7th Cavalry Gaming

Join the Tactical Gaming Excellence

Arma 3: I&A Tactical Realism 2 Feedback Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.

Rosefield.M

Lieutenant Colonel
Active Duty
1-7 HQ
238
274
118
Hi LTC, it could be a situation that I myself encountered : a side objective wasn't completed. In my case it was an anti-vehicle section (BRDM-2s with ATGMs) whose vehicles were damaged but not actually destroyed.

I even had a similar experience of needing to hunt what eventually was revealed to be commandos (suppressed weapons) in Aggelochori but it did not take us extremely long to find them.
As far as I was aware, we were pushing main, and we were taking no fire for ~1-2 hours(with BUFF in a close and very annoying orbit to try and draw fire with no results) . We had to restart the map. I did not know the status of the enemy vics as I joined in later than everyone, but if complete kills for vics is a possible solution, lets toss that up there for the boys as a solution moving forward.
 

Moraru.R

1st Lieutenant
Active Duty
B/1-7 HQ
S3 HQ
S3 Staff
192
150
98
What I will definitely do on my side is put up a reminder that complete destruction of objects associated with Side Objectives is needed. So for example if Mortars need to be eliminated, it's not sufficient to kill the gunner and throw a grenade near the mortar tube. The mortar needs to be completely destroyed (a demolition block would do the job).

I am hesitant to point the exact locations on the map or even give out any information regarding how many side objectives there are and what are they as the more you offer players on a silver platter, the faster they'll chew through it and get bored quicker. Sure, I want to avoid needle in a haystack situations.
 

Hamm.C

Warrant Officer 1
Active Duty
1/A/1-7
MP Staff
S7 Staff
143
146
98
First of all I would thank our 7Cav Devs for doing great work for the Cav. We really appreciate all you do. Second, I echo 95% of everything from the others, certainly the obvious glitches that need to be fixed. We all know anything new is a work-in-progress and constructive feedback is welcome and appreciated. Here are important issues I have seen and my strong suggestions for improvement.

Issue: Main base overlays are way, WAY too big. Ridiculously big. Even though in the last Insurgency build, I wasn't a big fan of the base 3-D floating overlays, but they were at least reasonable. They were nice and compact and appeared and disappeared (faded in and out) depending on your proximity to them. The new ones are MASSIVE and present several problems and are basically intolerable. First and most notably- obscured vision and impaired visibility, for both those on the ground and in the air. Second, they diminish the immersive realism/atmosphere/environment that we pride ourselves on trying to create/achieve.
  • Solution: a) Mark the map with pertinent locations and b) return to the previous smaller, compact, and neat overlays as described above. In any case, the base locations should be diagrammed on the map (i.e. Runways/taxiways numbered/labeled as well as main staging/logistics/rotary wing/fixed wing/airspace/medical facilities/repair-rearm-refuel facilities [preferably trucks]/ etc. etc. etc.)

Issue: UH-60 Blackhawk has no inventory. No inventory that I could find. Not even necessary supplies like ropes required for fast roping.
  • Solution: Add ropes to inventory so infantry can have fast-rope capability [preferably the longest ropes]. Further, add some basic supplies comparable to what was previously incorporated in Blackhawk's inventory. [Note- Not suggesting replacing resupply crates or anything like that, just the basics]

Issue: Aircraft Aircrew restrictions do not allow for Nonrated non-crewmember (“NCM”) or "fill-in" positions which is an extreme limitation and severe impediment to the aircraft and the infantry it transports and supports. "It is ultimately up to the PC (Pilot-in-Command) as to who, what, and where crewmen are assigned on the aircraft. Positions and assignments may change based on available crew, the mission, and other considerations by the PC" [all taken from our 7Cav BRAC field manual]. Many times NCMs, end up being vital to the safety and security of the aircraft/crew/passengers and critical to the success of the mission.
  • Solution: Remove aircrew restrictions other than the Pilot-in-Command and Co-Pilot, both of which should be an absolute slot restricted position/role. (UNLESS there is a way to allow that one last infantryman or other to sit in the co-pilots seat without the ability to unilaterally "take control" and fly without a seated pilot to release said controls). As stated in the 7Cav BRAC field manual, these crew roles are interchangeable roles which do NOT require a rating. Beyond that, authority is ultimately granted to the PC to sort out. Bottom line- ALL Aircrew slots other than Pilot (again, unless Co/Pilot seat can be specially restricted to avoid abuse) seats should be generally open to anyone and everyone and the crew seats on the aircraft should be open to anyone and everyone.

