If you read the description, you would realize the suggestion has nothing to do with blurring any more, and it also does not suggest any blinking grenades or sniper Scopes.

Alright, now you got the point, I up-voted. :) As long as its not like battlefield or something.

It is ok to increase FOV / Have some change in contrast on the screen, and improved dust and sound effects.
But definitely NO BLUR. Human eyes just dont simply blur up when you are scared.

Also I would suggest some form of minor splash damage when the bullets land really close to you, such as a disturb in movement pace as the sand and dirt hit your feet, and the shattered bullet shooting metal fragments at you. When a bullet land 10cm away from me I just feel really lucky, and that is not right.

understand this one. but im not up for it sorry.

If we can supress the ai, Im all in!

when i get shot at in arma, i get in cover.

if we are 5 guys and getting attacked by a 10 man group, i know where to find the closest rock!

I think that the debris is a great idea. And definite AI suppression. Though the player should not be forced to take cover by other effects, or have some sort of blur thing going on because then that means you can't take the risky strategy if you need to because you can't see.

Plus, although I think the AI suppression would be good, I don't really understand the point of it. Since AI don't run away unless there's 1 left there's no point, might as well just shoot them as quickly as possible so they can't shoot back and you're not wasting rounds shooting near them.

Saying that, it still would be interesting for the sake of advancement tactics. Because if you shoot at AI when others are trying to move up they just continue to shoot regardless of all the bullets hitting very close to them when you're trying to suppress so your guys can move up.

I use a mod for Arma2, which gives the ability to suppress AI and gives visual effects when player is being suppressed. It greatly enchanced not only the overall experience, but also the flow of battles. Suddenly I started taking automatic riflemen with me, instead of exchanging them for more riflemen and marksmen.

Previously, a lone gunman without cover, could kill the whole squad. The bullets were landing next to him, but he was acting like a boss and picking enemies one after another, until no one left. Now I have to carefully choose firing position, so I always have a way to retreat if suppressed. Just lying there on a flatland doesn't work anymore.

Another situation is on the assault. Automatic riflemen suppress the enemy, while the rest flanks to contact. You have to think and act more tactically, instead of just running there, guns blazing. Try to suppress them and try to avoid being suppressed.

downvoted.
this is not battlefield.
if ur not afraid of suppression face the consequences. your decision.

Suppression effect MUST HAVE! but blur in question...

I dislike battlefield 3 also but its not a justification for an argument, suppression effects done right would give the power back to person suppressing, currently suppression is a misnomer in the world of arma.

You might as well call it inaccuracy, as the person being suppressed just gets out from behind the rock like nothings happening and fires back.

What youve got to treat suppression like is an in game character thing, in any FPS a good developer will add ingame changes for the ingame character for things they know players sitting behind a screen don't react to, if you don't then you get unrealistic behavior.

Im not on about gimmicky effects, im on about an increase in heart rate meaning the gun is less steady, and maybe sounds effects to show that you don't like being shot at such as deeper breaths.

Also I do feel it should be choice for the server admins, or mission makers, maybe a module would be good.

Please make the suppression FOV change toggable.I love everything about this ticket except for that.I even dislike it when certain weapon mods zoom in slightly when going to an iron sight.

+1000 this would give this game much more reality

http://www.armaholic.com/page.php?id=20230

looks pretty good, it's an effect and it seems to give a good feel to it.

To play with effects means to be careful. Most effects in games are overdone or have no analog counterpart. Some elements most miss can't simulate. There is no way to simulate players fear by suppressingfire or zeds. Atmosphere doesn't mean to overblur or reduce the view to a minimum.
There is no sin by that, to throw performance away in the meaning to realize a perspective view by blur. All i think when i see this is, that i need glasses. If you look at a painting you always see in a real view. There is no need for effects unless geometry. If you look to your screen do you always see every corner in perfect perfect resolution? I think no.
As example, I played on the map Namalsk. Between some trees I found a death body. I checked him, suddenly stomps and deep breathing behind me. I turned around like a freak, seeking but nothing there. After a while I realized that it was a invisible buggy beast model that harmless. Then I was shoot down by a men that seemingly watched me.

Say what?

