razgriz33

Almost all above, but these 4 topping the list
 
Camille Saint-Saëns - Danse Macabre
Carl Orff - O Fortuna (Carmina Burana)
Sergei Prokofiev - Dance of the knights
Greig - In the hall of the mountain king

none mentioned famous BHD songs?
unacceptablez !
 

 

 
whut? restricted to Metal bands only?
... like i care

I'd agree with the majority here, but flying lessons aren't a bad thing, they've been done before and I'd be happy to run them again, but be warned it won't be easy!

Nope.
If pilots get a badge, shouldn't medics as well? What about leaders? And Marksmen? This was discussed in the EU3 community meeting, and it's basically what Smiley said.
Besides, the EU3 community is much smaller than EU1 or 2, so mostly everyone knows each other, so we know who's a good pilot, who's not, and so forth. It doesn't make sense, and breaks the spirit of EU3, I feel.

Found a new contender
 
http://www.armaholic.com/page.php?id=28646 - Weapons framework supporting multiple mods of Vanilla aircraft, as well as add-on vehicles.
 
http://www.armaholic.com/page.php?id=27766 - F16 add-on vehicle     This thing is... it's insane. The weapon selection is absolutely nuts. I've tested it with Copey, and while the 25mm main gun causes a ton of lag, that was the only issue we encountered. Single-seat only, and it handles like an ex-girlfriend who wants you back.      

This is in response to the OP I'll say firstly
 
I find it's more of an attitude thing. for example earlier today (i won't name any names in specific because that would be unfair on the poor asshat) there was just a horrible "I don't care about you, what you think, or what the plan is" attitude coming from a particular pilot.
 
So no matter how many rules or what specific rule set you want to enforce it will always roll back to the person behind the controls. If you have a pilot who is switched on and has the interests of his team at heart you'll find that he will actively switch into whatever role is required. Should he or she detect that there is a logistical problem then he or she would hopefully react accordingly to keep the team's momentum up and the same goes for if he or she detects that ground assets require hard targets knocking out.
 
You can set as many rules as you like but it won't remedy this stinky attitude. Make a point of leading by example if you are a frequent pilot, if you detect that a pilot isn't so switched on then tell them, simply put they're going to end up ruining your game experience and (as you've done already) make you not want to wait around at base for them. Finally if you still see problems as a last resort, shadowplay them at their worst and report their stinky attitude in confidence to an admin.

This is in response to the OP I'll say firstly
 
I find it's more of an attitude thing. for example earlier today (i won't name any names in specific because that would be unfair on the poor asshat) there was just a horrible "I don't care about you, what you think, or what the plan is" attitude coming from a particular pilot.
 
So no matter how many rules or what specific rule set you want to enforce it will always roll back to the person behind the controls. If you have a pilot who is switched on and has the interests of his team at heart you'll find that he will actively switch into whatever role is required. Should he or she detect that there is a logistical problem then he or she would hopefully react accordingly to keep the team's momentum up and the same goes for if he or she detects that ground assets require hard targets knocking out.
 
You can set as many rules as you like but it won't remedy this stinky attitude. Make a point of leading by example if you are a frequent pilot, if you detect that a pilot isn't so switched on then tell them, simply put they're going to end up ruining your game experience and (as you've done already) make you not want to wait around at base for them. Finally if you still see problems as a last resort, shadowplay them at their worst and report their stinky attitude in confidence to an admin.

This is in response to the OP I'll say firstly
 
I find it's more of an attitude thing. for example earlier today (i won't name any names in specific because that would be unfair on the poor asshat) there was just a horrible "I don't care about you, what you think, or what the plan is" attitude coming from a particular pilot.
 
So no matter how many rules or what specific rule set you want to enforce it will always roll back to the person behind the controls. If you have a pilot who is switched on and has the interests of his team at heart you'll find that he will actively switch into whatever role is required. Should he or she detect that there is a logistical problem then he or she would hopefully react accordingly to keep the team's momentum up and the same goes for if he or she detects that ground assets require hard targets knocking out.
 
