Amentes

If you can get 60 players or more, I'd be game. Anything less and it's not worth it to me

Using more than one set of weapon mods, I don't see us ever getting consistent and sensible damage values across the board. That, to me, is part of the package deal we take when we want access to a wide variety of weapons from different mods.

I think it's important to keep Function over Form in mind here. Having played this series of game since before it was even called ArmA, I've never been used to anything looking pretty; that's a new development in '3.

To be fair, a lot of us knew it was gonna happen. AFAIK, there wasn't a forum post about it, but it was well known by word of mouth. For my own part, I welcome this removal. The less uniform options the better, IMO

I actually agree 100% Smiley, I'd rather we not use planes. But the reality is, sometimes there's two pilots without any Co-Pilots, but the need for CAS is still there. Kinda leaves a plane as the only option.

It looks 100% identical. The feature list is actually saying it has LESS stuff than the ones we use, but all the pictures are of the same helos with the same armaments.

Because people were using a 20mm cannon made for kill air targets. Which, if you'll excuse my french, is a dumb thing to be doing The thing with this plane is, it will actually carry more bombs/missiles than the A-10, or even the A-164. But the best part is, you can tailor it. If there's 30 of us, but nobody bothered to go MAT or HAT, well, then we can load it up with a ton of Mavericks, but we also have the option of using a wide combination of bomb sizes, which can either be laser guided, or dropped on a grid coordinate. Point being, it adds a ton of functionality in one package that we just don't have in the A-10, and it can effectively rely on bombs and missiles instead of the 30mm cannon, meaning cannon firing will be an extreme rarity. Isn't that the same MELB package we're already using GhostDragon? The futurized version doesn't have a 2-seater. That said, personally I mostly see planes as something to be used when we don't have a copilot, as I'd rather we use helicopters then. Past week, we did use the A-10 a lot though, which is why I think a replacement is due

Can run Basic again if you need it, Ryko.

Right, so I've never been too fond of the A-10. I don't like how it handles in the air, and we've all experienced the lag of a pilot working the cannon. As the title may have revealed, I'm suggesting that we replace the A-10, and the best option I've seen so far relies on going back to our roots, of sorts, in the F/A-18 X Black Wasp "futurized" version of the '18 we've used in the past. http://www.armaholic.com/page.php?id=27129 If anyone knows of better options for a single-seat aircraft capable of providing multiple levels of CAS as defined by Command prior to mission start, I'd love to see them.

Maybe he's Australian? I don't remember

Got more than 500 hours on ArmA 3? BUY THE DLC, Mr. McDuck!

I wholeheartedly agree Smiley, and I'd love if it we as a community could set slightly higher requirements for entry on EU#3, but seeing as that's not something that's likely to happen, we've gotta work with what we have Most players simply aren't gonna learn this stuff on their own, but if they're actually interested in learning, provided this service is done, then I'm all for doing it that way. My rig is perfectly capable of hosting the training map, so I guess I'll look into setting up a dedicated .exe too then.

Try changing your PIP settings. I've had this happen on several occasions, but I honestly couldn't tell you how I fixed it, or if it just kinda went ahead and fixed itself.

Despite still seeing the occasional problem, I can't be sure said problems aren't down to the good old loading-radios-from-arsenal issue. That said, the issues early on were most definitely not down to client-side misuse.

Presumably, we're gonna see Veterans from every branch, and each one will most likely be perfectly aware of the areas in which they excel, and the ones in which they do not.

Why do I think this one might have been meant for a different but equally new thread?

I believe the goal is to organise similar sessions on a weekly basis Jim, so don't sweat it

You know perfectly well it's not the moderator 'gonna yell at 'em

I wasn't "lucky" mate, I spent a few months talking to people on the official forum, and eventually 17 of us decided to actually do something about the ideas we had It took work, not luck

I played ArmA long before DayZ existed, and while I certainly agree that DayZ brought in a lot of; undesirables?, I'd hardly describe it as an "every man for himself" type of game. In my experience, teamwork kept me and my team safe, rather than the opposite. I loved the tension that DayZ could sometimes serve up. I remember vividly a 6-man excursion to a heli crash site, how it all went tits up and I ended up shooting enemy players and zombies, weaving in an out of friendlies, from my OW point. It was, and is, the sort of game that a community like AW could enter and excel at, not that I'm advocating that we do so. It was what you made it, and me and my group made it glorious. We actively hunted Bandits, and we facilitated trade between third parties by MAD doctrine; we guarded the good Samaritans of Dr. Wasteland. We tried to make it more than "run around and shoot things". But yes, obviously few other players were that creative in their use of the game, which is also why I quit playing it. That and the scripters. Mostly the scripters.

Yeah, that would make a lot of sense Ryko. I'd still like to see less mods, but that's for other reasons

That's actually really weird. Yesterday, I wanted to make pancakes, but then realized the two eggs I thought I had, I'd actually eaten the day before. So I couldn't make pancakes. Sadness was felt. Didn't know it was pancake day.

Main issue is ensuring the troops are still combat effective, which usually comes down to injuries and the number of AT4s we burned through. If there's enough players that we have a half-full Bravo squad, I find it feasible that either Alpha or Bravo could beg, borrow or steal equipment from the other squad, leaving us with one of them combat effective and the other in need of a rearm. In which case, one could be extracted while the other moves to secure an LZ in or near the next AO. However, if Alpha happens to be all we have, we're moving into the "splitting up the squad" territory, which of course I'd never do. Meaning the full squad would be required to RTB if its combat effectiveness against enemy armor has turned to zero. So given that we're getting the ability to fix people up in the field, that's great and all, but we still need to start packing extra AT4s in our HMMWVs, and ensure that we don't get them blown up

In any case, I'll be home at the computer, obviously, so getting a hold of me if you need me shouldn't be too hard