Gambit

Using Zeus needs some polishing.
 
Not a fan of Zeus's being unable to do anything but Zeus when in the slot and being unable to use Zeus without messing in the "u" menu when in different slots.
 
I know there is that thing that kicks Zeus's in I&A3 but I prefer it's simplicity. This is much too locked down and difficult to do anything with. Case in point, I made a thing in Zeus, left Zeus to deal with something. Boom. It's all no-longer in my Zeus menu.
 
For some reason the admin tools are in the u menu ?? No idea why as scroll wheel makes so much more sense. It's easier to activate and allows you to still be in the game whilst doing admin stuff.
 
Back to the Zeus slots. What if we want to play but have to do admin or zeus things ? There is no provision for that as you cannot play whilst in one of those slots. AI can't see you, you don't show on map.
 
I honestly think 4 is over complicated far too locked down to be any fun. This kind of restriction is what you get on the MSO or game night missions when they have a purpose and a set objective.
 
I'm sorry to be such a Negative Nancy but there are so many issues and so many needlessly complicated bits of it that if 4 ever does go live it will make it so much less fun to play and less engaging for an audience that is not a bunch of dudes into their paperwork. Our playerbase and our appeal to a large base of the ArmA players is that we are NOT 77th JSOC. If I wanted to play like that I would go to their server.

I haven't played a lot of IA4 to give very specific opinion, but after trying it out a bit it's giving me feel a bit confused overall.

About the positive stuff:
-I really love the idea of backpack/vehicle locking, it's fixing one of the problems that's been following IA for a while, which is people messing with your stuff without your permission. I believe most of us in the past experienced some pointless and annoying arguing with people related to that situation, which sometimes even ended with giving up on playing more that day. (I love arma and games overall for giving us possibility to escape from every-day troubles, and I don't feel like having to deal with more of them virtually.)
-New revive system. Feels much better than the previous one and I think it's less buggy when it comes to reviving (I don't recall any situation where I wasn't able to revive someone. In the old revive system problem with reviving is more like everyday situation.) After being shot down you don't end up thinking "Not again..." and can actually hope to get help from someone and enjoy another chance instead of respawning over and over due to lack of medics around or having to deal with 'revive bug' yourself. The only thing you can miss from old revive system is being able to carry/drag someone. In some situations really helpful or even necessary. Still hoping to get it back one day. (#BlameStan)
-Possibility to play other faction than NATO (it brought the feeling of something new to enjoy/use).

For me the new Reward system is the only thing giving me mixed feelings. As @Xwatt mentioned, it has a lot of potential to fix the problem with side mission rewards and people fighting over them. I also think the system should include only vehicles, without any additional gear to purchase (about that below).

Now the negatives:
-Limited arsenal. Unlimited arsenal (kind of unlimited) is one of the main things you love IA for. It gives you the ability to approach the ongoing mission however you want, in your own style. You can easily change your style wherever you get bored of it or when you need to. There's a lot to choose from. That's why I don't like the idea of including any gear in the reward system, feels like they just took away some freedom from you. The only place where gear limitation fits and works well from my perspective are zeus missions. For IA it can get quite monotonous.
-Groups and roles is the thing that confuses me most. Every time I look at the groups panel it feels so illegible, and I just end up reading whole group panel few times in a row just to figure out which role is free to take. Maybe that's just the lack of colors and specific style to make it a bit more readable, but I guess that could be changed.
-More points for being in the area of operations. It feels like it would reward players for choosing more aggresive playstyle, which can lead to a bit of greedyness when it comes to points. I just imagined how it would work for friendly armor. Once you spend some time in the armored squads, you realise quite fast how easily it is to lose any vehicle if you get too close, AI is unforgivable once they spot you (especially now when the AI became more challenging). Whenever you think differently on another day and another approach, they quickly remind you how wrong you were this time, again. Sitting a bit away from the mission area is a common thing to anyone who tries to make some good use of the vehicle as they try to support friendly infantry. Being greedy for points can push many people too far and and they will just end up losing helpful assets. Also, freedom when it comes to playstyle feels a bit like a tradition, something that shouldn't be changed.

