Johnson

I agree on a surface level, but in practical implementation I think there have and will be problems. Such as magazine incompatibility, increase of Blue on Blue due to clothing differences, separation of players into individual groups (as we saw in Stiletto with @MoonFire 's group and my group wearing different cloths and testing our own different playstyles, rather than unifying together). In my personal opinion, the cosmetics can give off the feeling of unity and teamwork, along with practical benefits. Myself and Ghost both agree that with the with the revival of AWE a groundwork should be laid establishing what extractly the server aims to be. However how this is done and what this groundwork entails is where we find our differences. Of course, both systems have their benefits, such as the "Casual" option providing a more relaxed experience and allowing people to do whatever they want. In my opinion and experience, this bores people too fast and is one of the main reasons AWE did eventually collapse (don't take that as fact, just my own opinion). The "Strict" system benefits from unity, but lacks the same high levels of freedom as the "Casual" option has. Hope I'm not hogging this post too much, just want to make sure that my own along with several other's opinions are documented as it has been a while since we've seen AWE activity.

To go into more detail for anyone who might feel a bit "in the blue": The "Strict limitations" option is in reference to an idea posed by @Mouldy (correct me if I'm wrong of course) whereby there would be a multitude of factions to play as, but each faction is limited to the specific gear of that faction. For example, United States Marine Corps (USMC) wont have access to US Army gear (like the M3 MAAWs) but instead have their own type of weapon, like the SMAW. You would still get to use all the equipment available in the modpack, just not ALL at once. And if you hadn't guessed, yes, I voted for this. I'm sure someone else can vouch for the other option, which is essentially having all gear accessible, similar to EU#1. I personally think this "Casual" option demotes teamplay and brings too high of a focus on gear, but each to their own.

Tonight was pretty fun but a fair few of us have some suggestions. Personally, for me: - Scrap Viper since it's quite overkill and keeping everyone unified under one Squad is much more suitable. - Disallow the use of TeamSpeak during operation (until you're dead) and use the in game chat/radio instead. - Start the mission earlier in the night so we get to fight at night more. It was day too fast. - Group size should be bigger and even, maybe 8vs8, since we think it would be balanced either way. - Allowing HUD for firemode (but no crosshairs) - Siding towards a more conventional vs. conventional settup, rather than special forces. - Rules against abuse of vehicles (such as running people over) and maybe mines (like placing them on BLUFOR vehicles or something). I'm sure more suggestions will come up but currently that's all that comes to our minds.

ＯＲＥＯＫＡＳＴＲＯ ＷＡＳ ＡＮ ＩＮＳＩＤＥ ＪＯＢ ⒸⓄⓃⓃⒺⒸⓉ ⓉⒽⒺ ⒹⓄⓉⓈ ???? = ????

Gonna try to get some of us old EU#3 cretins on the next Beta Test to see what we're all missing. Should be fun, can't wait to see how much I&A has changed. @HybridRage@Pancake @Minipily @kennychr @Wavy_Gravy

A new subtle beginning, just like how it started originally, will certainly be the key to getting the much loved server back on its feet.

The MSO revolves more around combined teamwork than anything else. You wont get very far alone. The AI are smart, but not OP shots.

Any update and progressions with I&A4 for all us modded scrubs?

So much to chose from, had a pretty great year of Arma overall. Giving EU#3 one last hurrah combined with some amazing MSO experiences was certainly enough to satiate me. This will have to do, people seemed to like it. GOD IS A SERB