Issue: Certain aircraft missing or omitted. Airframes Raven-1, Sparrow-1, and Eagle-1 are either missing or omitted. These are valuable and fun multi-role, multi-mission capable aircraft that should be included, at least as optional. (Pretty sure we ditched the F-15 which is fine because nobody flew it much anyway).
  • Solution: Return/Add/enable/re-introduce these aircraft to our new mission build.

Issue: CH-47 Chinook sling load did not seem to work for me after multiple separate attempts.
  • Solution: Not sure, but something to look into. Testing perhaps, unsure :unsure:

Issue: Map Information buttons/tabs/menus and critical information missing/inaccurate. In the previous mission build there was tons of information in the map screen (map--->top left menus and sub-menus). Information ranging from call-ins to medevac, unit/element radio channels etc. etc. I no longer see any of this comprehensive, resourceful information in the map under any of the buttons/tabs/menus/options. Moreover, the listed channels/frequencies listed are totally incorrect and likely lead to confusion with newer, inexperienced players.
  • Solution: a) Restore the information resources on the map screen AND b) Correct the radio channel list to reflect the proper unit/element channels in congruent with and as mandated by 1-7 Battalion Commander in Communications Electronics Operation Instructions. [ https://7cav.us/threads/3099/ ]
Please advise if any clarification is needed/requested/required. Thanks!
 
Last edited:

Lucander.P

Corporal
Active Duty
2/B/1-7
86
49
48
Suggestions of improvment

Longer times between objectives, like 3 or 4 minutes, so supports can move out of the way.

A medical settings tweek, as some part of it is not working correctly, like the surgical kit, others are just so over powered, like the amour value, shooting high powered rounds, like 50cal or 30 mm auto canon on enemy infantry and the infantry just shakes it off like its BB guns. really frustrating in close combat.

more infantry groups patrolling around and one or two more vehicles spawns.

information on objectiv type, as its frustrating to not know if HQ tent or Radar dome is the side traget.
 

Winters.Z

Corporal
ELOA
42
58
48
Alrighty so, I have a lot to say and a lot of reason behind what I have to say. I think a lot of people here can agree on this and some things have already been stated.

Regarding Tact 2's current mission file "Invade and Annex" which has many issues as we all know. In my truthful opinion half the time it doesn't even feel like I'm battling AI, it feels like I'm fighting the server just to have it function properly. This would be due to the constant manhunts to find the last enemy and sometimes there wouldn't even be anyone left. This process takes very long 30+ mins due to lack of manpower, because people leave the server to just not deal with it. Another reasoning to this would be when you get to the objective, you have to pray it actually works properly. Spending a lot of time to clear it out and complete all the objectives, just to find out it won't update and move on to the next sector which leads to a map reset. This kills activity and makes people not want to come back, because this is not entertaining at all.

The mission file itself feels VERY rushed and incomplete. Doesn't look like much is changing over the past few days since this forum has been up. People are saying "complain on the forums" and it seems like this doesn't do much. I think the mission file should have never been published if it was never 100% completely finished. This just causes many problems as it has and now the price to pay for this is people stop playing the server. At around 1600Z Tact 2 had 10 or so people on and were attacking an objective. After the objective didn't update everyone got off, 10 minutes later it was myself and one other person. Players who have experienced this on Tact 2 look to an alternative offered by the Cav until it gets fixed. Many people along with myself really enjoyed the Tact 1 Stress Test server that S6 did. The mission file there which was liberation was very detailed, very interesting, new and enjoyable.

I don't agree with the rumors going around of accusing S6 of stealing players from Tact 2. Players most likely went to play the stress server, because it was a "enjoyable, interesting" mission file that everyone had a lot of fun on and loved. This is EXACTLY what the Cav needs, the activity last night was 30+ and everyone had a great time. There was a lot of stuff to do and a variety of things offered. It felt like a campaign and felt like it had more to offer than the Invade and Annex server. The Invade and Annex server is a simple capture a sector and kill side objectives and move on to the next random location. The Liberation server offers things such as a very detailed Logistics system where the FOB needs Ammo, Fuel and Supply. Many different objectives to capture, fortified cities, Enemy QRFs, Enemy Reinforcements when attacking objectives, Enemy Air, Enemy Armored responses to objectives. The AI even do counter attacks on random BLUFOR owned objectives causing the players to have to divert forces to counter this. The logistics part also makes players conserve what they use and it makes it realistic, because for example A-10s are expensive on the game mode and it feels more "needing to take care of it more." instead of people just wasting vehicles because they know it will respawn.

