Jump to content

Gambit

Donator
  • Content Count

    43
  • Donations

    20.00 GBP 
  • Joined

  • Last visited

1 Follower

About Gambit

  • Birthday 08/03/1987

Contact Methods

  • Steam Name
    https://steamcommunity.com/id/GAMBIT_ph4nt0m/
  • Website URL
    //about:blank

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Hungary

ArmA 3

  • ArmA 3 Player Name
    "GAMBIT"

TeamSpeak

  • TeamSpeak Name
    GAMBIT

Recent Profile Visitors

328 profile views
  1. imagine this: you spend hours to infiltrate csat base, gather resources, work hard, then sign off with pride in your work. then next day you hop on to enjoy the fuits of your endevours and find out that one random blew up everything and wasted everything, csat found your base because a troll fired mortars from it, 5 kajman spawncamping you... all it takes is one troll and 5 minutes to ruin everyone's work what im trying to say is it sounds good, but actually without constant moderation it would be just infuriating. the only way i could imagine to run this or something similar would be like a gamenight-like, once or twice in a week at set times, with moderators online, run it for a few hours and then close it, just to pick it up where you left off last week. thats the only way you or anybody could prevent it from being destroyed by one man who just wants to see the world burn
  2. Gambit

    Armor Crew

    emphasis on GAME. just because the real military does it, its not necessarily applicable in a game, considering the arma engine has limitations, plus EU1 is a casual environment.
  3. Lead by example. @Lindi : "nobody said it cant be a bad example eh?"
  4. im surprised by the fact that @Xwatt ran to the god damn blackhawk's copilot seat (left side) every...single...time to get in, then run around to the right side https://www.twitch.tv/ahoyworld/clip/OriginalFairLlamaOhMyDog
  5. 1. Saving PVT Gravity, next mission has to happen 2. Bad intel from the top 3. That bastard 4. M113s needs hugging too, dont judge, its *insert current year here*
  6. im more scared of a 5 man team ambush on the road then treating the wounded for 30 mins type of scenario
  7. ah, a man of culture, using the scroll wheel option to get out of a helicopter instead of smashing V wasn't even that close, next time i'll show you close
  8. Updated the document with crew roles and resposibilities (few pages, section 7.), bumped up the version number to 0.4, the pdf is not updated, so grab it from the link.
  9. fyi, official BI description says, after the DLC overhaul the DAGR still has the capability to lock on laser+ir guidance in a 30 degree cone to lock on laser+ir (yes, ir grenades too) guidance, so pretty much it acts as dumbfire but can make minor adjustments
  10. video illustration of the event when @Walk'N gets control of the katyusha
  11. okay, my idea dump wasnt meant to criticize your balancing skills and your objective to keep 55 players' fun in sight. And believe me i know what the intention was/is with the AAA battery. But i think we can both agree, there are not always competent pilots and Scar - who kills jets in a kuma faster than any base defense system - around on the server, considering that and the increased threat of the jet spawn update and continued tweaking pose we might be able to say that the chance of 55 infantry being killed mid air significantly raised in certain hours of the day (ofc not all infantry dies at once, but ive seen cases when it took more than 7 transport runs until one eventually made it and continued to slowly get the ratio of 1in3 runs successful to the ao while a bunch stood around at base and a few began using hunters which there are not many since ppl load em up with at and drive around their personal arsenal, i assume that was the day when reportedly -paraphrasing here-"a lot of ppl complained about the jets"). Logistical support, ammobrops and slingloading is there i know, but if a transport who can fly close to the ground and dont even have to touch down while ppl eject is having a hard time because of the jets, well, imagine what a slingloading huron/ghosthawk would experience because of the altitude floor requirement and speed limit. You might say, well, load a crate in and do that, but there are times, when helicopters at the base sitting on the pad get constantly barraged by a wandering tigris, who decides that the AO is boring, lets drive 500 meters out of the circle and engage the empty helicopters siggint there, and jets trying to engage inside the protection zone, and if that doesnt work and wasted all their ammunition on the invisible forcefield, then just ram you out of the sky. you might say we have CAP jets for this reason, well, their life expectancy is around 5 min after takeoff, not just because there are too many enemy jets, you know what im talking about. I know there is a lot more to being a pilot than transporting ppl, a lot to do on the map doesnt necessarily means there is a lot of chance to do it in that environment. Regarding the vehicle users, i would say driving 2.5-3 klicks aint that much more than driving 800-1200 meters, occasionally they get the wrong end of the stick too, they can be sitting on that very overwatch hill i meantioned in the pilot scenario, then the new AO spawns right under them. Happened more than a few times. I merley offered a possible way to try to balance the situation out, bouncing ideas, maybe spark even a third way to solve it. I suggested something, a possible route or goal, not exact solution, which would probably increase quality of life for 5 and get them shot down a little less (i wasnt saying take out all AA so autohover landing will be safe, but prevent the situations like constantly getting shot down if you leave the h-barriers) one could say would increase the quality of life for the 55 others, who probably doesnt like the idea of getting shot down every single time they get in a heli and leave the landing pad for solid 20 minutes or as alternative try to get a hunter when the AT rolling ammobox gets blown up. If you threathen to take away a pilot slot if i make a suggestion which probably goes against certain set ideas, then why would i offer a different viewpoint in the future. I was reluctant to type out my suggestion, and i see it was somewhat useless to do it. Consider it case closed, you wont hear it again from me i promise, i dont want to argue about nothing.
