Jump to content

All Activity

This stream auto-updates     

  1. Past hour
  2. AWE FUTURE

    A revised modset with more emphasis on using ALL of it would be excellent. I.E if maintaining RHS, then use ALL of RHS rather than just Blufor. Playing as Opfor and Greenfor is very fun and some of the gamenights we did where we played as forces such as CSAT and Serbian Armed Forces were some of the most popular gamenights in a long time. Looking forward to seeing what gets cooked up this time around.
  3. Today
  4. No, I mean, if an AT rifleman takes missiles out of your backpack (or if you put your missiles into their inventory), you gain RP. Oh, and a loss of RP for taking missiles out of an AT's pack to prevent RP farming...
  5. Yesterday
  6. You mean, spend reward points, and at missiles magically appear in your backpack? That's not gonna happen...
  7. The system I support most from the 4 suggested is to use reward points. Would it also be possible to implement reward points for putting AT missiles into an AT player's backpack, to hopefully improve infantry self-sufficiency? (I am aware this is a potential thread tangent, if it is distracting enough feel free to fork it into its own thread!)
  8. I know people like to play with the cool toys, so I like that fact that they are available to the players. An application system might turn out to limit it to a few players only, despite the relaxed and casual spirit of I&A. It might or might not be pretty labor intensive for the admins (?) and would surely open up a debate about favoritism and what not. A reward point system would be easier to maintain (automatic) and would allow for anyone to access CAS vehicles once they have enough points, it would also potentially depending on the implementation, prevent a situation where someone wastes the CAS assets and forces the next player in line to wait for x-minutes for the respawn. Voting systems I fear might be susceptible to a bit of trolling and or not giving a new guy a chance. I feel increasing the spawn time will not solve the under lying problem, it might maybe alleviate it a little but will most likely also deny the team CAS when they need it.
  9. I would just like to add that currently in the I&A rules it is stated clearly: So if people are abusing the roll you can have us look into it and we will see what we can do to ensure that all players have an enjoyable experience.
  10. Well i think that application system for Viper and Reaper would be nice. That will exclude players joining ie. HQ role just for points. I'm also for application system if you wanna be HQ ofc.
  11. AWE FUTURE

    I will be composing a forum post in the next few days detailing the things that have been confirmed for the new version of AWE. The idea is that it will appeal to players that want a more team oriented style of play with mods.
  12. I would like an application system for CAS roles. So new guys dont pick it and destroy it within minutes. And possibly increase spawn timers for the vehicles so it makes you more aware and careful when its used.
  13. So there has been some strife lately surrounding the presence and use of CAS jets in I&A 4. Rather than have me come up with a unilateral decision I'd like to discuss the issue and figure out a means of how these vehicles are implemented so a reasonably high majority of players are happy. ISSUES and considerations: 1. A reasonably good pilot in a CAS vehicle can level an AO pretty much single handedly and indiscriminately, making it less fun for other players. 2. A poor pilot can lose the vehicle quickly, meaning when CAS support is actually needed it's unavailable. 3. Many players love to fly these vehicles but their inherent power means they have to be rare. 4. The current layout of enemy forces in the AOs include armored vehicles, which mean it's not uncommon for players to desperately need CAS support. (feel free to add to this list so we can have a fulsome discussion.) Possible directions: 1. The no fun option: remove CAS vehicles and present them as support rewards (Bohemia has CAS support modules at the ready). 2. Make Reaper and Viper groups accessible only with reward points. 3. Implement some kind of voting or application system for CAS roles. 4. Increase spawn/respawn timers for these vehicles. Your thoughts, please. - Ryko
  14. AWE FUTURE

    Any news on when we could expect AWE to be up and running? I also loved when we had different mission game nights. Any chance that will be back? Jørgensen73 Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  15. I&A 4 Beta Test Feedback

    We did airdrop a Hemtt with 11 people... that was awesome
  16. I&A 4 Beta Test Feedback

    Completed several side missions last night nobody in the squad received points on completion.
  17. Last week
  18. AWE FUTURE

    Ironically enough it's not that much work. There's a bit of nip and tuck to make it all work together but the base mission was actually based on Stiletto, so not much work to get it running with RHS / TFAR / ACE
  19. AWE FUTURE

    It will be AWE, the mission is I&A but it will utilise the new mission that ryko has made(I&a4) this is because it is easier for us to manage and the gameplay will scale. Meaning that it will be a more tactical style of gameplay compared to the eu1 and 2 servers
  20. AWE FUTURE