You can set as many rules as you like but it won't remedy this stinky attitude. Make a point of leading by example if you are a frequent pilot, if you detect that a pilot isn't so switched on then tell them, simply put they're going to end up ruining your game experience and (as you've done already) make you not want to wait around at base for them. Finally if you still see problems as a last resort, shadowplay them at their worst and report their stinky attitude in confidence to an admin.

This is in response to the OP I'll say firstly
 
I find it's more of an attitude thing. for example earlier today (i won't name any names in specific because that would be unfair on the poor asshat) there was just a horrible "I don't care about you, what you think, or what the plan is" attitude coming from a particular pilot.
 
So no matter how many rules or what specific rule set you want to enforce it will always roll back to the person behind the controls. If you have a pilot who is switched on and has the interests of his team at heart you'll find that he will actively switch into whatever role is required. Should he or she detect that there is a logistical problem then he or she would hopefully react accordingly to keep the team's momentum up and the same goes for if he or she detects that ground assets require hard targets knocking out.
 
You can set as many rules as you like but it won't remedy this stinky attitude. Make a point of leading by example if you are a frequent pilot, if you detect that a pilot isn't so switched on then tell them, simply put they're going to end up ruining your game experience and (as you've done already) make you not want to wait around at base for them. Finally if you still see problems as a last resort, shadowplay them at their worst and report their stinky attitude in confidence to an admin.

This is in response to the OP I'll say firstly
 
I find it's more of an attitude thing. for example earlier today (i won't name any names in specific because that would be unfair on the poor asshat) there was just a horrible "I don't care about you, what you think, or what the plan is" attitude coming from a particular pilot.
 
So no matter how many rules or what specific rule set you want to enforce it will always roll back to the person behind the controls. If you have a pilot who is switched on and has the interests of his team at heart you'll find that he will actively switch into whatever role is required. Should he or she detect that there is a logistical problem then he or she would hopefully react accordingly to keep the team's momentum up and the same goes for if he or she detects that ground assets require hard targets knocking out.
 
You can set as many rules as you like but it won't remedy this stinky attitude. Make a point of leading by example if you are a frequent pilot, if you detect that a pilot isn't so switched on then tell them, simply put they're going to end up ruining your game experience and (as you've done already) make you not want to wait around at base for them. Finally if you still see problems as a last resort, shadowplay them at their worst and report their stinky attitude in confidence to an admin.

This is in response to the OP I'll say firstly
 
I find it's more of an attitude thing. for example earlier today (i won't name any names in specific because that would be unfair on the poor asshat) there was just a horrible "I don't care about you, what you think, or what the plan is" attitude coming from a particular pilot.
 
So no matter how many rules or what specific rule set you want to enforce it will always roll back to the person behind the controls. If you have a pilot who is switched on and has the interests of his team at heart you'll find that he will actively switch into whatever role is required. Should he or she detect that there is a logistical problem then he or she would hopefully react accordingly to keep the team's momentum up and the same goes for if he or she detects that ground assets require hard targets knocking out.
 
You can set as many rules as you like but it won't remedy this stinky attitude. Make a point of leading by example if you are a frequent pilot, if you detect that a pilot isn't so switched on then tell them, simply put they're going to end up ruining your game experience and (as you've done already) make you not want to wait around at base for them. Finally if you still see problems as a last resort, shadowplay them at their worst and report their stinky attitude in confidence to an admin.

Hey folks, I'll be running a small-ish training session this Sunday to go over ACE Explosives and Combat Engineering.
 
Overall length should be at max an hour and a half.
 

 
There'll be an explanation on what roles each explosive device is effective and how best to employ it (X1) along with demonstrations of them in use (X2).
After that I'll cover how to be an effective engineer with and without vehicle assests to keep an eye on (X3).
 
