ParabolicAJB

I regularly see people trying to slot as Talon just to get in an attack chopper regardless of how many players are on or more importantly if CMD has approved it.
 
I like Plant1ng's suggestion, as this could help mitigate the issue of CAS pilots ignoring transport requests for more pew pew in the AO.  It would also funnel the use of CAS to higher player counts as JTAC can only be used with a PlatCo.
 
I would also add that I feel a similar setup is needed for Hammer/Torch.  It's no fun being infantry when there are lots of heavy assets in the AO with low discipline.
 
I think Amentes raised a good point about AT, but it's an issue that needs to be addressed directly rather than allowing CAS to cover a gap left because infantry are neglecting their duties.
 
Regards, Alex.
 
PS. By 'CAS' I was excluding the AH6 (which can carry two passengers) as this can be used effectively with lower player counts ferrying between base and AO.

I could certainly engineer something that allows the Platoon Commander to spawn heavy assets.

Having read Planting's post I agree that JTAC (or someone acting in that role) should be mandatory for having CAS support.
 
- R

In my opinion Apache or any kind of CAS shouldn't be used without CMD JTAC. They rely the message to actual SL/TL in the field of needing aerial assistance. The Rules on EU#3 states that we need to fill up Alpha (12). After Alpha it's Bravo (12). Alpha and Bravo don't need to work together or approach AO at same direction. You also need at least one Pilot (1- I'd argue that bigger birds need at least two if not whole five men crew (UH-60)). You also need PltCo(1) and PltMed(1) (hi numbers, hi risk) to fill up before JTAC(1). That leaves 28 players minimum before filling second pilot team as two-men crew for flying Apache. If we involve 8-ground per pilot, it fits with 27 ground assets if first pilot crew consists of only a Pilot.
 
I know that following the rules by the book leaves little or nothing to maneuvre. Players on EU#3 constantly bend the rules. Sometimes they comply after being caught. Sometimes they argue. I don't have problem driving a boat on Sahrani for example to other side of the island. The problem is, some players don't like to wait to shoot one guy or get shot instantly. Arma3 is different kind of game than COD. There are no stats. There isn't best player of EU#3 server. Even if we do TvT your "best player" will probably get killed by new player. That's the beauty of Arma. A timeless moment to calculate the surrounding environment but, no time for comprehend actual environment.
Sometimes I wish we lock only to advanced flight if we can't lock to first person view. You'll see nobody behind the cockpit anytime soon. Now, where is my rotary wing?
 
@Kieran Collier I've seen CAS pilots teamkill, leaving NATO/US vehicles everywhere on battlefield unattended, doing reckless flying and endangering passengers, nades, salads and whatnot; I mean absolutely everything. Don't get alarmed. We have amazing guys who don't lack discipline. Which are a lot of them on EU#3. I find playing with them really pleasant and enjoyable.

Recently, and ever since the including of the Apache on the gauntlet missions I have quite often found myself at base, with no form of transport to get into the AO after death or joining in progress as the only pilots on have taken the Apache into the AO.
 
The idea behind the pilots RTB when someone needs transport in theory would work however its very easy to miss a connect message or a man down in a intense firefight therefore leaving someone at base with no means of transport. I have nothing against the use of the Apache, in fact I am in favor of the Hell-fire Apache over the ground suppression Cobra on Panthera as we need the support against the vehicles, not infantry usually. However it needs to be implemented well to not hinder the effect on the infantry in the form of wiping out all targets or using our only pilots which could 
 
Am I the only person who has witnessed this? Has anyone got any ideas other than a new rule regarding the CAS Apache's? As this has caused me to disconnect on many occasions as I simply didn't want to sit at base until Vortex needed a re-arm to realize there were people requiring transport
 
Thanks, Kieran 

It's easy to generalise and such about things but consider this:-
 
 
Sometimes it's polite to ask, sometimes it's obligatory, but sometimes asking everyone what they want isn't for the better.

any two-seater jets?  I can't fly very well but could co-pilot.

I choked on my saliva reading this.
 
I am all for adapting but we do not tell the host to adapt to us, visitors. We, visitors, must adapt to the rules of the host. That is why our home countries have law-enforcers...
 

This topic made me cringe like fuck. The influx of players is what drove me away because I don't have time to spend hours on end on an OP nowadays and having to deal with some many people fucking about isn't worth it. If I come online I want it to be quality. I'm fucking thankful admins are finally weeding out the crap that found their way into the community. If you wanna F- about then go to your virtual arsenal of host a private server. EU3 is for serious gameplay, any fucking about is what ruins it for others. If you so desperately need to unwind after an OP then take a gun and go to the firing range and shoot 3 mags, then come back and put your serious face on again.
 
My god.
 
I'm not apologizing for the excessive use of the F word. This made me so irate it's making my eyes bleed.

