Jason.

Great work for getting this made, this is exactly what we needed.
Is it weird that I'm excited about this?
 
Could you give some info on what sort of screenshots would be best in the case of a TKer.
Example screenshots:
TKs in chat:   This is the easiest evidence to provide since anyone can get those even if you're not able to see the killings in person.
TKs in action: Potentially very good evidence, however this can be quite difficult depending on how he's killing people.
Votekicks:       If you (the reporter) gets screenshots of different players using the "votekick" functionality already ingame, as that could serve as lots of mini-reports. 
 
No doubt the best way would be for all the players on at the time to submit their own reports, however I don't think most people would actually be bothered to do it.
 
Also a mini-suggestion, if possible make it so that votekick cannot be spammed, e.g. put it on a 10 second timer or something so that players can't spam it.

This isn't really an issue when everything works the way it should, but at times when there are fewer players online, or if the jet pilot isn't capable enough it can be a pain. 
 
This was the case yesterday. The AA pilot didn't perform very well and there were plenty of enemy jets in the air, shooting at the helicopters both in spawn and to/from AO. 
 
After an hour or two the jet pilot left and I stepped up to take his place. First thing to happen is that I get shot at while taxying to the runway, great.
 
After waiting for another jet (10 min) I'm airborne. Straight into combat, takes out 4 jets and need to rearm. During the time I land and rearm another jet respawns and shoot me down when on the ground, so I'm forced to wait another 10 minutes and thus the air is filled with jets again. During the very next takeoff I'm taking fire on the runway, but manages to get up and airborne and later take out the enemy jets. 
 
The AI is really stupid and flies horrendously bad, but they tend to get the jump on you when you're on the ground. They shoot as you take off, land or rearm, and you can't really do much to avoid it. If you get shot down, you're back to waiting another 10 minuits, there's just so much dead time, time spent simply waiting for a rearm or your jet to respawn. Other than that, they're so bad that it's barely fun to take the jet and fight them. I only took that role yesterday because we needed someone to kill the Jets, not because I wanted to, and I'm a guy love flying both the jets and helicopters in Arma.
 
The issue is that you spend so much time simply waiting for the jet to spawn or rearm. You could basically tab down and use a timer for the spawn when you die, since you'll have to wait anyways. Sure, you could take a helicopter and try and do a dropoff, but then another pilot would take the jet slot unless you're back at the hangar as it respawns, and you usually won't be.
 
This could be solved in different ways. 
 
The respawn and rearm time of the jet could be decreased, and the base AA could be extended to cover the landingstrip better. 
 
Me personally would love a combo of this, combined with having AI difficulty increased slightly on the jets, but I understand that that might not be possible without changing difficulty on everything else.
 
Anyways, long spawn times and too dull AI makes jets quite boring in I&A. It also causes frustration among the troops, who usually blame the helicopter pilots for taking missiles from enemy jets.

Basically, rather than decreseing the ammount of enemy jets, decrese the downtime of the friendly jets.

Perhaps some sort of form could be made where players can submit things like: TKer name, rough time of TK, screenshots, and maybe some comments on the incident.
That way players can report it at the time of it happening, rather than waiting for an admin and having to explain it to them hours later through TS, which I have done before and it isn't exactly smooth.

Perhaps some sort of form could be made where players can submit things like: TKer name, rough time of TK, screenshots, and maybe some comments on the incident.
That way players can report it at the time of it happening, rather than waiting for an admin and having to explain it to them hours later through TS, which I have done before and it isn't exactly smooth.

Pretty much as the title suggests, a British Army Air Corps Apache attack helicopter (AH-64 Longbow), landed on the school field, the pilot was an ex-member of the cadet force at the school which goes some way to explaining why they brought the beast to our rugby field. Took some videos and pics which I'm sure some of you will be interested to see. Enjoy...
    Landing: http://youtu.be/XuhTsEQzjzs
  Take Off:
  Short Bit of Flight: Won't let me embed 3 vids so here's the link: https://youtu.be/R7M7a0CUmSY   30mm M230E1 Chain Gun:   Just another pic:   NB: I was given marshalling duty of the younger kids which explains all the little high-pitched voices

Hey guys! Luetin's stream ended a couple hours ago, but I thought I'd put the discussion up anyways. Tonight was a lot of fun for me, and went fairly well for a first time doing PvP. I thought I would tell you guys some of my experiences during it. I must apologize beforehand if my typing seems fairly low-level, as it is not one of my strong suits.
 