I would love to see a good mix between old IA3 and positive aspects of IA4. That could be something to make public server even more enjoyable, bringing a bit of freshness without unnecesary changes to something that works just well. I believe I could get used to the IA4 the way it is now if I had to, but the question is, do I want to? At the moment - not really. That's not something I would get back into every day with some excitement.

BUT all that being said.

I still think that it's a good thing that Ahoy's flagship is evolving. We need that in order to keep people interested and coming back for more ArmA.
 
I think the direction of the evolution is the crux of the issue as this is the point that Ahoy will have to be careful with. and I am more than happy to support a jump forwards, just want to make sure it's in the right direction.

Thank you @Ryko for dedicating so much time to this though and for taking things into consideration when they have been put forwards by the players.

I've been generally quiet when it has come to giving my opinions about I&A4, but I think now is the time I adress certain things. I want to start by saying that I've been around since late 2014, and i've played through and witnessed the development of both I&A2 and I&A3, so my opinions and viewpoints may be drastically different to someone who has just played I&A4 for the very first time.
 
I want to begin with starting on the ethos of what Ahoyworld, and more specifically Invade and Annex is. Invade and Annex has always pride itself on being casual, open and as least restricitve as possible, so you can join in, play for 10 minutes, 20 minutes an hour or six, and all gear is at disposal to you (except a few class restricted Arsenal restrictions) and powerful assets such as tanks that can be obtained through playing side missions. Moreover, you can play how you like, be it lonewolfing or in a squad. And it has worked. It's what has differentiated us from the likes of the 77th, and I believe is the main reason why a lot of us aren't just playing there. I believe that I&A4 has took the ethos Invade and Annex was founded upon, and has threw it away.
 
Before I begin the negatives, lets begin with the positives. There are many things I love about I&A4. The increased difficulty, this makes playing boots on the ground so much more intense and enjoyable. The locking of vehicles, which tackles the issue we've had for years of people stealing hunters etc. The ability to play as different factions, (The Beta where we played as CSAT was one of the best experiences i've ever had.) Lastly the purchasing of side rewards, im still a bit hit or miss on it, but overall it sorts the issue of people fighting about "I did this side mission the reward should be mine." and the ability for all players to revive each other is amazing, as crappy medics no longer matter as much.
 
Now the negatives. Let's begin at base. You go the arsenal and see a lot of the gear you are accustomed to is missing. Uniforms, Weapons, Scopes. You think to yourself "I'm only here for 15 minutes I just wanted to quickly jump in, kill some guys in the AO and leave, but now to get what the gear I really want I have to grind points to get it" granted it's not a lot of points, but it just really shoots players who come here for casual gameplay in the foot, and it just takes away from what I&A should be. All weapons available from the start, except gear that is restricted to certain roles such as marskmans, autoriflemans etc. it really starts to begin to feel like a call of duty or a battlefield, where your gear is restricted behind a paywall of points where you can only get acess to it once you "kill the bad guys" or help your team.
 
Groups. I understand why it is the way it is, but enforcing a structure on a playerbase that is known and prided on being casual just won't work. There needs to be an understanding that people just want to lonewolf, and should be able to make their own squad and do that, as our ethos promotes allowing players to have their own freedom in an otherwise casual environment. Being tied to alpha, bravo, charlie won't help anything, as players who come to Ahoyworld looking to play alone will lonewolf anyway, regardless of the structure. We aren't the 77th, we don't make you stand in little cute lines at base with your squad, you should be able to ask on side chat if anyone wants to play seriously, then you make your own squad or you can make a squad with just yourself in, we don't need to enforce teamwork, that's not who we are, you should be able to have the choice to play in a group with yourself  or with other people looking for serious gameplay, there needs to be a choice. I'd reccomend just keeping the I&A3 grouping system, it promotes everything we believe in, and I really don't think anyone wanted or asked to be tied to a squad. I understand there are custom squads, but I believe right now they are blocked, but I believe they don't allow for custom naming or anything of that sorts.
 