And once again jumping to the blur? Did we not establish already that we skipping past the blur to use other creative methods?

Laywiin said: "If we can supress the ai, Im all in! when i get shot at in arma, i get in cover."

Samnicho said: "Because if you shoot at AI when others are trying to move up they just continue to shoot regardless of all the bullets hitting very close to them when you're trying to suppress so your guys can move up."

So it's okay to suppress AI because they dont react to incoming rounds, and they should, but when human players do the same (not necessarily you, but you do get alot of those), if they dont react to incoming rounds, then it's okay???

Create AI is to try to emulate human behavior. So there is a differ.

I see no point to unsimulate affects for players that not real. If suppressingfire does you not fear, then it is ineffective. So you need to overthink why and not to penalize the players for this. It's like to penalize for bugusing, but the problem sit on the other side of the table.

I understand where this come from, but it works for more arcadey versions of these games, such as BF3 and RO2, where their implementation is needed, and well thought. Both of those games happen on mid sized maps, closed. This creates hotspots where players tend to run like like lemmings. Just connect to any of those games and check it.

In arma, the lethality of the weapons is such, that the psychological effect of being fired upon, just happens. Of course i'm not scared for my life, but i'd rather keep playing and be useful, in the spirit of the game, than commit stupid suicide. This happens on every single organised multiplayer game of arma i´ve been into. There are no respawns, so you just make it count. Your soldier is a fragile thing, and you feel it the second the guy you were just talking to just slumps over, dead.

However, I would like some sort of suppression implementation for AI, such an important and basic thing in combat such as covering fire, for fire and maneuver for example, doesnt work against them. They should try to relocate, or just lie suppressed if say, pinned down by a LMG.

Loki, we come back to the argument that a person sits behind a monitor/tv so they cannot experience the effects of that situation, they can still okay fearless because, tough shit, they can respawn. In that case AI aren't worried either because they simulate what most seem to do behind a monitor.

Now what syn says, organized event, and no respawn, we discussed that earlier in the thread, yes that works, but because of no respawn, or excessively long respawn times people would most likely value their virtual selfs more. But as someone mentioned, make it an optional module in mp.

No, just no. Guns are supposed to be pin point accurate. Bullets flying around suddenly make my gun not hitting where it points to? Nope. Also machine guns ARE pin-point accurate in real life. GO back to BF3.

Sonic, you should maybe go back to CoD, because your argument above sounds like something a lot like CoD.

I agree that the psyc of human is in some parts fragile, in this case some effects are real and uncontrollable. But also it is the choice of player to come fast back into combat. That is a question what mission you enter.

easy - no virtual fear
medium - virtual fear
hard - virtual fear/emotions not needed / not acceptable

All you can simulate are physical symptoms. But Emotions came from an atmospheric situation.

I am not absolute against suppressing effects, only overdoes of all unneeded effects. Almost if them lower the performance in every case and unnatural my perception. I thought by my self about a stressing system based on the human biosystem. But that would work over a long combattime and result in real physical symptoms like the fatiguesystem.

related >>0008141 Stimpacks

@ShotgunSheamuS wtf is COD? some kind of fish?
My argument is that how the gun works should not be affected by the emotion of its user. No matter how nervous the shooter feel, bullets should always fly in alignment with the barrel. This is not the case in battlefield and that is one of the top reasons I quit. I'm okay with dirt on my goggles when there's an explosion, but that's it. My point is accuracy decrease is definitely NOT okay, and while currently you have perfect aim even when injured, it doesn't make sense to have weapon sway when you're not even hit.

Also what I said was not an argument. Guns ARE really pin point accurate in real life, especially machine guns (because they have long barrels). I only stated a fact and pointed out how your suggestion might contradict with it. If you can't accept that, this game is not for you.

How many more times are we going to use another game for an excuse to hide behind, if you don't have a brain to provide a competitive argument, don't post.

All you are doing is providing a reason why we SHOULD have suppression, because you clearly can't think for yourself.

BTW sonic if guns were pin point accurate in real life, do you think these statistics would count?

http://jonathanturley.org/2011/01/10/gao-u-s-has-fired-250000-rounds-for-every-insurgent-killed/

If you want to shoot like a bot and have head shots all the time then sure the current system works, it requires skill, and self determination in this system.