Sign up form is HERE
 
The training will be held on Stratis to allow everyone to have a good framerate.
I'll see you all there.

Remember the days you could place a marker on the map by pressing "p"?(in the UAV I should add).
Anywho Mr Amentes I commend ye for looking out for the best application of air units. And for using the forums to have a civil conversation.

Remember the days you could place a marker on the map by pressing "p"?(in the UAV I should add).
Anywho Mr Amentes I commend ye for looking out for the best application of air units. And for using the forums to have a civil conversation.

Remember the days you could place a marker on the map by pressing "p"?(in the UAV I should add).
Anywho Mr Amentes I commend ye for looking out for the best application of air units. And for using the forums to have a civil conversation.

So been kinda slow on the development front lately as I have had alot of overtime at work. 
 
 
But quick update :
InternalTestingCanditate-1 is around 65%done in testing, 6 issues where uncovered and squashed, one needs another test on dedicated.
Then ICT-1 gets merged into mainbranch of the mission.
 
Pending that the PTC-1 will be branched for the public test.
 
1st stage is testing of initial mission init where you have to capture one of the airfields in order to establish a base, where from ill add a teaser pic in the bottom of this post. When the initial capturing has been done Ill need people to write down feedback on how it felt etc. where to do that ill show when we get there
 
2nd stage is the logistical aspect of it. i.e im emphesizing more on actually staying more in the field in this mission than previous so ive put inplace some stuff thatl be explained fleshed out later.
 
3rd stage is doing actual missions. the ICT-1 and PCT-1 will have limited mission numbers as ive done alot of changes backend with writing a custom AI-spawner and addin caching and hc support to the mission for them sweet sweet frames that you love and hopefully i succeeded in doing so with the changes.
 
 
When this is done, issues that gets logged and or noted under test will be opened and changes will be done and the issues will be closed.
 
Then PCT-1 will be merged with main branch. Then i branch out a new branch for mission development which subsequently gets tested and tested... then merged back in and voila we have a RC which can be played!
 

my view put as simply as possible to avoid walls of text:
in the same sense that many casual things are against the law, such as speeding, soliciting, overtaking, illegal turns. You don't choose to turn a blind eye but you might not decide to impose a harsh punishment.
 
for example, in the above cases a slap on the wrist applies. so perhaps there may have been a lull in transport helicopters for example, you can either remove the sub par pilot or allow another one. you just have to remember what was the rule trying to achieve? in this case i just described the rule was trying to avoid needlessly filling pilot slots before any other slot but as my case describes, there is a requirement for another (for whatever reason)
 
another case would be filling in plat co before filling up alpha. it's not such a huge problem that you should CONSTANTLY bug the player in the platco slot to GET OUT RIGHT NOW!!!!1!one because if the server is filling up, chances are you'll want somebody in that slot eventually and a slot change from alpha squad leader to platco would disrupt alpha squad as a whole.
 
use your heads and think why the rule was made and what it's trying to achieve.
 
Again that's my view, what a member of staff will do is up to them and my good friend who regulates them

my view put as simply as possible to avoid walls of text:
in the same sense that many casual things are against the law, such as speeding, soliciting, overtaking, illegal turns. You don't choose to turn a blind eye but you might not decide to impose a harsh punishment.
 
for example, in the above cases a slap on the wrist applies. so perhaps there may have been a lull in transport helicopters for example, you can either remove the sub par pilot or allow another one. you just have to remember what was the rule trying to achieve? in this case i just described the rule was trying to avoid needlessly filling pilot slots before any other slot but as my case describes, there is a requirement for another (for whatever reason)
 
another case would be filling in plat co before filling up alpha. it's not such a huge problem that you should CONSTANTLY bug the player in the platco slot to GET OUT RIGHT NOW!!!!1!one because if the server is filling up, chances are you'll want somebody in that slot eventually and a slot change from alpha squad leader to platco would disrupt alpha squad as a whole.
 
use your heads and think why the rule was made and what it's trying to achieve.
 