As we come to the end of my thoughts on this whole thing. I would like to suggest that instead of using Invade and Annex right now. The server mission file be switched to Liberation that was used on Tact 1's stress test. Many reasons behind this, Invade and Annex is very bugged and broke. This will allow for a temporary placement for people to enjoy and have fun on 7Cav servers while the mission makers of Invade and Annex fix the problems. Many players will start to play again, because they prefer that file over the current one because it's overall structure and the fact it works well. After Invade and Annex is fixed they can bring it back or they can have both mission files and people can have fun on both, offering a variety instead of being forced to play one thing.

If you have made it this far thank you for reading my feedback.

Sincerely, SPC.Winters.Z
 
7
16
3
As I mentioned before in Discord, I completely agree with what's been said before by SPC.Winters.Z

I know, that I'm not a unit member and I have roughly 4 months of playtime in this community but I enjoy every day I play there. I had a chance to play on Insurgency and Invade&Annex. My previous experience in the European community for about 1.5 years on Liberation servers creates an opinion, that Liberation is the best file for the public server and for this community, here's why:

- Supervision, order, and people.
Liberation by itself may look simple, arcade, or even boring. But with the people you gentlemen have here it's an amazing experience. What may look simple becomes complicated in a good way, because besides blind capture of the cities, factories, etc there's a huge part of planning, structuring, entourage, and immersion. HQ has an opportunity to build long-term plans for the operations. Define the primary objectives, adjust the strategy, evaluate the number of assets, resources, etc. Every objective, every AO is different, because people obey the orders that are given to them, radio comms are great and players act professionally no matter what role they have. I can sincerely say, that 7Cav is the community I dreamed about and finally I got a chance to play here. Without this type of community, this mission file would be pale and bland.

- When there are no Zeus\Game masters
Liberation is a type of mission that Is getting played by itself. People gather up, assign roles and complete the task. The variety of enemies presented in this game mode do a lot in terms of gameplay. If with the Insurgency people could not encounter ANY enemies at the AO, whatever it's intel or a cache driving up to 20-25 minutes to the objective, at Liberation spawns are always different depending on the objective you're taking. Enemies have QRF's, air assets, different AAA's including stationary emplacements. Depending on the alertness level the difficulty will be different. So players would need to think in advance about the resistance they may encounter at the next objective because it's simply unpredictable. AI acts realistically and tactically. They flank, suppress, and push the players. Firefights become more intense, the situation changes drastically even without the presence of Zeus on the server. Without people on Zeus previous game modes could become boring and routine VERY FAST. On Liberation every unit has something to do, for example, Atlas-4 can finally provide non-contrived logistics by doing resupplies for the FOBs, can pick up captured resources on the objectives.

- People take care of the assets they have
On Liberation everything costs resources. People will plan and act more wisely, because if you lose your CAS unit or armored vehicle - you may not have a spare one. There's no such thing as something eventually respawning at the base after a 10-minute cooldown. People will not get crazy-ass loadouts on the Air assets, because every rearming process, again, costs ammo supplies. Rearming and refueling take A LOT of time in comparison to what I've seen on the previous gamemodes. Want to spray and pray? Ok. Spend 10 minutes manually rearming through ACE the asset you use loading up shell by shell, bomb by bomb. It will positively affect the realism aspect.

- Civilians and guerilla
On Liberation all actions will have consequences. Collateral damage will become an actual thing. If Civi's are angry - good luck getting yourself blown up on an IED. Local resistance can be your friends or enemies. And in the situation with that variety of enemy assets for the main OPFOR faction, it may become a real deal in the firefight.

- Side missions
On Liberation there's a set of side tasks people may complete, again, with the consequences, like decreasing the alertness level or rehabilitating the relationships with the civilian population. Convoys, capturing enemy assets or personnel, destroying enemy FOBs, POW interrogation, acquiring valuable intel about hostiles, etc.