Mission Area. I understand you get you more points if you are in the mission area, and less if you are camping on a hill outside of the AO. But why should we force people to have to be in that area to get more points? It's I&A, we are supposed to let people play how they want, it's a casual environment, if you want to sit on a hill and have no tense encounterments than you do you, if you want to run straight in the middle of the AO go ahead, why should we restrict the reward people get depending where they are? some people enjoy laying back on not being neck deep in the action, and that should be fine, we let people decide how they want to play around here and that is fine. we welcome all people and all playstyles, that's the Ahoyworld way.
 
Framerates. Much worse than I&A3. I'm not an expert or anything but I believe there is just so many scripts and such in I&A4, that optimising for it will be an absolute nightmare. I think I&A4 is just trying to use so many scripts and functions, that it is just absolutely going to tear apart the frames. It was at a point last night where someone was asking to make a zeus mission and they were denied, because the frames were so poor. Frankly I think Zeus missions is what keeps a lot of the players excited about I&A, and if the frames were to be so poor that we can't make them, it's just going to detract overall from the players experience.
 
Now for some more admin/Zeus stuff. Being unable to use some achilles functions due to the fact it's for "Anti Script Kid measures" is pretty lame. Such simple things such as holding control and left clicking to controlling units and many more achilles functions and such being unavaible, just makes zeusing in I&A4 so bad, to a point where I really don't find using Zeus in I&A4 intuitive anymore. I'd much rather scrap all of these script kid measures to have some of the core achilles functions back, and we have pointed this out to you Ryko, but you seem adament against it. You need to understand that if a public mod/spartan is enquiring to you about this, it's most likely because it's actually constricting them from doing their role properly. I know you are a understaiding person @Ryko, so I hope you will take this board. Moreover other things such as the admin menu not on the scroll wheel and being in the U menu isn't great, and the admin tools being very, very stripped down compared to the I&A3 admin tools. Lastly the teamkill messages are gone, but you did say you would look at putting this back in. Using Zeus is so flawed in I&A4, and it has a few times made me doubt what's the point in having it.
 
I'll conclude by saying this. Ryko you are an admirable character, but I&A4 just isn't what Invade and Annex prides itself on being. It prides itself on being casual, least restricitive as possible and accomodating to all play styles. I&A4 takes our ethos, and throws it in the bin. We aren't the 77th, and we shouldn't be taking steps to shove teamwork down peoples throats, and we should instead turn our focus to what has always made us stand out, our casual and enjoyable environment. For me, I&A3 is the peak of what our ethos is right now, but I&A4 is soon to be the destroyer of our ethos, unless serious change is made. It's overcomplicated and doesn't need to be. Just take what I&A3 is and work on it, and just add the features that make it enjoyable, such as what I said in the third paragraph.
 
I hope you read and take this on board @Ryko, and you can see as a veteran I&A player how passionate I am about this.

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.

video illustration of the event when @Walk'N gets control of the katyusha
 
 

Mission Name:
[EU2] Guerrilla Ops Livonia Week 6
17:30 UTC
(Contact DLC Required)
 
Server Details:
IP: 136.243.150.72:
Port: 2302
 
Mods Required:
TFAR_Beta Installation Guide
CBA_A3
 
 
TS address: ts.ahoyworld.net
TEAMSPEAK MISSION BRIEFING FOR ALL PLAYERS WILL BEGIN AT 17.30 UTC
Expected Mission Length: 120+ minutes (may go over or under expected mission length)
Player Slots: 32 (3 cells of 9,  command, FSG and vortex )
 
Situation
The NATO campaign in Livonia is falling apart before our eyes. Following our successful defense and counter attack against NATO forces we now have the momentum to keep moving forward. We will push South and drive them out of the areas that they have occupied. We have intel that Livonian rebels have occupied an area once under the control of the now defunct LDF. There are rumours that they have had access to a number of what have been described as "Katyusha" launchers. These rumours may be worth looking into.
 
