[Invade + Annex 3 // impressions - feedback - rant]

Apart from an hour of playtime during the event launch, I haven't had the pleasure of starting ArmA the past days, so can't really comment on the new I&A just yet, but am following this topic.

 

I noticed nobody really mentions whether his feedback here is about EU1 or 2, however, so I would advise that everyone adds that bit of information to his posts. This will probably make the dev team's job a bit easier.

 

Separate threads for each server is also an option, maybe even better?

[Call Signs & Unit Composition]

Did some digging and came up with the following list of military aviation callsigns, if anyone's interested.

 

Some remarks first:

- I wrote down all types and roles available in ArmA I could think of. Because of this, it's an extensive list, probably longer than it should be already. If I forgot something, please let me know, so I can look it up and add it to the list.

 

- Callsigns are realistic for the role and aircraft type (except for drones) though they may not always have been used by the indicated aircraft example.

- - Small drones generally don't have their own callsigns, as far as I could find, since they are usually deployed in the field and you would address the unit operating them. Also, some drones available in ArmA are not yet operational in real life. Nevertheless, I've given different callsigns (code words may probably be a better term) based on reconnaissance aircraft callsigns to all drones, to better indicate what is requested by or assisting players in the AO, without giving that information away over radios.

 

- Though there is no logic behind the choice of letter, I tried to make it a tiny bit easier to remember the callsigns by having each role start with a different one. Doesn't mean you can't mix them up, of course.

 

Now, for the list:

 

 

 

Cheers,

Eagle-Eye

[Invade and Annex 3]

Question:

I can imagine that quite a lot of people will want to try this at event start (maybe even more than the 120 that EU1/2 combined can gather?), so when all try to connect simultaneously when you say 'server is up', I'm pretty sure things could go (very) wrong with or on the server. As such, how will access to the server be regulated? Is there a special picking order, other than the normal AW hierarchy, or will it be first-come first-served?

[ZEUS actions]

Valid points, Liru, hence why Zeus should aim to include as many as possible and the must to inform applicants properly. It's also a matter of knowing your player base, of course. I know I said "hardcore mil-sim", but I think we all know and agree we won't find many players like that in EU 1 / 2, definitely not enough to fill an event, and creating an event mainly for EU 3 / 6 players isn't a smart move (or possible, AFAIK) for the new Spartans.

[ZEUS actions]

 

2 hours ago, PiranhA said:

Do players have to adjust to a Zeus, or does zeus have to adjust to the players?

 

2 hours ago, Liru the Lcpl. said:

In my honest opinion, Zeuses NEED TO adjust to the players so they can make a mission that they will enjoy and find compatible...but some people have the fame to make the playerbase adjust to them... and it causes a lot of weeding out of people...

 

I'd say it depends on the mission...

 

1) When enhancing an AO, either by controlling AI or by using "sub-missions", Zeus should completely fold to players, in order to enhance their experience and/or help them complete the AO.

 

2) When stand-alone missions are created on EU #1 and #2, I think they should ideally meet somewhere in the middle, though leaning more towards the players.

As Zeus, you should be able to estimate what your audience is capable of and create your mission accordingly, while as player, you should be aware that most Zeus-missions require a bit more teamwork and/or finesse than a regular AO...

 

3) During special Zeus events, e.g. on EU4, Zeus should aim to include as many as possible, but should also have the option to make the mission the way he wants it. Difficulty could range from "rookie hour on EU #1" to "hardcore mil-sim", but his event announcement must properly inform what is expected from the players that join up.

 

 

 

As for the reward, aside from a good time (which I hope they have, but is very subjective), it is the only way Zeus can show appreciation for joining his mission and bringing up the extra effort that was (likely) required. On EU #1 and #2, it could also be used to "balance" the former side mission rewards (e.g. if Zeus has been online for a while, and noticed mainly pilots have received rewards from previous side missions, he can give something that better benefits ground troops, or vice versa).

 

In my opinion, Zeus should also apply finesse to his rewards, blend them in the story of his mission or his feel to how the AO progresses.

For example:

- An enemy helicopter over the main AO is a PITA to many players over an extended period of time. When it's finally shot down, Zeus can create a scenario where instead of it being destroyed, it was able to crash-land somewhere, and if players can secure it before the enemy retrieves the pilots and blows up the heli, they can recover it for personal use.