And it is more styled to lone wolfs effectively.

Now lets take a look at the average engagement range:

http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=ADA512331

Skip to Page 24.

Average engagement range is 300 meters, and in general it is 500 meters, I can currently hit targets at around 800 meters.

If we were to apply suppression in Arma 3, it would cut this ridiculous system of massive engagement ranges down, as if every soldier is a sniper.

Forcing not only skill and self determination, but also teamwork and communications, effectively allowing a larger group to overcome a smaller group via methods used in real life.

if you had 8 US marines or 8 Rifles or 8 w/e bearing down on you, 4 suppressing you, and 4 maneuvering to get in closer and eliminate you.

You wouldn't be firing like a pro, you would be scared and the best you could muster would be to try and suppress back.

Currently the system we employ allows one man to wipe out a large team, even if they know where he is and are suppressing the hell out of him, he can still just peek and poke and get ridiculous shots at unrealistic ranges.

We need to give the power back to teams working together, because the game we play supports lone wolfs currently.

Suppression will make people think twice about firing that first shot at around 800 meters and bring them in closer to around 500 meters.

It will mean that ambushes actually have an effect, giving real world tactics an edge, and it will mean that if you are being suppressed you can suppress them back.

If you want to be ruled by lone wolfs then thumbs down, but if you want something that will force lone wolfs out, and allow for better gameplay then vote thumbs up.

Dale seems to get it... Like really get what this is about.

So it would better to review the aiming quality.

But a mainpart of paramilitary tactics is to beat an larger army with lesser resources. So now you have an idea what a fearless man can do, even when he die by that. If fatigue work, a moving unit of 8 is physical stressed and their aiming is worse. But the 1 or 2 hunters are fit and also have accurate weapons. It mean that ambushes actually have an effect. You said it right you need to get control and suppress. That he or they turn back and in the worst case your group lost 1, 2 or more man.

The reason why 1 man don't retreat is that after dying he jump into the next helicopter to paradise or runs 300 meter to combatzone. So why he shout feared by a bit deterring? Do you want that he get an epileptic shock when 10 man opens fire to him? They will learn to control this and shoot you and your mates faster down until they die. Such guys don't care, they know that the other have the same problem. As long they have nothing to lost and get a positive killcounter, you will need a big red sign in center of their screen to stop them. But then you begin to enter the fields of unfairness and unbalancing.

No to review the aiming quality would be to add in more deviation, which in some cases such as sprinting or being injured needs to be tweaked, but standing still even tired you can take accurate shots in real life.

Suppression on the other hand isn't dependent on factors such as sprinting and being injured, its all about the enemy suppressing you, and that acts as an enzyme and starts a process which is fair for both sides as it doesn't matter how tired or injured you are you will get affected the same.

Going into how paramilitaries and insurgency's work is pointless, in a game you've got to treat all persons the same otherwise you get unbalanced gameplay, and in doing that it becomes bad gameplay.

The main thing to remember is that if the US Army with all their tech are engaging at 300 meters, then the insurgents are also engaging at 300 meters.

in the article I provided the reason why they want to go back to engaging at 500 meters, is because there are less casualties because insurgents can't shoot for sh*t, the insurgents have a few good shots but they move around regularly training etc so they never get deployed for long periods.

@Dale That is because the shooters themselves are inaccurate at aiming, not because the guns aren't accurate. I'm talking about the gun. You clearly don't know what I'm talking about. If you haven't shot a machine gun before (I'm sure you haven't) then try it. The bullets will go to wherever you aim the barrel to up to 500m. The citation you posted doesn't contradict the fact that machine guns are pin-point accurate in real life. That statistics also accounts for the number of bullets used up in training, which is probably even more than used in real combat. It's just a huge AVERAGE. Also I can imagine green soldiers put on full-auto to spray and pray, or it's just simply machine gunners lay down supressive fires, to result in a large bullet consumption/kill ratio. But that is the result of how the user uses the guns, not the guns themselves.

Woa woa, this supression effect has effect on aiming? no way. got to agree with Sonic.

I like how you want to increase FOV / visual / debris etc, but if it effect the aiming/accuracy of the bullet, that is another story...