Again that's my view, what a member of staff will do is up to them and my good friend who regulates them

my view put as simply as possible to avoid walls of text:
in the same sense that many casual things are against the law, such as speeding, soliciting, overtaking, illegal turns. You don't choose to turn a blind eye but you might not decide to impose a harsh punishment.
 
for example, in the above cases a slap on the wrist applies. so perhaps there may have been a lull in transport helicopters for example, you can either remove the sub par pilot or allow another one. you just have to remember what was the rule trying to achieve? in this case i just described the rule was trying to avoid needlessly filling pilot slots before any other slot but as my case describes, there is a requirement for another (for whatever reason)
 
another case would be filling in plat co before filling up alpha. it's not such a huge problem that you should CONSTANTLY bug the player in the platco slot to GET OUT RIGHT NOW!!!!1!one because if the server is filling up, chances are you'll want somebody in that slot eventually and a slot change from alpha squad leader to platco would disrupt alpha squad as a whole.
 
use your heads and think why the rule was made and what it's trying to achieve.
 
Again that's my view, what a member of staff will do is up to them and my good friend who regulates them

my view put as simply as possible to avoid walls of text:
in the same sense that many casual things are against the law, such as speeding, soliciting, overtaking, illegal turns. You don't choose to turn a blind eye but you might not decide to impose a harsh punishment.
 
for example, in the above cases a slap on the wrist applies. so perhaps there may have been a lull in transport helicopters for example, you can either remove the sub par pilot or allow another one. you just have to remember what was the rule trying to achieve? in this case i just described the rule was trying to avoid needlessly filling pilot slots before any other slot but as my case describes, there is a requirement for another (for whatever reason)
 
another case would be filling in plat co before filling up alpha. it's not such a huge problem that you should CONSTANTLY bug the player in the platco slot to GET OUT RIGHT NOW!!!!1!one because if the server is filling up, chances are you'll want somebody in that slot eventually and a slot change from alpha squad leader to platco would disrupt alpha squad as a whole.
 
use your heads and think why the rule was made and what it's trying to achieve.
 
Again that's my view, what a member of staff will do is up to them and my good friend who regulates them

my view put as simply as possible to avoid walls of text:
in the same sense that many casual things are against the law, such as speeding, soliciting, overtaking, illegal turns. You don't choose to turn a blind eye but you might not decide to impose a harsh punishment.
 
for example, in the above cases a slap on the wrist applies. so perhaps there may have been a lull in transport helicopters for example, you can either remove the sub par pilot or allow another one. you just have to remember what was the rule trying to achieve? in this case i just described the rule was trying to avoid needlessly filling pilot slots before any other slot but as my case describes, there is a requirement for another (for whatever reason)
 
another case would be filling in plat co before filling up alpha. it's not such a huge problem that you should CONSTANTLY bug the player in the platco slot to GET OUT RIGHT NOW!!!!1!one because if the server is filling up, chances are you'll want somebody in that slot eventually and a slot change from alpha squad leader to platco would disrupt alpha squad as a whole.
 
use your heads and think why the rule was made and what it's trying to achieve.
 
Again that's my view, what a member of staff will do is up to them and my good friend who regulates them

ah super, so the pbo is sorted.
 
Our very own kamaradski has a server restarter including the use of battlEye
http://www.armaholic.com/page.php?id=26407
 
for the more simplistic server the best place to find knowledge would be on the arma wiki
https://community.bistudio.com/wiki/Arma_3_Dedicated_Server
 
I hope this helps good luck

Hi all, those who attended the meeting (and from looking at this forum) will know, Raz stepped down as leader today, handing over to me.
 
For those that missed the meeting, here is the link to the recording.
 
So what is changing?
 