Friendly Forces:
The New Livonian Army  
Assets:
FV-720 Odyniec "Mora" x 2 WY-55 Czapla x 2 WY-55 Czapla (unarmed) x 2 MH-9 Hummingbird X 2 A-149 Gryphon multi role x 2 Various ground transport and support vehicles Any assets recovered on the ground  
Enemy Forces:
NATO Livonian Rebels  
Civilians:
Large civilian presence in urban areas, sparse population elsewhere  
Mission
 
The New Livonian Army continue their push back against the NATO invaders by pushing South of Grabin to liberate Sitnik and the surrounding area.
 
 
Execution
 
Objectives:
Liberate Sitnik Identify NATO operations in the area clear out NATO forces  
Movement Plan:
At Commanders discretion
 
Rules of Engagement:
Armed NATO personnel may be engaged on sight. A large civilian presence is expected in the area so collateral damage is to be kept to a minimum. Only buildings clearly being used for a military purpose may be engaged. Civilian life must be protected at all costs  
Optional Tasks:
Investigate rumours of "Katyusha" launchers near Tarnow and assess if we may be able to use them now or in future engagements.  
Admin & Logistics
 
Resupply:
At the commander’s control, assets are available at base to facilitate this. Reinforcements:
Unlimited At commanders discretion, transport assets are available.  
 
Command & Control
 
Command:
Overall command lays with codename "Overlord" who will set objectives and ROE. Operational control on the ground lays with the Platoon Commander.  
Communication:
Radio channels are set for each element and can be viewed on the map in game. Platoon has limited discretion for change but structure is to be maintained.  
niech żyje livonia
Long live Livonia
 

 

Vote Toast for a ground role

I wasn't referring to your contry specificly, just stated that the tone is kind of reminded me of brexit.
 
Propaganda, i know i know, hearths and minds, even if spread across several meters. I'm sure we already won over a lot ppl by taking out a pesky checkpoint via VBIED, plus with a short but very expensive airshow close to the airport.

I wasn't referring to your contry specificly, just stated that the tone is kind of reminded me of brexit.
 
Propaganda, i know i know, hearths and minds, even if spread across several meters. I'm sure we already won over a lot ppl by taking out a pesky checkpoint via VBIED, plus with a short but very expensive airshow close to the airport.

sure
 
 
Contradicting much?
 
 
Brexit, anybody?
 
Freudian slip i guess.

Mission Name:
[EU3] Guerrilla Ops Livonia Week 5
17:30 UTC
(Contact DLC Required)
 
Server Details:
IP: 136.243.150.72:
Port: 2302
 
Mods Required:
TFAR_Beta Installation Guide
CBA_A3
 
 
TS address: ts.ahoyworld.net
TEAMSPEAK MISSION BRIEFING FOR ALL PLAYERS WILL BEGIN AT 17.30 UTC
 
Expected Mission Length: 120+ minutes (may go over or under expected mission length)
 
Player Slots: 32 (3 cells of 9,  command, FSG and vortex )
Brief Summary:
 
Victory!  Countrymen of Livonia, we stand victorious over the corrupt LDF and puppet government of the West.  The transition to a people’s democracy will begin over the next few days.
We have seized control of all LDF assets and locations!  We are the army of Livonia!
 
Still our future lies threatened!  Terrorists have begun attacking our positions, in futile efforts these lapdogs seek to preserve the decaying corpse of corruption that, you, the people! have overthrown.
We must not allow these traitors to derail all that we have acheived!  Against adversity!  Against oppression!  Against brutality!  We will not surrender!  We will not abandon our liberty!
 
