing wrong with them featuring slightly unrealistic enemies because I know that these games were made to be challenging. I'm fine with this.


Hell, in ARMA 3 alpha and beta this wasn't a problem, everything worked ok back then. Now I came back to it after few months break and after playing for a few hours I thought steam switched my games from ARMA to Call of Duty.

Christ, quit comparing Arma to COD... These two games really have nothing in common.


Again those "we" you are speaking about - I have still no idea who they are. ARMA community? I'm a part of it and somehow I don't find your words true. Who else then? People that appriaciate that ARMA has become CoD?

Still on the COD comparison, eh? Do you think I haven't noticed that you basically have nothing else to add? Also, how can you claim to be part of the Arma community after claiming that Arma = COD? This statement so incredibly foolish that I won't even try to make any comment on it.


Even on BIS forums and support pages are tickets regarding this issue. This has nothing to do with "balance", this series never required you to put half a clip to kill someone (granted the bullets hit the target of course) and somehow the balance was there.

People may have different opinions on this. Doesn't that mean they're not part of the same community.
Imo the only ones that really have no place in the Arma community are the ones that are dumb enough to compare this game to COD.
Last edited by Firmament; Jan 10 @ 7:16am
Dwarden  [developer] Jan 10 @ 8:20am 
enemies hard to kill is simply plain bug
first there was bug where the personal armor wasn't working
now the bug was fixed and the personal armor 'start to work' but it works too well (aka breaks existing balance configs)
so it's slowly fixed internally, some of it already in DEV and rest soon in DEV
sorry that it took 'longer' than instant to fix it
Showing 1-15 of 47 comments
< >
Per page: 15 30 50