But offences nonetheless, which I'm sure regular players would be reprimanded for. I'm actually all for Zeus spawning vehicles, as long as it's done consistently. We have a lot of realistic and fun vehicles at our disposal, especially with the new mods; not using them is madness.
I've spoken with Smiley about things over the last 40 minutes or so, and I've voiced all of my concerns to him. He's informed me that they're being raised in the appropriate manner, so I'm happy about that. I believe I've told him all of what I had to say, so I'll try to refrain from referencing anything else of that note in this thread besides the following:
There should be more concrete rules as to the limits of the base. I believe this is being discussed now. Any other loopholes or technicalities in the rules should mean that a punishment is held off until said technicality is addressed. There should be a more public record of ban appeal procedure; that is, a sticky explaining how things work. There should be a more public declaration of punishment process; for example, escalation of stacked warnings into a ban, or escalating a ban's duration after a previous ban. I'm aware that the above are very specific to my own situation, and I won't deny that. They're issues that I feel should be resolved, lest they occur upon another player who doesn't see them as things that should be addressed. As I've said in previous posts, I'm rather fond of AW, and I intend to stick about for as long as I'm welcome. If I'm sticking around, I'd like to help out in any way I can.
With that comes the next part of this post:
 
After consideration I've decided this comment was a poor choice of words; I apologise for it. It was a dig at specifics of my own circumstances, and I won't deny that.
 
I don't recall who I was referring to with this comment, but I'm sure that my issues have been conveyed.
Finally, it's been brought to my attention that some folks seem to believe I have an attitude problem; indeed, this was a key factor in my ban and it's appeal. I'd like to take this opportunity to say that if you feel I have such a problem, or if you feel offended by anything I say, please, tell me that. I never speak intentionally ill of someone, or deliberately give someone undue attitude. If I come across this way, it may be due to my accent or my manner of speech; rest assured it is not intended. I'm a nice guy, I promise.

Threads/posts like this are not constructive, never have been and never will be. They don't affect change - they only serve to entrench people's opinions, no matter how 'right' or 'wrong'.

Threads/posts like this are not constructive, never have been and never will be. They don't affect change - they only serve to entrench people's opinions, no matter how 'right' or 'wrong'.

Threads/posts like this are not constructive, never have been and never will be. They don't affect change - they only serve to entrench people's opinions, no matter how 'right' or 'wrong'.

Threads/posts like this are not constructive, never have been and never will be. They don't affect change - they only serve to entrench people's opinions, no matter how 'right' or 'wrong'.

Threads/posts like this are not constructive, never have been and never will be. They don't affect change - they only serve to entrench people's opinions, no matter how 'right' or 'wrong'.

Threads/posts like this are not constructive, never have been and never will be. They don't affect change - they only serve to entrench people's opinions, no matter how 'right' or 'wrong'.

As much as I understand why you/others want to keep a mod you like, there is something absurd about investing time and effort to re-mod an old mod which is no longer supported, when you could have equally offered support to a currently developing mod to make that better and potential exceed the value of TRYK.
 
If we (as a community) support a new/currently developing mod by using it on the server and even offer time/effort to assist in it's development, this would yield far better results in the longer-term and offer the mod makers an motivation and incentive to keep developing it.

As much as I understand why you/others want to keep a mod you like, there is something absurd about investing time and effort to re-mod an old mod which is no longer supported, when you could have equally offered support to a currently developing mod to make that better and potential exceed the value of TRYK.
 
If we (as a community) support a new/currently developing mod by using it on the server and even offer time/effort to assist in it's development, this would yield far better results in the longer-term and offer the mod makers an motivation and incentive to keep developing it.

Whilst I agree the RHS stuff has better appearance etc.  I am very much in favour of a greater level of standardisation than we had previously, if this means a short-term compromise for a longer-term gain I am in support, however at the moment I (and I am guessing many others) don't have any assurance of the length of the wait or size of the gain - which is the cause of this anxiety!

Whilst I agree the RHS stuff has better appearance etc.  I am very much in favour of a greater level of standardisation than we had previously, if this means a short-term compromise for a longer-term gain I am in support, however at the moment I (and I am guessing many others) don't have any assurance of the length of the wait or size of the gain - which is the cause of this anxiety!

Whilst I agree the RHS stuff has better appearance etc.  I am very much in favour of a greater level of standardisation than we had previously, if this means a short-term compromise for a longer-term gain I am in support, however at the moment I (and I am guessing many others) don't have any assurance of the length of the wait or size of the gain - which is the cause of this anxiety!