You got panic, but what if you still aiming at the same spot? the bullet still go where the person aim. Especially if you're on bipod? or maybe on steady aim position like prone.. you can't just suddenly gone crazy aim.

Sweet it doesn't say anything about affecting the bullet trajectory, but yeah slightly affects the aim, as does using up your stamina, or holding your breath too long, do how i is it any different from simulating stress?

Sonic I have fired many guns, and at no point while firing those weapons did I get a feeling of accuracy over long ranges, the very nature of the gun is "spray and pray".

If your on about mounted guns, then yes I agree that they are relatively accurate, but even then they are accurate only to a certain degree because as soon as you start factoring wind and skill you start seeing more difficult trajectories etc.

Also at no point am I saying that there should be deviation, where you fire the bullet is where it should hit, but while being suppressed you should start to swing and sway a bit more showing that you the character is under a stressful situation not you the person behind the computer screen.

Also at what point did the statistic state that it was taken from training?

If you are going to dispute a fact you must use more than an unknown statement.

Again stating that its a "huge average" has no bearing on the fact that currently 250,000 rounds are fired for every insurgent, if what you are saying is that some forces are able to kill more insurgents than others, the same will still be true with suppression even more so because those that excel will kill more people due to the ability to actually use suppression.

If you are doubting as to whether you yourself would get your head down when being fired at, trust me you would.

I read first 20 comments and skimmed rest so bare me.

It looks like the feelings are in two separate groups:

Group 1) People wanting effect to get target suppressed more effectively and feel the suppression forcing them to seek cover when they are shot at no matter of respawn or travel time.

Group 2) People wanting higher respawn time and travel time to give them reason to feel suppression and seek cover by their own knowledge of penalty.

The first group seemed to like idea of blurred vision etc, second group blamed about wanted to bring ARMA 3 as a CoD or BF3.

Many games have brought the blurred vision to suppression effect, way before CoD2/3 or BF3 were under development.

It does work well in many games, as it is the fear for the player.

What the suppression is suppose to do?
It should be a warning to person under fire that there is no wise thing to rise head. In multiplayer games it is a reason to get team give own suppressive fire for enemy and get pinned squad member out of the position.

Without any visual effect, the player only thinks "Nah, it is just 3-5 minutes waiting and trip to back" so I seek cover, wait a little to get position and then kill the enemy.

With visual effect, the player needs to seek cover at that moment, not to focus to who is firing or where. Think only about getting to cover as when being suppressed, you are no use for your squad.

How much use there is now in firing on move toward enemy? Nothing, as if you don't hit the enemy then there is no use to fire. If enemy is kneeled and fires toward you few shots and you are moving, you will be scared about getting hit and you think way to get cover and maybe fire a few shots at that direction to suppress shooter so you get to cover.
Now when you move and enemy is still, enemy has better change to aim and hit at you. Players know they can just jump on the ground, aim and shoot few rounds accurately without them getting any real panic being shot at.

In battlefield 3 the idea to bring suppression effect was great. It was just implemented badly as it was not so effective.

I would say, bring the blurring as suggested but tie it to difficulty settings. Where players who play at lower difficulty will get it but those who want to play as them being in total control getting it off.

The mod what was linked here what blinks screen black/white is my my opinion a bad one.

Blurring is way better. It can be done in few different ways, example blur the whole vision all the time, so player can not see anything anywhere.

Give the "tunnel vision" where edges of vision is blurred but the middle is more accurate so player can move and see where is heading.

Or add a motion blur, where moving head causes blurring but vision gets clear once looking at one direction longer (> 1 second). It would give a player change to fire back if wanted, but it is not possible just jump up and fire accurate shots right away.

One of the problems is that game doesn't have foliage cover (alpha blending currently) for long distances. Meaning who is shooting at long distances is almost bring like a red dot on night and targets moving as well. The enemy who is doing suppression should have the benefit to keep the targets down.

Changing accuracy or slowing down reloading breathing etc isn't good by my opinion. As my gun accuracy doesn't change when I am being shot at. The suppression needs to be a affective way to distract the target from fighting at that moment. To cover your buddy what is being shot at enemy and you fire at that enemy, you should get your buddy saved and force enemy to take cover and stop firing.