    I've got to say that I much prefer the Stiletto style gameplay, with varying missions and maps. I&A has its place, and a modded version of it would be fun, but EU3 has always been that special something that has a little for everyone no matter what time of day it is, or how many people are playing. That being said, as a huge fan of tactical ops, if the current EU3 rules were enforced on this IA4 modded server then I can see it having a similar feel with people still needing to work together and the like. I know that I'd play it over EU1!
  21. Feedback: wasn't able to kick a player out of a vehicle with "g"
  22. Thanks for your comments, Scar. Responding in reverse order - I have no ego to bruise, I figure if you didn't approve of it in some way you wouldn't bother to participate. Be heavy in your critique. I'm balancing a couple of factors here. 1) Players love to fly. If we made the jets super rare, I'd hear about it from the players that love to fly CAS. As it stands, there is a 45 minute respawn timer on the Wipeout, and 40 minutes on the Blackfoot, so I feel like it's somewhat delayed to have those assets constantly in the air. 2) Players are generally poor at dealing with armor as infantry. Yes, you can have a rifleman AT on the ground, but it doesn't take much for that guy to get taken out, and then everyone is mowed down by the enemy armor. Having CAS support is crucially important. 3) the UAVs are highly under-used by the current player base. I don't think I've seen a UAV strike mission used yet, mostly because those rewards are available to Squad Leaders / Team Leaders, and for some reason those roles are rarely used. I do take your point that a well-used CAS vehicle can lay waste to an AO, and I do take steps to make the AO more challenging when friendly CAS is in the air, but from what I've observed over several sessions, it's fairly rare that a Wipeout lasts the entire mission. I will bring forward the horrible problem of players "claiming" reward vehicles generated by side missions. It was always an ugly situation when a reward vehicle spawned from a side mission, and players uninvolved in that mission jumped in to the reward vehicle. Since the vehicle was awarded to the team, it's also not against the rules for them to do so, but it always lead to harsh outcomes. I'm not missing that dynamic and reward points make the success factor much more egalitarian. What I will say about side missions is that I intend to incentivize them a bit more by offering that special vehicles (ie., non-faction) may be purchased by people who participated in a successful side mission. I recognize this is cold comfort in the current system where only an Armor squad could use a Kuma (you've raised the issue of what players use reward points for after they've purchased their higher-end infantry gear) but I am thinking of adding a parameter option to make the use of armor more liberal, ie., non-armor players can use armor. I'll be discussing with mods whether this should be a default EU1 setting or whether we like the segregation of Armor squads. I have increased the amount of anti-air threat in the AO, but as I've said in the past I can't make it a flat increase or that Anti-Air threat will decimate the ground pounders. A big part of this is just Arma AI, some times I see the units sit there with their Titan AA launchers tracking a friendly jet and not firing... I can't fix that level of AI stupidity. Yep, that's a known and annoying bug that I'm looking to fix. It's hard to quantify this, especially because from what I've seen of your play style, it's not exactly fair on the AI. You sit on a hill about a km away from the side mission, destroy the vehicles with Titan rockets, mow down the infantry with your Hunter's weapon, and then cruise in to mop up the rest. To put it simply - you're not supposed to be one-manning these missions, and I don't really want to put myself in the position of writing missions based around a single user's play style. There are some scripts at play to deal with the fact that regular Arma AI is more or less helpless against this form of attack - they won't natively engage targets outside of a certain range - so I help them by having them have the option to call in Air support, or additional squads to move in to attack the threat. In "real life" an OPFOR wouldn't just sit there and take it. As for a fixed amount of enemy force - in an ideal world, the mission wouldn't spawn units until it "knew" how many players were going to engage it. If I create a side mission with 2 squads of infantry and 2 squads of players show up to deal with it, I will get complaints that the side missions are too easy. Similarly if I spawn 7 squads and two players show up, they will take a look at the regiment of enemy inf and complain that it's impossible. I feel like a dynamic number based on the player count is still the way to go, it's just about finding that sweet spot (right now the side missions will spawn the same dynamic rate as a main AO, but with a 40% reduction in that number. I might move to 50%, we'll see). This is currently the case. Vehicle respawning is tied to the type of vehicle that was destroyed. Utility vehicles like quad bikes and hunters respawn very quickly: the base time is around 4 minutes (the respawn cycle is checked every minute, so it's as little as 4 minutes and as much as 5 minutes for these vehicles). Special vehicles like APCs are 20 minutes; Slammer is 30 minutes; choppers are 10 minutes; attack choppers are 40 minutes; CAS plane is 45 minutes; Anti-Air plane (Black Wasp, etc) is an hour. Vehicle de-spawning is a bit trickier. If the vehicle has been destroyed in the field, it's automatically added to the respawn queue. If it's abandoned in the field, it'll only be destroyed for being abandoned if the nearest player is more than 500m away, and it's been left alone for 15 minutes. I recognize this is much different than how I&A3 handled despawned vehicles, especially as when a vehicle despawns, it's pretty much immediately put back into circulation at base. Two reasons why I'm going this different route: 1) Encourage players to not use their vehicles as disposable transport. 2) Prevent the situation where a player takes a vehicle into the field, moves into position, but their vehicle despawns because it's considered to have been abandoned, so now it's not there when they go back to it. I can tweak the above numbers, but I feel there are plenty of other options to getting into the AO, and methods for retrieving vehicles, that make the above approach reasonable. I have certainly had complaints from players on point 2, especially ("My vehicle despawned while I was running back to it."). Well, it's a pub server. I don't think it's fair to lock up all the vehicles. Plus, you yourself said you amass more reward points than you know what to do with, if you think there's a shortage of vehicles, there's nothing stopping you from buying a new Hunter for 500 points.
  23. I&A 4 Beta Test Feedback