Only thing to apologise for is the lack of punctuation 

I want to make it clear here that the admins are doing their job and nothing here is against anyone at AH working EU3 or gamenights.  Also, sorry for such a long post but I really wanted to get my point across because Ahoyworld is mainly the reason I play Arma3 and I would like to help and improve things in any way I can.  
Being one of the newer EU#3 players (I have been playing EU#1 and EU#2 for about a year and a half now and Arma3 since the alpha), one of the main topics I would like to see discussed is the lack of seriousness in a serious environment.  EU3 is meant to be a serious gaming environment for the more hardcore players, right? Hence the strict forum rules, countless mods and complicated (if you're new) files to download and such.  That is exactly what I was looking for when I wanted to get into EU3; a serious gaming environment for both the hardcore players and softcore players looking to get into the most realistic part of Arma3.
 Parabolic said in one of the first comments in this thread that the casual attitude needs to happen at the right time, and yes, jokes are needed but only at precise moments and not during a serious mission or a gamenight, unless during debrief and other out-of-mission downtime.
 I've played two of the three most recent gamenight missions so far, and I did immediately notice the lack of strong leadership in a few areas.  Some weaker squad leaders do know what they are doing, yes, they really do.  Its just a matter of execution and its something that should not be done for the first time in a gamenight.  However, I also feel that both of the missions I participated in, the Fallujah mission (blackhawk down) under Bacon and the chaotic Sahrini town mission under Icy, seemed to be understaffed.  Not by admins, but by players. I think there were only maybe 30 players in each mission. If the server was more populated during these two missions, then maybe a stronger squad leader would have been present.
 Anyways, back to the main point. It really just doesn't fulfill anything for me, and I'm sure others too, when there are players who join EU3 during the week and for the gamenights, and just screw around constantly.  It ruins the whole environment of a serious and yet fun time playing these missions when there are around 4, maybe 5 or more players, in both of the gamenights I've played, who will talk about waffles and bananas and STD's and weird sexual things that should be left at the EU3 server lobby, and not taken into EU3, especially gamenights.  YES, there is a time for jokes and all of that stuff, but I think it should not be in the middle of clearing buildings or any part of a mission.
 Having weaker squad/team leaders may have an impact on this, maybe a stronger squad or team leader would have told these players to cut the shit during a mission.  Maybe better leaders would take action and discreetly inform admins (not using side channel, I hate that). Like I ParabolicAJB said earlier, this weak form of leadership recently has been the cause of a casual, and I think somewhat immature, attitude at the wrong time.
 EU3 is about a hardcore Arma3 experience for the serious gamers, and players will join and treat it like EU1 or Altis Life.  It breaks the immersion, but I think it also supports the issue that players will skip right over the EU3 rules here in the forums just to get the TS3 password and get into the server to do whatever the hell pleases them. The people guilty of the screwing around are rarely in the forums as far as I've been able to tell in the last month. Yes, I might have finally joined the forums a month and a half ago but trust me, I check the forums daily at about 11AM-2 PM MST (I live in the States) and I know EXACTLY who the hardcore players and the experienced EU3 veterans are and it is honestly so easy to distinguish them from the people who join the gamenights and EU3 play sessions during the week and just treat it improperly.
 Again, I apologize for the super long reply, but this is just a concern and opinion of mine that should be brought up at the meeting on Saturday. I'm a little bummed that I will not be able to make it to the meeting to share this, so I thought I'd leave it here to be discussed, and hopefully we can come up with a resolution.  Thanks.

'Bad Leadership' - This isn't a dig at how good people are at leading, I do not choose Commander/Squad Lead as I recognise I would not be good enough to ensure things run smoothly and everyone has a good experience, but that is my point.  Lately, there have been many different players taking the leadership roles which has detrimented the gaming experience for others.  This goes beyond cutting someone some slack, this is players who are plainly not experienced enough or don't have the right attitude. 'Time Wasting' - This could be caused in part by the above issue, but the crux of the issue is unecessary time spent idling at base whilst other players are not focussed on getting ready and getting the AO/mission underway.  This goes beyond the reasonable time needed for command to make a plan and get the pieces in the right place.  This is caused by a casual attitude at the wrong time.  There is time for a laugh and a joke, it's needed, however lately I've noticed my experience and that of others heavily detracted by this behaviour. Regards, Alex.

'Bad Leadership' - This isn't a dig at how good people are at leading, I do not choose Commander/Squad Lead as I recognise I would not be good enough to ensure things run smoothly and everyone has a good experience, but that is my point.  Lately, there have been many different players taking the leadership roles which has detrimented the gaming experience for others.  This goes beyond cutting someone some slack, this is players who are plainly not experienced enough or don't have the right attitude. 'Time Wasting' - This could be caused in part by the above issue, but the crux of the issue is unecessary time spent idling at base whilst other players are not focussed on getting ready and getting the AO/mission underway.  This goes beyond the reasonable time needed for command to make a plan and get the pieces in the right place.  This is caused by a casual attitude at the wrong time.  There is time for a laugh and a joke, it's needed, however lately I've noticed my experience and that of others heavily detracted by this behaviour. Regards, Alex.