Soldiers are not trained to withstand suppression. That is experience what comes from battlefield when your senses and courage grows to the situations being shot at. You don't anymore get in panic or such adrenaline bursts of it but you can work under fire better.

It should be difficulty setting, skill level of the character.

Harder difficulty == everyone are more experienced in battle == less effect
Easier difficulty == everyone are less experienced in battle == more effect

When player sets AI character skill in game, it as well sets the effect amount. So if player takes control of that character, it gets the effect no matter of game overall difficulty settings.

When host set server overall difficulty setting for person versus person gaming, it enables/disabled the effect based level.

Personally I would enable in difficulty settings the blurring effect for suppression even on hardest difficylty levels (custom levels) as it would make more meaningful combat situations where everyone can suppress others better.

And I am against by making the effect always on, no change to change setting. As clearly many player doesn't like it but same time many likes it, so setting is good thing.

y think this is a good ad-on keep this game more immersive. trust me in real live if you are under shoot you will not be in your normal state.

In Darkest Hour, mod for Red Orchestra Osfront, the suppression effects were pretty goat... You really did shit you pants under MG fire.

Not sure why there are so much dislikes. I have a bad case of tl&dr though... xD

Well dunadan, I will summarize it for you. 60% of the negativity is "copying" battlefield 3 and they dont like battlefield because it isnt arma, and it is an arcade game. And yeah some just dont like the way it was implimented in bf3.

And the other 40% is just that it isn't necessary because it isnt realistic, and some seem to believe supression seems to be a myth from the sound of it???

There, easy read =)

Ok, I see. You got my vote anyway.

Funny to see people bringing up BF3 at every turn while there are much older games and highly respected tactical shooters that successfully featured suppression effects such as Darkest Hour and Project Reality.

I saw people doing the same on BIS forums when some people rightfully complained that you cannot switch to your sidearm without stopping.

I wouldn't be surprised if many fake accounts were used to downvote this as maturity isn't a quality among these people. Gotta remember that guy who had created a hundred accounts to downvote a poll, whether ArmaIII should use Steamworks or not, on BIS forums.

Wow, just... Wow

Wasnt aware people go to such lengths just to have their way, even though they are the minority -sigh-

Either way, looks like almost a straight up 50/50 deal, so let's see what the devs do about it =)

If this is the case then its an easy win for us, because the devs being devs can just take a look at the vote IP's, and then decide how many ACTUAL people want the suppression effect.

If not then we've lost fair an square, and bringing up such issues is pointless, the only way to truly fix this would be to link accounts with PlayerID's (or more precise steam), that way it would mean easier work for the devs :) and its not like we want feedback from people who aren't playing the game tbh.

It needs a suppression effect similar to insurgency 2 where the goes grayscale and blurs slightly for a faction of a second. This is needed as the sounds at the moment are poor, and the only way to tell if someones firing directly at you is if you see the clouds of dust are your feet. The current system is far from ideal.

Thanks jester, appreciate your input as well =)

although recently i am aware of some people complaining about blur hurting their eyes, so perhaps skip the blur? But indeed an effect is needed, nothing overwhelming, just a slight hinderence, enough to inform one is being suppressed, and also hinder one slightly so that suppression actually has an effect.

Still findingsome inhuman like players out performing others, like a sniper at 360m that can keep a steady calm aim and take out two persons actively suppressing (or trying to) and a third flank. At most he gets away wounded with 3 kills. Just doesn't seem right? More like an action Hollywood movie.

No this isn't BF3 it isn't that type or shooter, like was said before you know your being suppressed by the amount of rounds landing nearby and ontop of that you know because if you get out of cover you will die.

Downvoted, really awful idea. When in-game combat gets intensive your real-life heart starts beating faster, you concentrate on one target and don't paying much attention to others and so on. There's simply no need to poorly simulate something that happens with player IRL.

In ArmA when someone shoots at you, your aim become unstable. No need for blurry fatigue effects. Let for modders to do it for those who want it.
/Downvoted

Why are you guys not reading the description and further comments other than the first few? I know its a lot to read but really, read it before you vote and comment, stop assuming its like battlefield and stop assuming suppression will will be a blurry representation.