- An attack on an enemy installation, or just disabling a vehicle until units leave instead of destroying it could provide a map or folder with some intel on a current or future AO.

- If players are having a tough time with an AO, Zeus could leave 1 or more damaged or "abandoned" enemy vehicles at random places in the AO, where they may or may not be found.

[ZEUS actions]

- Disregard -

[ZEUS actions]

I don't think there's a smooth weather changer (if there is, can someone point me to where to find it?) so, it's always a sudden change. Time could be accelerated to provide a smoother transition, but that doesn't help the NVG-issue. Not sure if we are able to give NVG's to players through the Zeus menu? (don't think so)

[ZEUS actions]

11 hours ago, Cebi said:

It is very much harder to please a larger crowd (as in real life). Mission balance that all players on a server will agree on does not exist. Therefore it is your "Job" as a mission creator to set it up and watch it unfold and give only minor touches to it while players are present.

 

Did you make it too easy? If they had a good time playing it, even an easy mission is a good experience and you learned that you can provide harder mission next time.

 

Was it too hard and they failed? If it was their fault like destroying objective, then it is fine. If you made it too hard then it is Your fault they failed. Remember that you are playing with Players, not against them. Maybe provide them more intel next time or suggest them something they missed.

 

Finding a good mission balance is #1 PRIO on the to-do list.

 

11 hours ago, Cebi said:

1. You can rarely do it fairly. You are the Zeus. The only time it is OK in my eyes to kill a player is if it is part of story telling and you have some revive system in place. Also, you can get away with it if Kill messages are off in difficulty option and as ppl before me stated they are on and you will be identified as a Tker. Furthermore, I think the point of the game is to have fun, not to train poor players to be soldiers.

 

Let me tell you what I would have done instead of controlling gunner and wrecking that GH. I would hop in as a driver and moved the Ifrit. AI will probably notice the GH then and engage without me doing it. My hands would figuratively remain clean.

 

Being fair is a matter of perspective (unfortunately). What is normal to the spider, is chaos for the fly... I remember Luetin also had a lot conflicts about whether or not it was okay to engage a unit. Personally, I'm a sucker for realism, so each time I do something as Zeus, I run through a mental checklist if it would be realistic for a certain unit to behave like that. I try not to have my knowledge as Zeus impact that, and I sincerely hope it doesn't. Like Amentes says, however, if "a player exposes himself in a royally stupid way", I don't think it's unreasonable to fire at him, even if Zeus has to do it himself due to AI limitations.

 

As for the GH, I don't see how taking the driver position and have AI shoot is better, or keeps Zeus's hands clean? It's still Zeus taking control over a situation where AI is too stupid on its own... In fact, the end result would be the same, or worse. Once AI does have his eye on you, he will always shoot to kill, in which case the GH would most definitely be destroyed. If Zeus takes the gunner position, at least he can choose to fire on the unit directly (kill), his projected LZ if he's still in the air (possibly disable or kill), or just close to him (possibly damage).

 

 

1 hour ago, TheScar said:

my usual engagement range is 1,5 - 2k distance - if you dislike this happening i d suggest you vouch for a removal of the ability to change view distance.

 

This, in my opinion, is a bit twofold. Real life equipment nowadays has the ability to engage beyond 1km. For that reason, I don't think you should impose artificial crutches like limited view distance settings on players using them. Fog could theoretically be used in some situations, but in most, it wouldn't be realistic at all.

 

On the other hand, however, I've noticed many people park a Marshall or Slammer at very long ranges, and then send dozens of tracer rounds towards the enemy before hitting anything. On the receiving end of those rounds, AI won't react AT ALL, except maybe walk around a bit with their gun held up, while obviously, in real life, they would flee for cover, locate the source and set up a counter attack.

Same for intercepting a squad with small arms fire. Kill one from 100-200m out and his teammates will become "suspicious". If you just take cover, however, they'll become "safe" again after a few minutes and resume their normal routine. This animated video of Skyrim's stealth attack shows it brilliantly.

 

In my opinion, operating like that is merely taking advantage of the AI limitations, and I feel it's Zeus's job to raise the AI skill level just a bit above a headless chicken (the level of a trained monkey would already be a dream come true for some AI, so let's save that for later).