People do really enjoy this mission file and it gets easily proved by the Online on the server. I don't remember seeing 20-25+ packs on the server outside Wednesdays.

Problems, that may be encountered on this game mode
(All of them are fixable)

- Fight between players for the resources
All we know about how infinite human's greed is :)
Sometimes there might be situations when Sabre-1 wants himself an Abrams, Banshee would like to get a Bradley, and a fixed\rotary CAS pilot would like to provide Air Support, which means there has to be an AH-64D or an A-10\F-18\F-15
But there are not enough resources for everyone to satisfy
(Small amount of free assets, like LAV's\Helicopters\Jets on the Aircraft carrier, that are getting respawned only after the restart)

- Server performance issues.
After 4-5hrs of playtime, for me personally, FPS gets a stable drop down to 20-25. Because it all gets littered up by wrecks, stuff people drop on the ground, dead bodies, destroyed buildings etc.
(So what I've seen is just people having regular restarts after each 4-6hrs)



P.S. Typing down this feedback at 7 A.M after the entire night spent playing with guys on Liberation scenario. So I'd like to apologize in advance for the bulkiness of my text due to weak exposition skills and how tired I am right now :D


UPD :
- CAS and CAP Missions become an actual necessity
When I was Infidel-1 I had an occasion when people told me to stop calling for CAS, because there's nothing left for the infantry.
That's not the scenario that would happen with Liberation, because even we had about 20-25 pack yesterday in the same AO, yet we still needed CAS support against the enemy forces. But we haven't anything to bring up the air. That's when we decided to use mortars. Not because we wanted to practice the jurisdictions (which is a good thing, no doubt) or get an epic boom-boom just because of 'why not?', but because we actually have had a necessity in it. People in jets or RW wouldn't be bored by constant orbit loitering with desperation for the actual CAS mission. The ISR would be always needed because of how unpredictable enemy spawns are, the situation is constantly changing, people get beaten up by the hostiles, or a logistics unit might get pinned down on the route back to base from the factory, pretty much everything can happen and pilots will have a lot of work to do.
Close Air Patrolling will be a 'must have' on the high alertness levels, because of the number of enemy planes and attack helicopters in the air. CAS unit needs protection in the air. And I've met many people asking for faster versions of jets to provide CAP. But on Invade&Annex\Insurgency there's nothing to do for them with that role AT ALL unless there's a Zeus making something for them.
 
Last edited:
7
16
3
Get FA-18\E\F Super Hornet in the public modpack

Hello everyone, today I would like to suggest including the F-18 Mod into the public mod pack for the servers like TAC-2
The reason for that is pilots requiring faster analogs for CAS purposes. The mod is highly detailed, has a clickable cockpit as you'd see in simulators like DCS.
- Variety
People would love to have something besides A-10C made by Firewill. The single multi-purpose jet would allow people to complete CAS and CAP missions. For the 4 months of my time there as a HOG pilot, I personally got a little bit tired of exactly the same aircraft every day and every mission. I think many pilots would share my opinion about that. Refreshing IMO would be nice and the FA-18 Super Hornet is a great mod with outstanding quality.

- Cockpit options and immersion for all range of players, especially dedicated pilots.
I've seen A LOT of players in this unit who use HOTAS and who hop on the server exclusively for piloting. Dedicated pilots are probably guys, who play DCS, who enjoy learning about the aircraft, and would like to have more realism and immersion into the piloting process. ARMA-3 is not DCS, but its still would be cool to have somehow DCS-related mechanics. This mod will allow them to do so at least for the fixed-wing branch. People can finally get rid of HUD, get full immersion and rely only on aircraft sensors inside the cockpit. The jet allows controlling every aspect of the plane's behavior as much as ARMA Engine allows it to do without the need of a scroll wheel menu. Also the aircraft has its own 'Bitching Betty' voice warning system without the necessity of such cool mods like AWESome (Which is said, tbh). But its still cool and breaks the silence that is usually in the aircraft without any comms and tasks.

- Isn't the mod is too complicated for the new players?
I've heard an opinion, that people refuse to add that modification to public modpack because of how complicated it might be for the regular or new players.
With all the complicated elements the mod would allow to create training lessons about the aircraft, how to operate it, and which button or which system is responsible for certain things. As far it's a Milsim unit with realistic and tactical implementations, the mod would be more than suitable for the server setting.
If you worry about ARMA beginners, who might get scared by this complexity - simply don't. Allow players to choose which system to use. As it is with the advanced flight control for rotary-wing. Players can just turn off manual engine start-up and play as they did before playing with A-10C without any buttons, tumblers, etc. Good old scroll wheel ain't going anywhere.