ACE has it.

I think having realistic bullet impact sounds would automaticly give that effect. I know with some sound mods i deff feel suppressed when shot at.

Downvoted. The only time I'd agree to suppression effect if it makes you to defecate in your pants as soon as you are shot at so this then will slow you down. This or nothing.

I think in a firefight you get an adrelanin rush. So they should ad efects, that are similar to the realife.
Some said in there commends soldiers are trained to deal with that.
But i thinks even a soldier will still be stressed and fearful when he gets under fire. I Added some youtube link. I think this video supports my opinion.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ktse9JUudv8

The only way I could see this implemented is if dust kicked up and blurred your vision temporarily, not "oh no I'm getting shot at and my contacts fell out". As good and well thought-out as your suggestion is, this sort of thing applies to fast-paced games like Battlefield and Call of Duty, where suppressive fire doesn't mean much without it. Games like ArmA don't need that because your soldiers life is valued, what with long respawns and a large map to traverse back to the battle. The ArmA games are full of experienced players who know how to properly react to a firefight, and I can assure you that you will rarely, if ever, run into sprinting CoD kids. And if you do, they die off first usually, so you'll be in good shape without this effect.

I don't know if there can be established now some "standardized physiological response" to being under fire for game developers and other industries

I will say that close passing of high velocity projectiles will induce a certain hydrostatic effect on a humans liquid makeup

Perhaps this is the middleground. Perhaps you say "Well, we know scientifically that projectiles carrying high kinetic energy (or momentum my physics is a bit rusty) passing close to a liquid body will cause pressure fluctuations in that liquid therefore we can deduce there will be fluctuations in blood/intracranial-fluid pressures within that human and therefore we can implement a standardized, somewhat averaged version of the known effects of rapid and transient fluctuations in blood and intracranial-fluid pressures including blurred vision, confusion, etc."

I remember in ARMA2 that it became difficult to aim precisely when you were under fire but that this also lead to erroneous results where you suffered "suppression" in situations which did not warrant it.

I think the fluid pressure fluctuation model might be a good answer but that it should only apply to projectiles which pass very close to the human, mainly within 5cm of the head.

wow that is a very technical explanation lol, a bit tooo out of the box maybe? But I am sure it may be valid to some extent =) thanks for the pro-active response.

About arma2, you referring to vanilla Arma2 or a mod? I have never noticed anything like you described in vanilla Arma2.

vanilla arma2. if you take some fire your breathing goes apeshit and you cant aim. could be disabled at lower difficulty settings im not sure

Guys who used "lol" often probably need supression. And go to play BF3. You not ready to play with adults.

Game definitely needs more immersion sound and dust/splinter-wise. I could also imagine transitioning up the voice-levels from stealth to aware etc. I'm not feeling additional effects like blur, increased sway or such.

@Anachoretes: If play BF3 next while suppression == lol. Thanks.

i see this issue has seen some transformations since its start, so even though the initial idea of forcing a psychological effect to a player may sound wrong, there are other indirect or out-of-control effect that may augment realism and may influence player's choices when forced in a corner.

Morale plays a key factor in war and combat, and a combat simulator that can reproduce psychological effects (without forcing your ragdoll soldier to curl up cry and piss his virtuapants, or throw his weapon away and flee or surrender) would certainly be most welcome.

i like the increase of particles and the increased heart rate that may influence your ability to focus on a target, thus actually giving some real use to machine gunners that are usually easily targeted by cold blooded soldiers even during a suppression sweep: when successfully suppressed you shouldnt be able to crouch, inhale, take your aim, and headshot your suppressor, common sense and survival instinct should force you behind your cover literally holding for dear life.

Overall if you've ever been on the frontline which I can tell nearly all of you haven't, you would know that you might not get suppression effects but you do get your head down, for those of you who compare suppression effects to BF3 are more than likely from BF3 as those who have played with suppression effects in most games come from milsim backgrounds i.e ACE, BF2:PR etc

It doesn't matter how you think you would react in a situation like this it just isn't true and for those who have been in these situations it either isn't powerful enough (bullet impacts) or it isn't strong enough to warrant getting into cover.