 

1 hour ago, zissou said:

I’m going to write up a list of do’s and don’ts for all new Spartans so hopefully this won’t be an ongoing issue.

 

Thank you.

[ZEUS actions]

1 hour ago, Jason. said:

 

You've kinda answered your own question there.

What I said doesn't apply so much for actual Zeus missions, as for that it makes sense to expect the unexpected and so to be extra cautious. 

But more for setting "ambushes" to players going to/from a mission.

It's just a pet peeve of mine when I hear people say that as an excuse for taking out a group of players who thought they were safe.

Okay.

 

Something worth mentioning that I wasn't aware of (and many with me, I think) before I got Zeus's all-seeing eye, is how often units will be spawned far outside the AO circle by default, especially the sniper - spotter duo (which makes sense, I guess). In rare cases, units also don't despawn like they should after AO completion, so it doesn't hurt to be vigilant at all times, as even without Zeus interference, you may be surprised by units where you wouldn't normally expect them. A few weeks ago, for example, I had a side mission where none of the units even entered the indicated AO...

 

[ZEUS actions]

 

5 hours ago, Jason. said:

Then there's the argument that players should be cautious at all times... no, just no.

 

Out of curiosity: why not? (provided Zeus sticks to the AO area of course)

 

 

4 hours ago, Cebi said:

I have around 300h as a Zeus for small (6-8 players) circle of my friends. Here are some things i learned in that time sorted by importance.

 

While I agree with what you say, I think you can see how it's easier to scale a mission for <10 units than it is for 30+ players, as you can impose hardware restrictions and set up a few basic guidelines to better suit your operation? I've built a few Zeus missions from scratch now, and like Chuck says, the hardest decisions I had to make were: do I have enough or too many units? Should I add more armour, maybe AA, or actually take some away?

It doesn't help that it's a public server .. If there are 20 players on the server now, I check the mission and it looks perfect to me, that may all change when a few minutes later, a few guys leave and the mission is suddenly too hard. Likewise, if more people join or someone rolls into the AO with a tank, it's far too easy. Personally, I'm against just spawning or deleting units to accommodate the current number of players, because I would not be able to do anything else if that were the case.

 

 

There is one rule I like to discuss a bit more, as it is the most controversial one... Killing players as Zeus: Do or don't? (maybe worthy of its own topic, if there isn't one already?)

 

In my opinion, as said before, I don't see the harm in it IF done fairly... The way I see it, first shots should always be harmless (smoke, or missing shots very wide). It's main purpose is really to make the player aware he was spotted, and in case of direct fire maybe to highlight the Zeus position, to give the player a fighting chance. After the warning, wide shots should begin closing in. If the player still doesn't run away or look for (sensible) cover, I see no harm in aiming to injure / kill. Most likely, regardless of age or skill level, next time that player takes a shot, he'll duck...

 

There are exceptions to the above, however. If players make stupid decisions, Zeus should be allowed to punish them, because that's just how combat works... Even in real air combat training, the "aggressors" are often meant to be nothing more than an opposing force (note: not threat) to be "shot down", but they can and will abuse every single mistake a rookie pilot makes. If that gets the rookie pilot "killed", he can use the debriefing and experience to avoid making the same mistake the next time, which may save his life some day.

Coming back on the example I used above, which did really happen just the other day.. A Ghosthawk pilot needs to pick up a few units and lands his helicopter on the beach, completely oblivious to the Ifrit GMG that is standing just 100m further, even though it was still firing at the units requesting pick up. If, for whatever reason, the AI is too stupid to notice or do anything about the big black metal bird coming down into his line of sight (which was the case), why wouldn't Zeus be allowed to step in and do it himself?

[ZEUS actions]

As background for those who don't know: earlier this week, 4 guys (incl. myself) have been accepted as Spartans, and thus given Zeus powers on the AW servers. This is why you will probably see a bit more Zeus presence in the upcoming weeks.