Joining: After managing to seize a slot on CSAT, it was a nice welcome to see the different teams organizing and having a sense of coordination, as opposed to regular Zeus missions on EU2. The limited gear options was also a plus, because it made the squads more role-dependent, and everyone understanding the importance of their designated role. Of course, you can easily find this on EU3, but that's expected. 
 
Another thing I found myself disliking but somehow enjoying was the forced first person. I'm in the bad habit of using third-person a lot, but having it forced sort of introduced me to some parts of ArmA I haven't experienced really. Being in a vehicle and not knowing on the outside was pretty exciting, and so was tactically checking your corners because you didn't have third-person view to save you from the risk. This made driving armored vehicles a pain, but luckily I didn't have to experience that much. 
 
Mission 1: NATO Attack/CSAT Defend
 
I enjoyed this mission a lot. I found the staging and planning done by my team quite impressive. We had possession over a Kamysh, and we discussed many possible locations and the benefits of putting it there. Eventually, we settled on hiding it behind a ridge. This plan went south after being flanked from the East by large numbers of NATO. Fortunately, I managed to gun a few down before the Kamysh was blown by a PCML missile. This led to an intense firefight between my team and several NATO soldiers. This went on for a while until my computer crashed, ending my experience in the first mission. Overall, the mission was great.
 
Mission 2: Experimental weapon

I had managed to rejoin the CSAT team in time for this mission, although I was part of another team (led by RoyalSertr). Although my team lead the CSAT victory, I myself found myself in a tower with a teammate sniping scattered NATO soldiers. After CSAT gained possession of the truck, I regrouped with the rest of team and escorted the Objective Vehicle back to base, only encountering very small resistance. Overall, the mission was great.
 
Mission 3: CSAT Attack/NATO Defend
 
This mission is where things started to go south for my team and the rest of CSAT. A Helicopter transported the entirety of CSAT forces and was dropped off in different locations, all far from the objective. Due to lack of communication, my team was split off. While traveling large distances in an attempt to regroup, my area was heavily shelled by mortar fire. I had managed to take down an enemy spotter, which lead to me being shelled and shot in return. Returning to the AO was an issue. It was a length distance away, and my team leader insisted we waited for Heli. This took quite some time, as I later found out our friendly heli was grounded, and my team and many others waited quite some time for a ride. After a helicopter was finally available, space was limited and our team was split once again. We finally managed to get to the AO with 5 minutes left on the clock just to be mowed down by a static HMG at an extreme range. 
 
I did not enjoy this mission as much for obvious reasons, and would like to point out some of the unfair differences as opposed to the first mission.
No respawn tents/sleeping bags. The first mission had these available, allowing for a more sustained flow of troops. Long distance. The AO was about 12km away from the CSAT base, and in order to get there by land, a detour around the ocean was required, even increasing the distance more. A trip in a faster vehicle would've taken roughly 10-15 minutes, and our team leader wouldn't stand for that. This wouldn't have been so bad if our side wasn't only limited to one pilot. Static weapons. In the first mission, CSAT did not have this available. Static weapons in the hands of real players fighting against non-aimbot AI is extremely powerful, and NATO had an abundance of these weapons. Also, the numerous mortars were also very deadly to CSAT forces. Terrain advantage. The steep mountains and thick trees gave NATO a perfect defensive position, making it hard to be spotted but easy to spot. This made using heavier vehicles harder, especially with the forced first-person. However, I still had fun during the mission, and it was overall okay.
 