  12. for me, the jet numbers are pretty much irrelevant, only the overall lock-on missile count matters. I dont have an issue with jets chasing me and my trusty hummingbird down with guns, since the increased enemy jet numbers would provide target practice and purpose for our CAP jets, but the number of lock-on missiles if ground and air based sources summed up on AO spawn basically grounds vortex and constantly punishing them for doing EVACs. If i would suggest anything, i would say, limit the number of AA missile numbers at any given time-averaged ofc- to a low number (ZSU definitely has a lock-on missile, but manpads can be switched to 2 rpg rockets instead and maybe limit the enemy jet ammo count, switch a few to cas instead of cap should you choose to keep the jet numbers preserved at current state). RPGs are still a threat, actually can be evaded and requires skill instead of relying on flares which work or not half the time depending on desync. RPGs would provide a bit more cinematic environment by passing close to the helicopters while providing a credible threat on final at the LZ, still makes a difference if you are a good enough pilot or not, instead of instantly punishing everyone who happens to be in the air whenever an AO spawns (the 30 seconds lower treshold of jet spawn on new AO is a tad bit deadly, considering the when and where of an AO finish and the new one spawns is really out of the hands of a pilot plus taking into account that 80% of eu1 infantry players will still ask and cry for an evac when the next AO is 500 meters away regardless of their ammocount) with the current state, on new ao spawn on a moderately busy day (sidemission, priority target etc not taken into count), 2 enemy jets, 3 ZSU, -and ill be conservative here- lets say 5 manpads at the AO. That gives at least 20 lock-on missiles. Situation turns into jesus take the wheel real quick when you fly towards an AO, it just finishes when you are trying to land tucked safley behind a hill, covered from the now old AO and the next one spawns just behind you because somebody on the other side of the old AO killed the last guy in just that moment. Even if you make it out of there, (worst case) in 30 seconds at least one of the 2 jets will still chase you down with 2-4 lock on missiles launched in a relatively short period of time and you have to pray that the flares will actually work (i know that flares arent magical energy shields on a buttonpress, but they are not nearly 80% efficient even if you correctly lead the missile and evade while you are dumping them). Now top that with a jet or helicopter factory mission, RT/HQ building, or even just one AAA battery, vortex will be pretty much grounded for 40-50% of AO uptime, and getting up friendly CAP will be close to impossible after a few minutes- which is kind of optimistic if you take into account that a vortex pilot spots the situation, needs to get back to base to switch to CAP from transport and get into position. A few of you know me, hailing tracers around my cockpit is considered another day in the office, it is a calculated situation that i deliberately put myself into on occasions. A missile convoy that happens to be launched at me because of sheer luck (or lack of it to be more exact) because the AO spawns under me and the enemy jet spawn timer is just happened to be 30 seconds, well, where is the fun, the challenge, the requirement of skill, the sporint chance in that. But thats just my two cents.
  13. In regards of the American style squad, not much changes compared to the british one. Just look at it a bit sodeways, and think as the SL is still a teamlead in this regard, but introducing a second TL who is learning under the SL how to do things. I think from the two TLs one should be relatively experienced, the other one should be a newcomer who needs a bit more hands-on guidance. SL has a bit more time to communicate which would make it a bit more interesting on the stream for the viewers, instead of watching a zeus cam for 15-20 minutes where all they can hear is occasional commentary from the zeuses. More communication, more information getting up the chain helps command update, and formulate more informed plan. Since we follow the "get the initial plan quickly, adapt mid mission" formula, i would say more mid-session communication is required to aviod squads just sitting around waiting for orders. With the little bit of free capacity on the SLs, they can use that to more specifically plan out their next course of action, suggets objectives and plans to command, think about supporting assets and how could they be used all the while helping the second learner TL by watching and maybe taking over when something goes wrong. If we were a seasoned unit, years of working together and everyone in the same role so we could get used to each others reaction and everyone had training to know and autonomusly act in any situation without specific orders, i would say the british squad would suit us better, but since we rotate people out of roles every session, the teams always change, i think we can use the added link in the chain to (by design) slow down the approaches a bit via the need of communication, giving everyone a bit more time and capacity to assess the situation and understand the next objective ahead. I think the slower approach would aviod players getting killed, because the leading elements can actually focus on leading and if needs be micromanaging instead of SL/TL going silent because they are in the front lines of a firefight. Heck, just look at how well teams hold a formation . Having a bit more free time on the hands of leading elements would facilitate a constant action feel from the rifleman point of view (SL/TL had time to plan a bit ahead, so they are ready once the firefight is over - no more firefight->wait 3 minutes until SL/TL orientates himself, formulates a plan where to and how to move). By giving another team for the SL to work with can leave the option open if we need to fold in a half squad/team - SL can take a team of his own, because the player numbers not awlays capable of forming only full squads. I suggested this way before, not because i felt that SLs werent capable of doing well in the british squad structure, but because i felt the momentum of transitioning from engagement to engagement was struggling when we reached the mid point of a mission, or more likely when we reached the end of the initial hasty plan. My goal was to facilitate more situations, where people in the chain of command can have the time and energy to help up and down the chain (SL helping a new TL, TL/SL helping command with plans and potential next objective). Even the last rifleman can benefit from this by at least speeding up the action for him.
×
×
  • Create New...