- Good advertisement for the recruits
Cool modifications on the server are one of the key advantages in terms of advertising. People would like to check out the server and unit because there're interesting assets the community offers to them. When I was a dedicated pilot, I was searching for servers or units exclusively with that mod because of how much immersion and gameplay improvement it brings.
 
Last edited:

Maco.D

Corporal
Active Duty
1/B/1-7
215
180
98
Could we possible look at adding the mod with the 60mm morter as it's something that is used in Cav and having on tac 2 would allow people to practice with it in a practical setting such as myself who only doing medical in operations
 

Tharen.R

Colonel
Active Duty
1-7 HQ
S7 HQ
595
1,018
148
Get FA-18\E\F Super Hornet in the public modpack
Could we possible look at adding the mod with the 60mm morter as it's something that is used in Cav and having on tac 2 would allow people to practice with it in a practical setting such as myself who only doing medical in operations
All of this is great feedback, so thank you! I think it's been mentioned already, but we are unfortunately not looking to add more mods to Tac2 at this time. The intent was to reduce the mod bloat to make it a more accessible public server to new players who will then hopefully turn into potential recruits for us. Having 25+ mods was definitely a barrier to entry that made it more difficult for new people to join our public server and we've hopefully made it a bit easier for the new players we'd like to attract by having 16 required mods or less, and keeping those 16 mods as pretty universal ones that most people are likely to already have anyway when playing Arma these days. We've all seen public players try and join the server because they are excited to play on a server with 20+ active people on it, but then disconnect over and over because they could not get all of the mods to work, give up, and never come back. Tac2 is meant to be a balance between recruitment and showcasing the Cav, and that balance is being fine tuned to be more welcoming and attractive to new players right now.

If you are a public player who like to have an even more in-depth co-op milsim experience with even more mods, including the F/A-18 Hornet mod, then we definitely invite you to join the Cav to experience exactly that in our trainings and operations where we have a much larger mod pack and bloat concerns are not a worry. Enlist today!: https://7cav.us/enlist

Also, if someone needs to practice a particular weapon like the 60mm mortar or something else, the option to do exactly that on our private training servers also always still exists!

Thank you to everyone that continues to care and give great suggestions. You all show great passion, and having members and players that care makes all of the difference, so thank you!
 
7
16
3
All of this is great feedback, so thank you! I think it's been mentioned already, but we are unfortunately not looking to add more mods to Tac2 at this time. The intent was to reduce the mod bloat to make it a more accessible public server to new players who will then hopefully turn into potential recruits for us. Having 25+ mods was definitely a barrier to entry that made it more difficult for new people to join our public server and we've hopefully made it a bit easier for the new players we'd like to attract by having 16 required mods or less, and keeping those 16 mods as pretty universal ones that most people are likely to already have anyway when playing Arma these days. We've all seen public players try and join the server because they are excited to play on a server with 20+ active people on it, but then disconnect over and over because they could not get all of the mods to work, give up, and never come back. Tac2 is meant to be a balance between recruitment and showcasing the Cav, and that balance is being fine tuned to be more welcoming and attractive to new players right now.

If you are a public player who like to have an even more in-depth co-op milsim experience with even more mods, including the F/A-18 Hornet mod, then we definitely invite you to join the Cav to experience exactly that in our trainings and operations where we have a much larger mod pack and bloat concerns are not a worry. Enlist today!: https://7cav.us/enlist

Also, if someone needs to practice a particular weapon like the 60mm mortar or something else, the option to do exactly that on our private training servers also always still exists!

Thank you to everyone that continues to care and give great suggestions. You all show great passion, and having members and players that care makes all of the difference, so thank you!


This makes no sense to me. I've been playing on the servers where the modpack consisted of 50+ mods. And the reason I played there - IT WAS GOOD.