We Must wipe these men out, like the rabid wolves that they are.  Search far and wide, through the forest and hills, along rivers and streams, hunt them down and end their malicious discontent, end the suffering they inflict on the Motherland!
 
In this new era, one of freedom and prosperity for all, we embrace our eastern allies as brothers and sisters!  Never again shell we be pawns in NATOs schemes, a colony whose youth is to be mined dry in their warmongering with the East.
 
 
niech żyje livonia
Long live Livonia
 

I’ll look into possibly replacing our squad structure to the American Structure, as beautifully pointed out by both Jenkins and Gambit.
 
its unlikely we will see the introduction this week, but most likely for next week. If anyone opposes this idea please do let me know below with some reasons why they may disagree with this squad structure.
 
my intentions with this mission is that I just go straight off what the community wants, and what’s in their interest, I too have been hearing that squad lead roles have been taxing and somewhat scary for newcomers. So I do think that implementing this structure might help us to ease some of the people who want to TL.
 
Thanks for the suggestions, keep them coming!

I can't agree more @Jenkins, I suggested the American style because that would, in my opinion, help open up the leadership roles, make them more accessible. With that said, some people would more likely take up those roles and with time, a level of leadership would train itself to work together, which in turn would make the newcomers' experience a bit more seamless, when they jump in a role of a rifleman. In my opinion teaching the community, and providing less daunting environment where they can easily hop in to learn should be the goal for us, so the community can grow. We, as players can do so much, lead by example, and offer help along the way, but ArmA's learning curve is already pretty steep with the million keybinds, adding a communication layer over it with TFAR, for people who just started to participate in these missions can be intimidating.
I've heard too much that nobody wants to step up. I encourage all of you to take on these roles when situation arise, a little bit harder, but get your feet wet, because the appretiation from your fellow lads after, even when you try to carry out a hastily made half-baked bad plan, is worth the effort.
Making the SL role more accessible and providing the option with an extra TL in the squads could provide more opportunity to get the experience, give more capacity to SLs to help their TLs learn. I usually join in at the latest time i can as to fill the missing roles if needed, and lately i've seen that SLs likely taken, but TLs are empty.
 
Either way, even if the squad structure stays the same as is, it's upon the community to cultivate an environment where people won't feel intimidated to take these roles, and in the same time everyone can find the courage to tackle the challenge. I'm sure, if anyone interested, the more experienced guys and zeuses are willing to help, just ask for it. In the times i've been around, everyone (ofc with a few exceptions) was more than happy to help or eager to learn, this is why i personally prefer to hang around in this community. Great potential, incredible amount of effort from the zeuses, staff and regulars every week.
 

I can't agree more @Jenkins, I suggested the American style because that would, in my opinion, help open up the leadership roles, make them more accessible. With that said, some people would more likely take up those roles and with time, a level of leadership would train itself to work together, which in turn would make the newcomers' experience a bit more seamless, when they jump in a role of a rifleman. In my opinion teaching the community, and providing less daunting environment where they can easily hop in to learn should be the goal for us, so the community can grow. We, as players can do so much, lead by example, and offer help along the way, but ArmA's learning curve is already pretty steep with the million keybinds, adding a communication layer over it with TFAR, for people who just started to participate in these missions can be intimidating.
I've heard too much that nobody wants to step up. I encourage all of you to take on these roles when situation arise, a little bit harder, but get your feet wet, because the appretiation from your fellow lads after, even when you try to carry out a hastily made half-baked bad plan, is worth the effort.
Making the SL role more accessible and providing the option with an extra TL in the squads could provide more opportunity to get the experience, give more capacity to SLs to help their TLs learn. I usually join in at the latest time i can as to fill the missing roles if needed, and lately i've seen that SLs likely taken, but TLs are empty.
 