Currently most bullets hitting around me sound like .22 rounds, it just doesn't sound or feel like im being shot at by machine guns or heavy calibre rifles, heres an example of what a M60 impact looks and sounds like.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uBlZh5vsnjw

The power of that MG is just not comparable ingame as ingame the bullet impact sounds are like nothing, in dry areas such as Afghanistan impacts create a lot of dust also which you would be getting in places like Stratis and Altis.

The funny thing is those who are arguing against it are saying go back to BF3, yet suppression and impacts are more milsim than BF3 yet even they have it, how can you claim to be a milsim enthusiast when you don't even know what its like being on the receiving end of a rifle or at least let those who know tell you.

@Dale
"The funny thing is those who are arguing against it are saying go back to BF3, yet suppression and impacts are more milsim than BF3 yet even they have it, how can you claim to be a milsim enthusiast when you don't even know what its like being on the receiving end of a rifle or at least let those who know tell you."

Yes, the sound impact to player being shot at is very low.
It would be interesting to see if that effect volume would be boosted dramatically.

Still for gameplay reasons I would go to blurring and other visual distractions so player itself gets distracted but not limited by own skills, so eventually some players would be better dealing getting shot at.

I think that if you want people to fear being killed then they should have some Hard-core PVP Server options where if you die, then no re-spawn. also no 3rd person views and Less accurate weapon handling. so I guess its up to the server host. I do agree also that there should be a suppression response from the AI they should run and look for cover with a quicker response time for locating cover and actually hide behind things when being shot at not just turn an shoot back. But again as for PVP join or host a server without re-spawn and without 3rd person viewing options.

Why is this thread voted down?

It should be a suppressed effects in Arma.
The Auto rifleman doesn't get his full potential with his job.

I did play a mission (workshop) that he had a script or whatever for that, were we did actually get suppressed, and it is more realism and harder to spot the enemy or where the fire comes from. With the suppressed effects, the Auto rifleman can actually do his job and suppress the enemy.

I do not understand why this is 150 vs 173 voted. This is Arma, realism.

Vote down, as a add on mod, YES. In the Arma3 Vanilla no. Bullets don't make my vision blurry. Getting fired at like that will make your adrenaline pump so fast, things seem to slow down, if anything, as if YOU cant move fast enough, nothing is slowing down tho its just the perception of it slowing. Soldiers are trained for this and react to that training in these situations. Goggles are quite effective against debris but you're lucky if shrapnel or ricochets don't hit you if you are being suppressed.

Suppression for AI is needed to be more in depth because they do not react in a similar way to a person.

If you are using Extended Armor, then please do not complain about the apparent lack of suppression effects. If you do not use extended armor, you know those bullets will kill you, and you are scared of being killed because you will not respawn or you will be forced to move a great distance back to your location.

Very long scroll down here...
Suppression is Terrible, 1000bullets and still no kill. WTF MAN! this ain't COD.

Hello there, seeing there's lots of discussing about suppression here, I might as well post this here in the hopes of getting some general feedback. I'm working on suppression for the TacBF mod (Dale, who made plenty of posts here, is in that team as well). Either give feedback here or what you think or on the youtube video (preferably the youtube video). The values of effects are quite easy to tune and it doesn't require other mods and is fully scripted. It could be added to any multiplayer server without any problems. Eventually it'll be released to the public as well.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wZleWl1b3DE

Sorry, I didn't like the suppression effects. Its better then none thought.
But I did play a mission on ARMA 3, don't remember who made it. But he had the best suppression effects I've seen so far.

I all against this! Even though I'm sitting comfortably behind a computer I get stressed out when being suppressed!

If this does get implemented in Arma 3 in any way users should be able to set the suppression effects level, and even disable it completely. I think most users will find it irritating, and will disable it anyway.

But I am all for suppression effects for AI.

How about this as a suppression mechanic that can work in game.

When suppressed no blur however the huge amounts of adrenaline in your blood are shown in game by lack of fine motor skills so while you are suppressed mouse movement sensitivity is increased + mouse acceleration is turned on momentarily.

Once no longer suppressed mouse movement returns to normal.

Lack of fine motor skills is one effect of adrenaline and such a mechanic would be super great as a suppression mechanic.