I mean, I might understand the point, when the modpack is too heavy in terms of the hard drive space usage. Sometimes there're gigantic modifications with the weight of 10+ gigs, especially map addons or huge mods with a huge variety of stuff you get.
What's so hard to find the server in the launcher, and then CLICK join, the mod list would pop up, then you CLICK download all, and there you go, you're good to join the server. Or just drag a web browser link to the launcher to again, just automatically download all the stuff.
I am the actual person, who has a problem with that because my launcher gives me weird errors and I need to apply all the mods manually and I did it anyway because I want to play there!
Would it be an actual problem to have slightly more mandatory modifications, but those that will bring more realism and immersion to the server? I don't want to play on F-18 only in official unit events or on training, because probably I can't consider myself as a dedicated pilot. But I want to have an option to use this asset when I have the right mood or it's not taken by the person with a dedicated role on the public server.

Speaking about joining the 7CAV. I would if I could, but I can't do it, because I'm already in a European unit. And both your and their units prohibit dual-claning. Also, I live on the other side of the globe, I can't physically attend the mandatory events you have. Yes, I've heard that this community provides events and training for the European members as well, but the point is that I want to enjoy playing in your community in my free time on the public server.

Theoretically, if I would be a unit member, I still wouldn't be able to enjoy the stuff I like on the public server playing in my spare time besides the 'official' operations. As a very exaggerated example, all mods can be turned off for the public server. Because people might have problems clicking 'Download all and join' in the launcher? It will bring a huge amount of people, why don't have the mods exclusively for the 7cav members?
As said before it makes no sense to me at all to have separate modpacks. It's like "You're playing a free trial version, want better options and stuff? Join 7cav"
 

Burton.P

First Sergeant
Active Duty
B/1-7 HQ
RTC Staff
S7 Staff
405
534
148
This makes no sense to me. I've been playing on the servers where the modpack consisted of 50+ mods. And the reason I played there - IT WAS GOOD.

I mean, I might understand the point, when the modpack is too heavy in terms of the hard drive space usage. Sometimes there're gigantic modifications with the weight of 10+ gigs, especially map addons or huge mods with a huge variety of stuff you get.
What's so hard to find the server in the launcher, and then CLICK join, the mod list would pop up, then you CLICK download all, and there you go, you're good to join the server. Or just drag a web browser link to the launcher to again, just automatically download all the stuff.
I am the actual person, who has a problem with that because my launcher gives me weird errors and I need to apply all the mods manually and I did it anyway because I want to play there!
Would it be an actual problem to have slightly more mandatory modifications, but those that will bring more realism and immersion to the server? I don't want to play on F-18 only in official unit events or on training, because probably I can't consider myself as a dedicated pilot. But I want to have an option to use this asset when I have the right mood or it's not taken by the person with a dedicated role on the public server.

Speaking about joining the 7CAV. I would if I could, but I can't do it, because I'm already in a European unit. And both your and their units prohibit dual-claning. Also, I live on the other side of the globe, I can't physically attend the mandatory events you have. Yes, I've heard that this community provides events and training for the European members as well, but the point is that I want to enjoy playing in your community in my free time on the public server.

Theoretically, if I would be a unit member, I still wouldn't be able to enjoy the stuff I like on the public server playing in my spare time besides the 'official' operations. As a very exaggerated example, all mods can be turned off for the public server. Because people might have problems clicking 'Download all and join' in the launcher? It will bring a huge amount of people, why don't have the mods exclusively for the 7cav members?
As said before it makes no sense to me at all to have separate modpacks. It's like "You're playing a free trial version, want better options and stuff? Join 7cav"
You bring solid points to the table, and subjectively, you are absolutely correct, and with continued feedback I'm sure there could be some kind of compromise.

That said, a lot of things have to be taken into consideration when it comes to our public servers. One of them being accessibility. With Tac 2 being one of the primary recruiting tools of the unit, we aim to make it as easily-accessible as possible while not stripping away all the fun. Tac 2 as it stands can certainly use some work and that's where all this feedback comes in handy, just bear in mind that implementing any changes on this server is something heavily considered by those responsible, even just the smaller changes.

As for your last comment, I'm relatively certain that almost all Arma 3 Milsim units have different modsets for their public and private servers...at least those who actually have both. It also incentivizes joining the unit, which I'm not sure is necessarily a bad thing.

"Hey, you like what we do with the public? Wait'll you see how we roll in official internal ops."

It's a solid selling point. And it's not misrepresenting either...because our official operations are practically night and day from public ops due to the training, unit cohesion, and mentality of the people involved. It's just like any other situation where you game with the same people consistently. You form a synergy and it makes everything smoother and more fun.
 