 

As for my personal background and goals as Spartan, if anyone's interested:
First of all, I should say that before Wednesday, I had zero experience with Zeus in multiplayer. What I DO have, is a lot of time spent in the editor and a vivid imagination. :) As such, expect a few crazy ideas and hick-ups here and there while I discover what I can and cannot do with my new powers. As of 2012, however, I've been responsible for flight ops, training and creating realistic missions for a mil-sim F-16 squadron in BMS, so I should know a thing or two about setting a scenario.

 

My initial aim as Spartan is to discover the functionalities and possibilities by enhancing AI to a more realistic level. What this could mean is that I will put in more defences to protect a VIP or strategic location(s); place units in overwatch or forward observing positions; have OPFOR scout, flank or pincer a position where they would realistically suspect or know BLUFOR units to be located etc. Once I get the hang of things, and find a proper balance, I will probably start creating separate events.

 

While I am Zeus, I will take positive control of AI that does not do what I think a real person would do (opinions will undoubtedly vary on this matter), in which case, I will from time to time actively engage BLUFOR. Though I usually give a warning about my presence when I'm remotely controlling a unit (e.g. popping a smoke grenade, missing the first shots intentionally), BLUFOR units may get hit and/or killed by my fire occasionally. If someone gets killed, the way how and reason why he died will decide my further actions. After a stray hit, I'll apologize, heal / revive you if I can, or teleport you back after you respawn. Land a Ghosthawk in clear line of sight of an Ifrit GMG, however, and remorse won't strike me as much...

Aside from the mission enhancing/creating. I will do what you say a Zeus should do: assist wherever I can, while keeping an eye out for any questionable actions. Have a question or need help? Ask, and I'll give you the answer if I know it. Destroy BLUFOR assets (players and vehicles alike), and I will call you out on it. If it has an impact on the AO's progress (e.g. crashing a UAV or heli into the Radio Tower to destroy it), I will act accordingly. This may include the "Wrath of Zeus", so to speak.

 

 

All that being said, I am aware I will have to find a balance between what I aim to do and intervening too much. I try to be firm, but fair. If you feel that is not the case, please call me out on it (in-game chat, Teamspeak or PM here) so we can discuss and I can learn.  I think, though I can not be certain of course, that this is true for the others as well, and things should settle soon enough.

[Call Signs & Unit Composition]

I haven't been on EU3 yet (it's on the to-do list ) but I have a booklet lying around somewhere with call signs used in real life (valid around 2009 - 2010, iirc) for almost any type of aircraft or helicopter, for various air forces. If you want, I can try and find it for you?

 

EDIT: Found it. If anyone's interested, let me know what aircraft / heli are used on EU3, and I'll look up a few call signs.

[Revive and FAKS]

Maybe too advanced for EU1 and 2, but AFAIK, upon arrival at a downed unit, you would first use the FAK carried by the wounded soldier before using your own equipment. I  think most, if not all, take FAK with them anyway, so technically, a medic would not even need to carry a single FAK himself, thus solving the issue of encumbrance. Of course, for contingency, having a few doesn't hurt ...

 

As such, my suggestion would be:

1) Healing:

When infantry is healed by medic, the wounded unit loses a FAK, just like when he would heal himself. Only if he does not carry one, would the medic employ a FAK of his own... Because of more knowledge and/or experience, a medic would be able to heal better than you can yourself. (e.g. own heal = health from 30 to 50%; medic heal = from 30 to 70%)

 

As for equipment: No FAK available in unit / medic inventory = no healing. No medkit available = no problem.

 

 

2) When infantry needs a "big heal" (read: revive), the medic will use a FAK from the wounded unit or himself (for bandaging etc) + his medkit (special tools). 

 

No FAK = No revive, or as a second option, very low health with remaining injuries. No Medkit = no revive at all.

[Redesigning the spawn area]

How ironic that it is a manual on how to work with Dropbox.

[Another "just a question"]

After the mission is completed, it can take up to a few minutes for all hostile units to despawn. If you just dropped some guys at an LZ and are on your way back to base when the mission is completed, immediately turn around and head for the biggest concentration of infantry, 9/10 you're back at the old AO before it's 100% safe.

[Another "just a question"]

At the moment, I was too busy flying like a boss.

[Another "just a question"]

Found myself in the same situation quite a few times, where enemy AI hadn't despawned yet when I got to the evac point, or people fired their gun at the helo so I would notice them (as if the bright orange smoke grenade didn't already do that).