As I said in the meeting nothing will be changing immediately, I need to survey properly where our weaknesses are and how we can improve. I will however be looking at the following:
 
Improving coordination between staff members.
 
At present it is difficult to keep track of user records, in particular users who have been warned but not banned, it is easily lost information and tracking will become tedious if it’s not done properly. It won’t happen overnight and it will require careful planning.
 
Improve communication from staff to the community.
 
It was raised in the meeting that quite often things are pushed through without consulting with the community, this is a problem all through the ranks not just between users and admins. I recently made a judgement call which blew up quite spectacularly which highlighted the fact this is prevalent everywhere, we knew it was a problem, but underestimated the extent to which it reached. Consultations will be on the up!
 
Removal of the US server
 
I brought this up in the meeting, it costs us £85 per calender month, was hosting Squad which is not populated and not bringing us any income. It was incredibly quick to resolve, here’s why:
 
 
Graduated offences
 
Something I have been looking at is a graduated offences system, instead of warning, kick and ban for all broken rules there would be 2 or 3 thresholds, racism would be your top tier and get you and instant permanent ban from our servers whereas spamming VON would land you a warning. Another possible avenue was different consideration dependant on membership status. This is just at idea phase.
 
EU3 Mods & Spartans
 
We have all regarded Spartans and EU3 Mods as the same rank, it isn’t clear though. I am not a fan of different routes for different play styles as it may not be equal, one route may favour another. I’m not sure what to do with this as I don’t really want to shake these up too much. Again, this is just an idea.
 
Community engagement
 
Our current community engagement is very low, far lower than it should be. Basically a lot of our admins don’t play on EU1/2 a lot, this means we don’t engage with the non members and that means they don’t become members. My plan is to drive up community engagement, gain members, promote people into the lower ranks (Field Ambassador etc) more frequently to end up with a broader admin team, this spreads out the workload for admins and in turn makes playing on EU1/2 less stressful for them, making them more likely to play. In short, not playing on EU1/2 means it’s more work in the long run.
 
Regular community meetings
 
Something we are lacking is meeting with the members, we do it from time to time but nowhere near enough to really connect, I’m aiming for quarterly.
 
Delegation
 
Both my predecessors got caught up with was delegation. I work away during the week but I keep in contact via the forums, both my predecessors found themselves trying to do so much and ultimately succumbing to stress. I’ve been a part of communities where the owner eventually took his own life, I have no plans to get in that deep. I can’t afford to be trying to do everything, I work away during the week and the rest of the admin team have my complete trust and are more than capable of making educated decisions about their sectors for me not to worry about them. I aim to be guides on the side of a bowling alley and nothing more.
 
Taking suggestions to the top
 
I can’t stress this enough, we will always listen to you, you can come to us any time on TeamSpeak with a suggestion, failing TeamSpeak we have the ideas forum, specifically for this, please don’t be hesitant in bringing things to us, we don’t bite.
 
New website
 
For a while we have been developing a new website and this was discussed in the meeting this evening, it’s not been a matter of urgency and it’s not an overnight job. We were planning for wordpress, it’s on the cards for the future, but it’s not our top priority.
 

 
Raz has done a fantastic job for the last two and a half years since Rarek left in which was not a clean break. Leading from this is remarkable and we have made great strides in the years. It truly is incredible. I have known Raz for over 7 years, I am nearly 22, that’s over 30% of my life and he has been nothing but a great friend to me.

Now on to me, I will make mistakes, I am not perfect, I do not have a handbook, I do not have any business or management experience. I got to where I am by making good decisions, but I will no doubt bring some terrible ideas to the table and horrific mistakes. I managed to delete half of TeamSpeak and the entirety of EU3 throughout my time here and I will continue to make mistakes (although I hope these are few and far between) and I rely on you the community, to tell me when I am making errors.
 

As you may not know Razgriz33 has chosen to step down Raz has handed down this role to Core Staff Muckduck! This video shows the changing of the Ahoyworld leader!