Mission 4: Experimental weapon
 
I found this mission experience similar to that of the second mission, but there were a few things I disliked about it. For the most part, he fact that you only had to get in the vehicle and not successfully get it back to base was very disappointing. This basically removed the dynamics of the mission and turned it more into a race. I didn't even reach the compound before the mission was over and didn't see a single enemy. This overall mission for me was fair.
 
Mission 5: Team deathmatch
 
This mission was a sort of comedy hour for my side as well had the brilliant idea of taking off our uniforms and going in our undergarments. After the mission started, our team took defensive positions in a large house to the west side of the town. We spent most of our time suppressive enemies and launching grenades. This was short went on for quite some time until we were flanked and poor communication lead to our team being massacred. Overall, it was still enjoyable for myself, and I consider the mission went great.
 
Overall:
 
These Zeus missions were very enjoyable, even more so than some of the recent ones I've participated in. I haven't played ArmA for long, and this was the first time I have ever done PvP. I got to experience some of the things about ArmA I haven't done before. Luetin did a wonderful job with the missions, and I anxiously wait for the next one. There were a few things I recommend go into the next PvP event.
More slots per team. A 25v25 would be more exciting, but 20v20 is good still. More roles, such as Explosive Specialist or Medic would be cool to add. Assigned roles ahead of time, for certain slots such as Team Leader and Pilot. Different mission types only available for PvP would also be cool to have.  
So tell me guys, how did the event go for you? And what did you think of it? I would love to hear the NATO perspective. 
 
Thanks!

Although I would rather have a repair truck than a refuel truck, I think there should be both as often a damaged heli will have a fuel leak meaning that very quickly it can be out of fuel and that's something even a repair spec can't fix. 

I do agree on this but, the Ghosthawk is actually a better replacement overall, this is why:
 
It can hold more people It has 2 turrets on the side It can drop a supply crate it has built into it It has countermeasures It is (Generally)  a Stronger chopper than the Orca in most situations There is no need at all to add the Orca back, The Ghosthawk is far superior in many ways.  and for the time being then Orca is fine as a side reward, you see it so much as a side reward anyway, because it is so common, it is perfectly fine as a side reward and I myself much rather prefer the Ghosthawk over the Orca because it has more pro's then con's over the Orca. But this of course is just my personal opinion.


 
Also, just to add on, the Ghost hawk carries 12 people, (2 x Gunner, 1 x Co-Pilot, 1 x Pilot, 8 x Passenger). this is 4 more than the Orca and could make a difference between another chopper needing to come and evac the remaining people.

So in a typical EU#3 scenario we are fighting against enemies equipped with AKs. Booted up ARMA3, loaded up the arsenal fireing range thing, loaded up my basic russian grenadier loadout(AK with GL v/ stock ammo). Selected the vanilla ACH Helmet. Result:
 
 
Range 20m 1 shot to the head

 
Without headgear 20m 1 shot to the head:

 
Tryk PASGT ( To rule out "OP" vanilla helmets ) 20m 1 shot to the head:

 
And without headgear again 20m 1 shot to the head:

 
Either my ARMA3 is broke or it seems that helmets work exactly like they are suppose to? Facetanking bullets wont work unless your fielding some heavy duty Jason Vorhees mask made out of Kevlar\Titanium combo stuff made by Tony Stark.
 
Also, digging through configs and general BIS wiki about the cfg's for gear shows that helmets range from 1.2-1.8 in armor rating whereas cloth stuff as berets and field caps have _0_.
 
I dont see any practical application for this beret other than to cater to your needs to play dressup. With that said gear restriction is coming to cut down the OCONUS SAS FSK SEAL SPECIAL TEAM DELTAFORCE 6 Pripiyat dressup simulator 2015 that happens every time theres a new restarting of the mission\server.

And yet these little rules being added constantly are really killing the overall experience. It really feels like if someone makes a stupid silly mistake a new rule is enforced to prevent that from happening again. I'm very open in the way that I'm not afraid to say that I don't fully agree on the way AW is maintained, I myself try to play by the rules simply because I hate getting told off. But every time a new rule is added I get annoyed. Especially when rules are so thoroughly enforced on some of the long time members.