 

Either way, regardless if it's during ingress or evac, if you hear fire and think it's aimed at you, you either bug out and re-assess the LZ, or you put it down really quick. In the end, you're the pilot and thus boss of your helicopter. Basic rule is always: if you don't feel comfortable doing it, don't do it... So if you think you can put it down safely, go for it. If you can't, wave off.
 

In my opinion, doing an "improvised landing" is tricky, and should be avoided as much as possible.

1) You're usually not prepared to land where you eventually end up, and may end in a crash-landing and a bent heli, or a big ball of fire. This also makes you slightly slower (trying to gauge the new aimpoint, estimating your clearance with nearby objects, ...) and may still get you shot because of it.

2) You may land some distance away from the intended LZ or Evac marker where infantry is gathering (which will also get you yelled at, because poor guys with a sore finger after the slightly longer virtual run to AO / heli ).

3) You usually don't know where the fire is coming from. For all you know, you may be landing right in the middle of enemy infantry.

 

In my experience, bugging out is respected by most (or at least they don't want to make a fuss about it) but it may get you yelled at from time to time. I remember this one time I was on short final to an LZ when a Tigris took notice of our helo. Immediately, I took a hard defensive turn, started jinking up, down, left and right to avoid the spray of bullets, but a guy in the back kept verbally yelling over vehicle chat... "No, fly lower, faster. Lower, goddamnit. Okay, put us down here (probably looking at a tiny patch of clearing in the middle of a forest right below us while I was travelling +150km/h), come on, put us down, GOD F*KING DAMNIT PUT US DOWN NOW"). Then, when I did land after about a minute or so, 300m further from AO than intended LZ, I got another mouthful. 

 

Wasn't too bothered by it then, but as I still remember it so vividly, maybe it left a bigger mark than I thought. 

[New to Arma III Multiplayer: Some Questions]

Since you're relatively new you probably didn't know, but with the latest update, helicopters have become a lot more responsive, and number of crashes has increased a lot because of it. Even for seasoned pilots, it takes a bit of time to adjust to the new sensitivity, especially with the Hummingbird.

[Just a question]

22 minutes ago, Cebi said:

@Eagle-Eye About uh-80 miniguns... you can lock those. Not many pilots does that sadly.

 

On EU2, turret control only works in the normal Ghosthawk. Sand and tropical camo variants don't have that option unfortunately.

[Just a question]

As I assume the guy will not just be standing there, enjoying the cool breeze of you hovering overhead: Can you actually airlift a vehicle / boat that is moving?

[Just a question]

Same thing with random guys hopping in Ghosthawks and just firing the guns at base... You can lift off and go to some remote place, but they just jump out, die, respawn, take the next helo.

 

Not a lot you can do at that moment, except call an admin on TS. If none are available or you don't have the time to call one, I'd suggest taking video/screenshots of whatever's happening and later use the report tool on this site, so that admins can take appropriate actions.

[Tanoa fog]

Aha, I knew it! 

 

Just wanted to let you guys know what I noticed. Never know if it might lead to something.

[Tanoa fog]

On my days off work, I spend a few hours on the server as infantry, relatively alone (max 5 players). During that time, crystal clear weather and no indication that it will ever change. As soon as a pilot slot is taken, however, fog starts moving in slowly until about 30 minutes later, visibility is approximately 200m or less.

 

I know it's a long and very weird stretch (I don't see how the two can even be related in any way) but this has happened at least 3 times now, at varying in-game times... Seems a bit too much to still be just a coincidence. 

[DCS: Need a change]

Does it have to be DCS? If not, I can definitely recommend Falcon BMS to fly the F-16, one of the most agile and versatile fighters out there.

 

All you need to buy is Falcon 4.0 from Steam (€6.99) or GoG (€8.99 for the entire Falcon collection), downloading BMS is free of charge.

[What do you fancy besisdes Arma 3]

13 minutes ago, Amentes said:

 

Sadly SWAT 4 simply won't run on rigs with multiple screens, or I'd still be playing it. I'm still crying at night what with no SWAT 5 being made and all.

Have you tried disabling your secondary screen(s), or running it in windowed mode? May be a bit of a PITA, but from what I can find, it should work...