Either way, even if the squad structure stays the same as is, it's upon the community to cultivate an environment where people won't feel intimidated to take these roles, and in the same time everyone can find the courage to tackle the challenge. I'm sure, if anyone interested, the more experienced guys and zeuses are willing to help, just ask for it. In the times i've been around, everyone (ofc with a few exceptions) was more than happy to help or eager to learn, this is why i personally prefer to hang around in this community. Great potential, incredible amount of effort from the zeuses, staff and regulars every week.
 

I can't agree more @Jenkins, I suggested the American style because that would, in my opinion, help open up the leadership roles, make them more accessible. With that said, some people would more likely take up those roles and with time, a level of leadership would train itself to work together, which in turn would make the newcomers' experience a bit more seamless, when they jump in a role of a rifleman. In my opinion teaching the community, and providing less daunting environment where they can easily hop in to learn should be the goal for us, so the community can grow. We, as players can do so much, lead by example, and offer help along the way, but ArmA's learning curve is already pretty steep with the million keybinds, adding a communication layer over it with TFAR, for people who just started to participate in these missions can be intimidating.
I've heard too much that nobody wants to step up. I encourage all of you to take on these roles when situation arise, a little bit harder, but get your feet wet, because the appretiation from your fellow lads after, even when you try to carry out a hastily made half-baked bad plan, is worth the effort.
Making the SL role more accessible and providing the option with an extra TL in the squads could provide more opportunity to get the experience, give more capacity to SLs to help their TLs learn. I usually join in at the latest time i can as to fill the missing roles if needed, and lately i've seen that SLs likely taken, but TLs are empty.
 
Either way, even if the squad structure stays the same as is, it's upon the community to cultivate an environment where people won't feel intimidated to take these roles, and in the same time everyone can find the courage to tackle the challenge. I'm sure, if anyone interested, the more experienced guys and zeuses are willing to help, just ask for it. In the times i've been around, everyone (ofc with a few exceptions) was more than happy to help or eager to learn, this is why i personally prefer to hang around in this community. Great potential, incredible amount of effort from the zeuses, staff and regulars every week.
 

I can't agree more @Jenkins, I suggested the American style because that would, in my opinion, help open up the leadership roles, make them more accessible. With that said, some people would more likely take up those roles and with time, a level of leadership would train itself to work together, which in turn would make the newcomers' experience a bit more seamless, when they jump in a role of a rifleman. In my opinion teaching the community, and providing less daunting environment where they can easily hop in to learn should be the goal for us, so the community can grow. We, as players can do so much, lead by example, and offer help along the way, but ArmA's learning curve is already pretty steep with the million keybinds, adding a communication layer over it with TFAR, for people who just started to participate in these missions can be intimidating.
I've heard too much that nobody wants to step up. I encourage all of you to take on these roles when situation arise, a little bit harder, but get your feet wet, because the appretiation from your fellow lads after, even when you try to carry out a hastily made half-baked bad plan, is worth the effort.
Making the SL role more accessible and providing the option with an extra TL in the squads could provide more opportunity to get the experience, give more capacity to SLs to help their TLs learn. I usually join in at the latest time i can as to fill the missing roles if needed, and lately i've seen that SLs likely taken, but TLs are empty.
 
Either way, even if the squad structure stays the same as is, it's upon the community to cultivate an environment where people won't feel intimidated to take these roles, and in the same time everyone can find the courage to tackle the challenge. I'm sure, if anyone interested, the more experienced guys and zeuses are willing to help, just ask for it. In the times i've been around, everyone (ofc with a few exceptions) was more than happy to help or eager to learn, this is why i personally prefer to hang around in this community. Great potential, incredible amount of effort from the zeuses, staff and regulars every week.
 

