asdasdasdsadasd

My opinion is this:
 
Is there a problem with stinky attitudes? I'll refer you to my other post 
 
Instead of adding rules, lets encourage a change of attitude. Culture is more important than law in both cases.
I would suggest an increase in respawn times for helicopters and look into the wreck recovery system that we saw off of domination from arma 2

Ingame Name*: Zhenylas
 
Why do you think you were banned?: The server says I was banned for Racism, although I don't recall saying anything that would be considered racist. However, I was on EU2 admittedly doing some friendly bantering which might have been mistaken for hate speech.
 
Why (in your personal opinion) should your ban be lifted?*: My main argument for being repealed is I was not given a clear warning for my actions. Although there's a chance I was given a warning over the chat and I didn't see it, if I were to have been given a kick or thunder bolt, I would have given a sincere apology and probably shut my mouth for the rest of the night. I consider a permanent ban to be very extreme relative to my actions. I had no intention of actually putting down anyone. If I did, I deeply apologize. I have the highest admiration for the Ahoyworld Staff and community, and would not want to be severed from that because of a misunderstanding.
 
Which administrator banned you (ArmA 3 only)?: John McClane
 
When were you banned?*: 3/27/2016, roughly 2:00AM GMT

That's a fair resolution I must respect. To be honest, sometimes I forget certain slurs aren't as tolerated outside my local community. Haha, I guess it's what I get for letting my mouth (or fingers in this case) get ahead of me. Well, see you in a month I guess. Again, sincere apology as I didn't mean for a personal affront. Cheers.

I have make a short summary video from the scuba/zeus/mission on the Eu1 Public Server
 

Okay I've bought everyone (btw you all belong to me now!) what do i do now duffy?

That's a fair resolution I must respect. To be honest, sometimes I forget certain slurs aren't as tolerated outside my local community. Haha, I guess it's what I get for letting my mouth (or fingers in this case) get ahead of me. Well, see you in a month I guess. Again, sincere apology as I didn't mean for a personal affront. Cheers.

This is usually a instant Permanent ban without warning, racism is not tolerated at all in this community, however i gave you a 1 month ban because of the fact that you did attempt to "Censor" the word. But still the fact is that everyone knew what word it was. 
 
 
The decision on what happens next i leave to PERO, i have given him the exact message that you posted in sidechat. 

Ingame Name: Mr,Mustache
Why do you think you were banned?: Racism Don't know how or why
Why (in your personal opinion) should your ban be lifted?*: becuse i got no warning no one told me eneything. the ban came out off the blue while i was sitting playing a game. and becuse i don't know what i should do then AW is like the only thing i have left atm.
Which administrator banned you?:S0zi0p4th 
When were you banned?*: Ahoyworld Teamspeak

Ingame Name*: NiggNogg, later on for NoggNigg admin happy?
 
Why do you think you were banned?: For some reason the admin got really offended by an icecream name from Sweden. I dont know why, but i did not think you would cry for that. 
 
Why (in your personal opinion) should your ban be lifted?*: Well, it was a name, that seriously only offended the admin for some crazy unexplained reason. However, i now know that it is not okay to have a name like that, so i will change in the future.
 
Which administrator banned you (ArmA 3 only)?: It did not say.
 
When were you banned?*: 15th november 2015

Ingame Name*: Super The Sylveon
Why do you think you were banned?: I'm new to invade and annex and my friend introduced me to the server. I didn't know what I was supposed to do so I got in a vehicle and started killing people. I realized this was wrong but I was angry and the time and got into an argument which was really stupid of me. Luckily the admin banned me so I could think about what I've done.
Why (in your personal opinion) should your ban be lifted?*: I've thought about it and I feel awful. I get salty really easily and sometimes I just wish I could calm down. I want to apologize to all the people I hurt and show them that I'm not a bad person. Also there's videos of the Ahoy server and it looks really fun. I wish we could have a clean slate so I can learn all about it :3
Which administrator banned you (ArmA 3 only)?: I can't remember and it doesn't say in the ban message unfortunately.
When were you banned?*: It was last night when I was tired, depressed and angry; not thinking straight.
 
Love from Super <3
 

Ingame Name*: Wolfgang
Why do you think you were banned?: Lobby Idiling
Why (in your personal opinion) should your ban be lifted?*: Am i actually a bad player ? I have been involved with the server with a good cause and i keep getting banned by the same admin, Zissou. You need to give me a chance and talk to me before you hit the ban hammer on me. Mate, i just got caught up with my errands in the kitchen after i joined the server. I don't mean to cause harm. I apologize that i did not join the server right away. I understand that you take your position very seriously to maintain integrity, but honestly, I don't go out of my way and get myself in trouble with the administration after all the things i've done on your server a year and longer. Is this how you treat your frequent loyal players ? Mate, i have nothing against you. I believe what i do on your server is important in your community, and i value the respect i share with your admin team. 
Which administrator banned you?: Zissou
When were you banned?*: 6/13/2015

That's a fair resolution I must respect. To be honest, sometimes I forget certain slurs aren't as tolerated outside my local community. Haha, I guess it's what I get for letting my mouth (or fingers in this case) get ahead of me. Well, see you in a month I guess. Again, sincere apology as I didn't mean for a personal affront. Cheers.

That's a fair resolution I must respect. To be honest, sometimes I forget certain slurs aren't as tolerated outside my local community. Haha, I guess it's what I get for letting my mouth (or fingers in this case) get ahead of me. Well, see you in a month I guess. Again, sincere apology as I didn't mean for a personal affront. Cheers.

Ingame Name*: Zhenylas
 
Why do you think you were banned?: The server says I was banned for Racism, although I don't recall saying anything that would be considered racist. However, I was on EU2 admittedly doing some friendly bantering which might have been mistaken for hate speech.
 
Why (in your personal opinion) should your ban be lifted?*: My main argument for being repealed is I was not given a clear warning for my actions. Although there's a chance I was given a warning over the chat and I didn't see it, if I were to have been given a kick or thunder bolt, I would have given a sincere apology and probably shut my mouth for the rest of the night. I consider a permanent ban to be very extreme relative to my actions. I had no intention of actually putting down anyone. If I did, I deeply apologize. I have the highest admiration for the Ahoyworld Staff and community, and would not want to be severed from that because of a misunderstanding.
 
Which administrator banned you (ArmA 3 only)?: John McClane
 
When were you banned?*: 3/27/2016, roughly 2:00AM GMT

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!

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!

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!

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!

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!

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!

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!

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!

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!

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!