Jason.

Not too sure about side missions

Yes this is because of a "cleanup" script that happens at the end of every AO, which will remove items like backpacks from the ground. If you think the AO's going to finish then just stick them in a vehicle to be safe. Also if you can bring some spare bipods etc with you in case it goes missing

This is the Ideas Box not the Rant Box

The FSG gunner slot is very rarely used, so adding more would cause those slots to be wasted 99% of the time. It's good that you want to be in a group playing a mortar support role. But even a single mortar is very powerful, having three of them would be a little overkill imo. It is currently possible to have multiple people use a mortars even if they're not in the FSG gunner slot, but they won't be able to use the artillery computer. Luckily Cz3h has made a very nice app that will do all the work that the artillery computer does. Link to his forum post: http://www.ahoyworld.co.uk/topic/4890-artillery-calculator/?hl=mortar

Can't really complain about improvements even if they're small, especially considering it's a pretty good looking game to begin with. I'll have to see the changes for myself in-game before I can really decide how much I like it, I find it really hard to judge it from a few screenshots. I think the most impressive change here is what they've done with the water, it looks incredible.

I wouldn't have wrote that mini-guide if it didn't work So yes, you can lase with a Darter, and lock onto that with a Greyhawk (including moving targets). If I'm understanding you correctly, you're referring to the position of the laser when locked onto a target. There are two ways of getting around this. If you have the Darter looking down onto the target vehicle, when you lock on the laser will be on the center of mass, and will stay there even if the target moves. 2nd way is simply to lase the target manually from the Darter (which I explained above).

Looks nice but... where are you going to fit the HMG? Considering that BI never bothered to add the showcased animations to a lot of vehicles in game atm, I doubt that they'd add them to a jeep.

I beg to difer. You can lock with ctrl+T (default) on moving armor and the lock will stay on target even when you maneuver and target is moving around. I had destroyed/disabled quite a few MBTs which were on the move. It is immensly more efective then JTAC on ground leading moving target. For further details see where i learned how to do it. I agree with Cebi here, hitting moving targets isn't so hard. How to hit a moving vehicle with a GBU: Obviously you will need an armed Greyhawk, but also a Darter, preferably able to look down onto the vehicle. 1. Lock onto the vehicle with the Darter and turn on the laser. 2. Switch to the Greyhawk, lock onto the target, and release the bomb. Make sure you release a good distance away from the target (2k altitude should be fine). 3. QUICKLY switch back to the darter. 4. (This is where is gets tricky) Go into the gunner seat and release the lock on the vehicle so you now have control of the camera. 5. Keep the lase on the vehicle but try to predict the vehicles movements, aim the laser where you think the vehicle is going. 6. If you do it right (it takes some practice) you should get a direct hit on the vehicle, or at least hit close enough to disable it. This may look tricky, but with some practice you can do it easily and you'll take out vehicles far more reliably than just locking on with a laser.

I think I'll stop here before I get carried away and get myself banned by my sick sense of humour

If you cannot think of anything interesting or useful to say on the forums to earn your coins, then you'll have to buy them. Contact Slick who can set up an account for you at the Ahoyworld-Coin-Bank (ACB). Also check out their website AW-coin-lenders.com for the latest deals. Or if you're looking for a way round this system, I may be able to hook you up with some shiny coins if you can do some favours for me... You need a webcam and I like kinky stuff

Do people really need to question if this is an April fools joke?! I think it's pretty obvious this is real. I can't wait for the changes David! Hopefully you can bring this to EU1/2 as well. My god planting why do you make this so boring!

Someone promote this guy to Core Staff already! Seriously though, a little optimism wouldn't hurt here

This is how I would recommend dealing with naughty people: 1. Call for an admin in side chat. Whenever "admin" is typed in the chat it alerts them, think of it like how batman is alerted by the batsignal. 2. If you don't get any response (give it a few mins), then poke one on TS. 3. If there aren't any admins on TS (or they're afk), then use the report form ( www.ahoyworld.co.uk/pr ). If possible (or relevant) then add some screenshots/video of the naughty player doing his naughty things. All of this is just my way of doing things and is in no way official, so use this at your own risk! Also if any admins (or others) have anything they'd like to add to this then please do.

I don't think kman was suggesting "infinite fuel", but rather to disable fuel leakages as a result of taking damage. So helicopters will still use fuel from normal flying around etc. Also, I don't think I've ever seen a Pawnee pilot survive long enough to need to refuel...