I thought I would run some more bullet ballistic tests using Bohemia's traceBullets function since I haven't tested vanilla, RHS and SMA weaponry in a while. I will likely do more tests in the future comparing more mods or weaponry and perhaps even make a Dslyecxi-style video to demonstrate this visually. In the test I simply fired a few different types of rounds from a some vanilla and modded weaponry against a several 2-3 inch thick layers of plywood and then screenshotted the ballistic outcomes. Bear in mind that this is an extremely simple demonstration of a very complex Arma 3 system. If you wish to see a more detailed explenation of the game's ballistic featuers, I suggest you check out Dslyecxi's video here. The colour of the bullet's trajectory indicates its velocity as a percentage of the initial speed that it leaves the barrel at (muzzle velocity). The slower the bullet, the less damage it is likely to inflict upon its target / less chance of penetrating more materials. Colour chart: 75%+ 50-75% 25-50% ~25% (Vanilla) 5.56x45mm NATO --- (Vanilla) TRG-21/TAR-21 Pretty impressive trajectory and penetration considering the target could be hidden behind six wooden fences and you would be able to hit it a still very effective round. Heavy drop off at the end as the round likely breaks up. Bearing in mind that Bohemia do not state the exact designation or what type of 5.56 round is available in the default game, so this could be some futuristic 2035 technology. (Vanilla) 6.5x39mm NATO --- MX Slightly more efficient than vanilla 5.56, especially towards the end of its journey. Not much else to say, pretty impressive all around. Perhaps this is a factor as to why NATO made the change to 6.5mm Grendel in the Arma 3 universe. (Vanilla) 7.62x39mm --- (Vanilla) AKM Realistically impressive penetration considering the age of the rifle and the round, supposing it is not a modernised version. Again, no exact designation or type specified for the ammo. (RHS) 5.56x45mm NATO [M855] --- (RHS) M4A1 Pretty damn poor penetration when compared to the vanilla 5.56, however a still very effective round for shooters who don't happen to have x-ray vision. The United States Armed Forces standardised M855 ball ammunition in October of 1980, meaning this is a very old round in comparison to the time period of Arma 3. Keeping this in mind, both vanilla 5.56 and RHS' M855 can find a place together in the game realistically, due to the fact that the vanilla 5.56 round is likely a much more modernised version of NATO's 5.56 calibre and therefore perform way better than a round that is half a century older. In other words, comparison between these two rounds should not revolve around balancing as they are from completely different time periods and not really competitive. (RHS) 5.56x45mm NATO [M855A1 EPR] --- (RHS) M4A1 Now were talking; a certain improvement over the round's predecessor... shame it took more than 30 years. Standardised in 2010, M855A1 Enhanced Performance Round was a direct result of the U.S military's concerns for the 5.56's lack of materiel penetration. Certainly more comparable to vanilla ammunition and perhaps even equally as competitive. Side note on this photo, I was aiming a bit too far downwards as you can see from the heavy drop. This means that the angle of penetration was increased and therefore the effective penetration of the round was reduced. More simply, should the trajectory have been a bit flatter, the round would likely have performed better. (RHS) 7.62x39mm [57-N-231(89)] --- (RHS) AKM So that's why Russia keeps 7.62x39 lying around. Nearing the effectiveness of 2035 ammunition, the Soviet 57-N-231 (1989 variant) performs admirably and comparably to the vanilla version of the round. Keep in mind that this round is quite large and although the vanilla 5.56 may penetrate more than RHS' 7.62, it certainly won't hurt as much if it hits you. I used the 1989 version of the round since the original version is near obsolete in it's role of penetration, unlike M855 which is not made to punch through walls. RHS have some very modern rounds to compliment there weaponry, I just chose a round I would expect to be comparable to vanilla and SMA. Russian 5.45x39mm 7N22 would likely penetrate into the fourth box and maybe even out the other side, so be sure not to assume that RHS does not have tools to satiate your need to destroy. (SMA) 5.56x45mm NATO [M855A1 EPR] --- (SMA) M4A1 blk I've always been sceptical of criticism towards Red Hammer Studios (RHS) when compared to Specialist Military Arms (SMA) and I think this photo pretty much sums it up. A fair few members of AhoyWorld have stated that RHS is under-powered and noncompetitive when facing vanilla-asset factions such as PLA. Personally I have always found that through testing and experience, it isn't that RHS is under-powered but that SMA is over-powered. This test only confirmed my suspicions. A clear difference can be drawn between RHS and SMA weaponry through this screenshot. While each mod's version of the exact same weapon and ammunition have been demonstrated, SMA's M855A1 is clearly more effective in penetration that RHS' own version. SMA's M855A1 penetrates better than vanilla 2035 5.56mm and 2035 6.5mm while being a round that is 20 years older. Additionally, due to my dreadful aim, I fired low once more - meaning that, as described previously, the round may have even penetrated even more walls than it did. It may have even gone out the other side of the final box and kept on going, considering where the round stopped. It only had 1 more wall left to penetrate. These simple tests were mainly intended to update existing knowledge of ballistics, but also to deflect and appease notions of poor RHS performance. Of course these tests were extremely basic and can be used for not much more than a first step in comparing mods, I just thought it might be cool to see. If the post is recieved well I'll likely do more, or just a video. Maybe comparing BAF or keeping it just within the current modpack (mostly RHS). Then it could be used to inform players as to which rounds/weapons are most effective at certain tasks.

Discussion was made regarding BAF, however due to the nature of the AWE "clean-slate" being focused around gameplay over content, BAF can easily be seen to simply re-skin much of the content we already have. For example, playing as British Army with L85A2s + ACOGs really doesen't offer any more interesting gameplay than playing United States Marines with M4s + ACOGs. I believe there is always the possibility of mod reintroduction, but certainly not until the new direction of AWE is solid in its foundation (gameplay > content). For now, RHS and vanilla should certainly suffice, especially now that we will likely use both of them to their full potential.

This was briely discussed and could certianly be a re-discussed at a later date. It's possible, I know there are AW members who would opt for a system similar to that of Kenny's MSO.

So, I've been pressing for more vanilla gameplay for the past week or so, as you may have noticed. My personal hope is still to succeed with a multiple faction/arsenal system, in which case we would certainly have 2035 options. This, however, is not as easy as dropping some mods to focus on gameplay and until the decision has been made on the future of AWE's mission (be in Stiletto or not), we will likely have to keep using Zeus arsenals.