The game has wrong scale for units and map size when compared to ranges.

Unit ranges are too short, example MBT's firing range is too short, artillery is too inaccurate and every infantry are supermans' running marathon in just over 30 minutes.

http://imgur.com/a/j1T2d#0

Example: When game gives range 100m, it is actually more about 35m.
Results? About 2.8 times smaller calculated range means every unit shoots and travels 2.8 times shorter / faster than they suppose.

Maps what size are about 30x30km looks more like 10x10km but by wrong reasons is made longer. Yes, AA would cover whole area, artillery could give accurate support for whole map, tanks would shoot much longer etc.
But that is the reason to have tactical positions of the zone so you have good visual to enemy what needs to come over open areas and you can stay in cover and hidden to destroy enemy in few shots without enemy knowing where they actually came.

Now in game, no matter how realistic it is wanted to be, is like soldiers are shooting paintballs by their range, throwing hand grenades over 100m way over javelin throwing records what is visually so crazy, jogging over 1km in a minute (going over 4.4km in 4 minutes) while visually running at correct speed etc.

Game has good LOS (Line of Sight) system and it isn't used. With correct longer ranges, units would need to be positioned to better tactical positions depending their LOS. Every hedgerow should matter for LOS and give visual cover for moving units.

When people are talking about ranges (like boosting ATGM range by 100m) it does not implicate the real need and situation (example of 100m would mean range puff is nothing, while for game range puff should be about 400-700 for same effect).

Making correct scale would't mean that everyone are just shooting at longer distance. Because LOS would mean it would not happen so easily and projectiles would still fly slowly so it would be much harder to hit a moving target and could be possible to even parry them. Artillery would be much more accurate but same time much harder to use for big area effect. A older era MBT would not be so much weaker than modern MBT as LOS would need to be taken in situation. So modern MBT would have the range bonus only at very long open areas, where older MBT's could just flank and avoid modern MBT range bonus easily.

Game needs more depth what can only get by correcting ranges and unit recognition.

Fresh news, bro.

_________________

huhuh

_________________

It doesn't and if you disagree, you're perfectly free to make your own game. I might even play it if it's fun.

_________________

Looking at the second image, the range actually looks quite appropriate to scale, at least, according to a 1.5-3.5x magnification scope.



I'm pretty sure someone's pointed this out before just in relation to speed and distance, but, yeah, aaanyway. Those single digits on the left-hand side designate range in hundreds of meters, the range-finder itself should be easy enough to use, it's based off of the height of a man.

_________________

The problem is that the FOV and position affects the scale adaption at low level. But as you can notice at first image, 100m in game does not anyway reflect 100m visually. Far away from it. And the other image is from same position, but the other group is over the assault rifle range (701m) what isn't even used range for shooting, where max range is about 300m for kill. And 300m is very far away if you just go out for such range and you check it. Think about targeting someone from that range who is in cover in forest and laying down hiding and shooting at you.

Even a 50m is long range for assault rifles and at forests the typical range is about 25-50m (depending more about forest type but for german...) as visibility is bad and even at that range, hitting isn't so easy.
http://www.angelfire.com/art/enchanter/range.html

And think about range of 700m. It is very far away. A soccer field is about 90-120 meter long. How many have been standing next to goal at full length soccer field? It is far away from goal to goal.
It is easy to think that 300m is very close and that 700m isn't that far away. It is good even if you can easily hit a steady target at 600m range what pop's up nicely, but much harder to hit to moving target or target what hides.

How long it takes to run 600m? A 30 seconds? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o7T853jSqS8 In game soldiers run in one minute over 1200m, with gear and on road, field or forest. So they can do 600m in 30 seconds with about 15-20kg gear on them with hand hold weapons. Just so amazing!
But when looking the speed, they are jogging and moving about correct running speed. But still the range does not match at all what they should travel. Game has distances 3-4x too long for calculations. Meaning units don't shoot so far away as they should, doesn't travel as long as they should (that is pure game mechanic thing to have fuel) or can use any cover as they should.

IF developers do release SDK (I still doubt it, some has said developers have promised to release them but I haven't found such claims but I haven't spent hours for searching those promises), at least players can then fix the obvious unrealistic problems from the game, but because I doubt developers will release SDK because they easily feel that they lose the change to control game (many developers fear it, even that modding community is the one what keeps game a live).

And when distances are wrong, as is the calculations for speed. Like helicopter flying 300kph is little faster than APC driving 100kph, while difference should be more dramatic.

You should look into some of the RTS mods for ARMA2...

I think the issues may have more to do with the camera system not exactly matching the maps; I'm not sure why, but there are several maps where the spatial relations seem to simply not match others.

Sure, infantry are very fast, but, all in all, they're kinda just a little nuance feature in the game; powerful, and integral, but if the game totally eliminated them, it probably wouldn't be that incredibly different from how it is now, and if you slowed them down, you'd effectively make them more stationary than they already tend to be (Forest clearing aside).

One some maps, one thousand meters looks like one thousand meters, on others, it looks like 300-400. Indeed, I've played a lot of Hell's Highway, but it's one of those maps that doesn't seem afflicted with it, whereas a few others seem pretty skewed, and then some are just kinda, 'Huh, that doesn't seem normal,' like Summer's Night and Storm Eye, which feel kinda right, but a few distances don't seem like they'd be the same if displayed in another map.

Also, I have a healthy interest in firearms and shooting, so I'm fairly well aware of range relations and difficulty of shot placement at range.

_________________

I am having this exact feeling. I sometimes felt maybe it is because I zoomed in less or more but I think you are right.
Like yesterday I felt my Leopards were shooting really far on Hell's Highway and I couldn't believe they could actually shoot that far.
I think it is something related to map size but I may indeed be imagining stuff.

check this thread:
viewtopic.php?f=11&t=2694