If you just want side missions to be more of a challenge then wouldn't it be easier to just add more units to them? That would be much simpler than trying to merge multiple side missions together. That said, I'm against making side missions harder, they're supposed to be a small optional mission that can be done by a small infantry squad. Since they're often left alone with nobody interested in going to complete it, I don't think the FPS drop would be worth it. I'd like the idea, but the way that ai vehicles move would mean that they're never going to reach their destination even if the mission is ignored, so I don't think these sorts of missions are possible atm Although that did give me an idea that some side missions could have a time limit attached to them, that would add an extra challenge to the mission without the disadvantages of adding more enemy units.

As far as I know there is no way to avoid the camera shake if the UAV is moving. To get the most accurate lase you should use the Darter and have it autohover, once it's not moving the camera will be 100% accurate.

Anton if you haven't already I would suggest that you fill out a player report form ( http://www.ahoyworld.co.uk/pr ), and include that video which should be good enough evidence to get the player banned.

So is it ok if the crash landed pilot respawns to bring the repair vehicle back to their heli?

Zissou I 100% understand where you're coming from here, and I largely agree with it. But can you not see a scenario where a pilot will be waiting for a LONG time (potentially hours) for somebody to come and repair/refuel his heli but nobody comes? Because I certainly can, I've played enough of EU1 to have experienced many situations just like it, so to force pilots to wait for another player to help them doesn't seem quite right. If this is going to remain as a strict rule then pilots won't even try to land a damaged heli, because they know that then they will have to wait for somebody to repair/refuel them, instead they'll just crash so that they can respawn.

I'll take Rifleman. Although if others are interested I'm up for taking a vehicle role. Trust fr4q to be begging for a pilot slot

I don't usually designate targets from greyhawks so I don't have so much experience with it, but when I do I do what Shorts said. I'd be interesting in knowing why you think it's better to let the AI fly after the bomb drop, as in my experience it causes far more unstable flight.

I agree with Smiley, I will usually decide my own LZ due to the constantly changing situation at an AO, what may have been a good LZ 5 mins ago (or even when you left base), may no longer be viable by the time you get there. There are MANY factors to consider when deciding on an LZ, and it's something that newer players often struggle with. I had a situation a few days ago where I was in the first heli to a new AO, the LZ given to the pilot was pretty close to the AO and only had a small treeline as cover. If the pilot flown low behind the cover of the trees and landed at the LZ it probably would have went fine. But instead he flies in at high speed, way past the LZ and at least 100m altitude, I could see this coming so I already had my parachute ready, the others weren't so lucky... After all that the pilot then blames the LZ for what went wrong, don't be that guy. Sometimes LZs are quite flexible, but often they depend on a critical piece of cover to protect them from enemy fire. Usually this would be a hilltop but can also be trees, buildings, or a coastline.

It's a nice idea but I struggle to see what purpose it would actually have. The only outcome would be that pilots without the "mark" will be at a constant disadvantage, which I don't think is very fair. There are already basic rules that you must be (somewhat) competent at flying to be a pilot. Whilst that bar isn't exactly very high, I think it's good enough for EU1/2.

I wouldn't bother making suggestions for the base layout/vehicle locations since I believe that's something that's already being worked on. For the HEMTTs I agree with Scar "1 Repair 1 Fuel 1 Flatbed 1 Med HMTT", the others are never used or needed. On having certain pre-loaded vehicles (Hunter with mortar stuff etc), I'd so no to that, it would be better to focus on creating a better system to load vehicles yourself, rather than slowly filling and emptying your backpack.... I like the idea of pilots switching to driving roles in certain situations, however I feel that it would be hard to enforce when pilots can/cannot switch to driving roles as it would have too many grey areas. Also, the mindless zombies at base have a hard enough time figuring out which heli to get in, god knows what will happen if you throw in ground transport options as well! Never considered it before, but I like your idea for switching to the regular Slammer, it's still a little pointless since an AT guy can do a better job, but hey, TANKS! Scar I'm not too sure what exactly you think should be changed regarding "enemy air activity", since the Neophrons will often target and destroy our ground vehicles all over the map, if anything I think that should be toned down a bit. Although I wouldn't mind if the enemy helicopters would come a bit further out the AO every now and then. Don't get me started on those FOB trucks... that deserves a topic of it's own! Scar's really is just a miserable little shit

The UAVs are designed to SUPPORT the ground troops, and the GBUs fit that role very nicely. If the Greyhawks had ATGMs then the UAV operator would be able to take out ground targets by himself too easily, and people on the ground would no longer be able to designate ground targets for him. Another option would be to switch the AA Buzzard to the CAS version, which is armed with Skalpels and GBUs, but that's for a different topic... Also what Amentes said ^^