    Vehicle despawn timer / respawn timer this is a picture of a side mission near Kavala engagement point i took ... quite a few times ... First,this are all "stock" vehicles available on base that are free to use to everyone. I started with the Hunter HMG,got send to incap by a T140K commander canon and returned using the Prowler,got incap´d again by the same T140K commander canon and returned in a HMTT truck and ... you may guessed it ... got incap´d again by the same same and returned in the med HMTT this time and ended that canon drama. Now,what observations does this lead to? For a start,there is a need to divide between respawn time (vehicle got destroyed and misson restricts respawn untill a certain time passed) and despawn time (vehicle despawns once no alive player is in <500m to its position and will respawn instant back on stock spawn place in base). I do agree that despawn time can be abused for several reasons i dont need to digg deeper in it as it doesnt really has a mission effectin factor. But as seen in my above example the time values are way off to be comfortable and it will def get worse with raising player count using the current values. Also,the amount of enemies invovled in side missions should be a fixed one,not scaled to player count. I had several sides that varied from 12 to 90 units (not counting the reinforcements) with up to 5 BTR´s,3 FriTs and some minor offroads on a HVT mission - that s just tad to much considering this is a side mission not a full sized AO. I m aware BETA isnt about tweaking finally,but consider employing a fixed amount of enemy force for certain side missions. Side missions are quite dull too imo,compared to the challenging ones from before I+A´s (Secure Intel,Prototype tank,etc) (yet). A thing i find to be a improvement is the notice telling you what got you killed,altho i assume its hard to catch (as the message gets displayed quite short) and i assume it isnt working in all possible events (killed in chopper,mission time,etc.) is this : I focused on side missions in the past 2 tests mostly as i cba to compete (and yea,this is the right word for it) in AO barrelshooting with Reaper,Viper and that UAVname,Hitman,Dodger,whatever in order to kill a handfiull of enemies that are barely a threat to our force. For real,the times i see CAS pilots surfing the AO regulary without any massive risk against them is breathtaking. I call the decicion to add stock vehicles to certain roles (A10,BF,Slammer,Greyhawks,Sentinel) that respawn on the regular a bad one. Everything is given to you in I+A 4 were you had to work for in previous I+A versions. Nothing is precious anymore. This is also another main division between I+A before and now - apart from the side mission change and the points over rewards - that really puts me off alot. And no,it doesnt enhance cooperation alot,at least not that i got knowledge on. It just leads to jet pilots doing CAS runs in AA jets with customized armanments and a free_to_shoot_everything attitude while i get shot by a jet on the other side of the map and no pilot cba to take it out ... Raises 2 questions to me : how many AA specialists you saw playing in our ranks yet? with all the smart(er) AI now,i wonder why a 115mill $ jet is engaging single ground forces in a area way off the main action? (and why didnt our AA jet take care of it to begin with?) I realise i got offtopic quite abit here ... but hey And ofc there s good things in I+A 4 but icing the cake was never my thing. I nodd gently if i approve/like something, i appreciate the work and effort taken to achieve this stage of mission. But i m just better in pinpointing flaws and issues than i am good at pleasing other people s feelings. That´s just the way i am. Heads up,tho.
  24. ArmA 3 Screenies & Videos Thread

    important I+A 4 BETA update ----> enemy jets still eZ to take out by shooting a Titan AT up their back savin that one guy that dare to engage side mission HVT with me (**** stars performance rating) quite intense coop without much talkin required CZ ftw dear Sir
  25. AWE FUTURE

    I was just thinking this exact same thing a few days ago about how IA with minimal realism mods would be super cool. My day job is a programmer, and while I probably would be totally useless trying to script in SQF I would think there would be quite a bit of "grunt work" in making IA4 RHS / TFAR/ ACE aware. If this comes to fruition maybe I can help with some of the grunt work.
  26. action required CallMeTom

    Hello Vlad, Thank you for the appeal. At the moment I have a bad case of the flue and will look seriously at your appeal when I feel somewhat better.
  27. Hiding

    The HVT from a terminate HVT side mission, finds the best place to hide from players.
  28. Encircled

    Players garrisoned in the building are ambushed by enemy soldiers, but fight their way out.
  1. Load more activity
×