Sypolt.R

Corporal
Active Duty
S6 HQ
S3 Staff
643
336
93
Could the AA threats be adjusted to something a bit more logical? Its very odd to have Mk21 Centurions tossed in the dirt which are NATO Warship Mounted Automated SAM sites rather than like Shilkas or ZUs
 
Last edited:

Sypolt.R

Corporal
Active Duty
S6 HQ
S3 Staff
643
336
93
Also the range on those things is just silly.

Hog is still having missiles shot at them in this picture, they've flown literally off the visible map
5020c33225.png
 

Langlois.R

Warrant Officer 1
Active Duty
2/A/1-7 SL/ASL
69
100
88
Also the range on those things is just silly.

Hog is still having missiles shot at them in this picture, they've flown literally off the visible map
5020c33225.png
After doing some Arma research, it seems like they can target 14km out. On a flat map they are impossible to destroy however on a map with some decent hills you can loft bomb them and be fairly safe.

They are insane for the rotary pilots though so reducing the number from 3 to 1 or swapping to a different AA platform might be needed.

Edit: It is nice to see fixed wing have more of a required role on the server. I was on for a good 3-4 hours and these SAM sites kept me entertained the whole time while doing the occasional ISR for the ground forces. I guess what I'm trying to say is if we can make it a little easier for new pilots then do so however let's not remove the need for fixed wing 😉
 
Last edited:

Moraru.R

1st Lieutenant
Active Duty
B/1-7 HQ
S3 HQ
S3 Staff
192
150
98
I'll add a work package to look into alternative setups for the Air-To-Ground/Ground-To-Air game.
 

Moraru.R

1st Lieutenant
Active Duty
B/1-7 HQ
S3 HQ
S3 Staff
192
150
98
Sypolt.R Langlois.R - When the v0.0.3a rotation gets uploaded, I'd like your feedback on the Ground-to-Air vs Air-to-Ground setup featured in this package. Air assets will have significantly more room to breathe (enemy AA is only gun based), but at the same time the engagement ranges of the available air to ground weapons is appropriately short.
 

Ronnings.P

CW2
Active Duty
RRD HQ
S5 HQ
S1 HQ
S3 Staff
SPD Staff
1,644
1,453
163
Sypolt.R Langlois.R - When the v0.0.3a rotation gets uploaded, I'd like your feedback on the Ground-to-Air vs Air-to-Ground setup featured in this package. Air assets will have significantly more room to breathe (enemy AA is only gun based), but at the same time the engagement ranges of the available air to ground weapons is appropriately short.

Range of air-to-ground is appropriately short? Did you change the range of AH-64 / A-10 ability?
 

Moraru.R

1st Lieutenant
Active Duty
B/1-7 HQ
S3 HQ
S3 Staff
192
150
98
Range of air-to-ground is appropriately short? Did you change the range of AH-64 / A-10 ability?
No, can't influence the range (lock on, flight time, etc) of weapons via script. I wish I could, but it's only do-able via addon configs. Instead the weapons available are rockets and bombs (hence why you have to get to AA gun ranges to deploy).
 

Ronnings.P

CW2
Active Duty
RRD HQ
S5 HQ
S1 HQ
S3 Staff
SPD Staff
1,644
1,453
163
No, can't influence the range (lock on, flight time, etc) of weapons via script. I wish I could, but it's only do-able via addon configs. Instead the weapons available are rockets and bombs (hence why you have to get to AA gun ranges to deploy).


So the loadouts for AH-64 and A-10 are restricted now? Just so I know what we are talking about.
 

Moraru.R

1st Lieutenant
Active Duty
B/1-7 HQ
S3 HQ
S3 Staff
192
150
98
So the loadouts for AH-64 and A-10 are restricted now? Just so I know what we are talking about.
Yes. Theoretically there's room to play around with different variants of rockets and bombs (RHS and FIR), but that requires research on my part in terms of figuring out the RHS Arsenal Pylons API and FIR Missile Rack API.

For now, I am more interested to see how big of a plus the reduced enemy AA range is percieved as.

(It shouldn't come as a surprise that a "Guided Munitions vs Shilkas" setup is off the table. It either long range for everybody or short range for everybody. There is now a decent amount of feedback in regards to Long Range-vs-Long Range. I am curious to see what Short Range-vs-Short Range yields.)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top