I can't agree more @Jenkins, I suggested the American style because that would, in my opinion, help open up the leadership roles, make them more accessible. With that said, some people would more likely take up those roles and with time, a level of leadership would train itself to work together, which in turn would make the newcomers' experience a bit more seamless, when they jump in a role of a rifleman. In my opinion teaching the community, and providing less daunting environment where they can easily hop in to learn should be the goal for us, so the community can grow. We, as players can do so much, lead by example, and offer help along the way, but ArmA's learning curve is already pretty steep with the million keybinds, adding a communication layer over it with TFAR, for people who just started to participate in these missions can be intimidating.
I've heard too much that nobody wants to step up. I encourage all of you to take on these roles when situation arise, a little bit harder, but get your feet wet, because the appretiation from your fellow lads after, even when you try to carry out a hastily made half-baked bad plan, is worth the effort.
Making the SL role more accessible and providing the option with an extra TL in the squads could provide more opportunity to get the experience, give more capacity to SLs to help their TLs learn. I usually join in at the latest time i can as to fill the missing roles if needed, and lately i've seen that SLs likely taken, but TLs are empty.
 
Either way, even if the squad structure stays the same as is, it's upon the community to cultivate an environment where people won't feel intimidated to take these roles, and in the same time everyone can find the courage to tackle the challenge. I'm sure, if anyone interested, the more experienced guys and zeuses are willing to help, just ask for it. In the times i've been around, everyone (ofc with a few exceptions) was more than happy to help or eager to learn, this is why i personally prefer to hang around in this community. Great potential, incredible amount of effort from the zeuses, staff and regulars every week.
 

I can't agree more @Jenkins, I suggested the American style because that would, in my opinion, help open up the leadership roles, make them more accessible. With that said, some people would more likely take up those roles and with time, a level of leadership would train itself to work together, which in turn would make the newcomers' experience a bit more seamless, when they jump in a role of a rifleman. In my opinion teaching the community, and providing less daunting environment where they can easily hop in to learn should be the goal for us, so the community can grow. We, as players can do so much, lead by example, and offer help along the way, but ArmA's learning curve is already pretty steep with the million keybinds, adding a communication layer over it with TFAR, for people who just started to participate in these missions can be intimidating.
I've heard too much that nobody wants to step up. I encourage all of you to take on these roles when situation arise, a little bit harder, but get your feet wet, because the appretiation from your fellow lads after, even when you try to carry out a hastily made half-baked bad plan, is worth the effort.
Making the SL role more accessible and providing the option with an extra TL in the squads could provide more opportunity to get the experience, give more capacity to SLs to help their TLs learn. I usually join in at the latest time i can as to fill the missing roles if needed, and lately i've seen that SLs likely taken, but TLs are empty.
 
Either way, even if the squad structure stays the same as is, it's upon the community to cultivate an environment where people won't feel intimidated to take these roles, and in the same time everyone can find the courage to tackle the challenge. I'm sure, if anyone interested, the more experienced guys and zeuses are willing to help, just ask for it. In the times i've been around, everyone (ofc with a few exceptions) was more than happy to help or eager to learn, this is why i personally prefer to hang around in this community. Great potential, incredible amount of effort from the zeuses, staff and regulars every week.
 

I believe the squad structure we use currently is the same as Arma 3's vanilla setup, which is very similiar to how the British Army operates infantry sections. (Strange considering NATO is mostly American in A3.)

Which you can see in the following picture;

Obviously subsiding the Section Commander for SL and 2iC for FTL.
 
I do agree that squad leading can be quite taxing, however in my opinion I believe that squad lead is a role that just requires practice and some basic radio discipline within the squad. Whether this is done pre-mission or established hastily in the field shouldn't make much of a difference in terms of workload.
 
For the sake of easing people into leadership roles and making the scenarios less mentally taxing, it could be worth while adopting the American rifle squad structure. (Identical to the setup you mentioned.)
 
As seen here;

+Adding a CLS to accompany the squad leader.

As you said, it would allow the SL to focus more on Platoon orders/communication between fireteams, rather than have to worry about the rogue rifleman disappearing mid-op to eat noodles (@Wookz). 😁This would also allow the FTL to practice their leadership ability.
 
However, this is down to the staff to decide.

I can't agree more @Jenkins, I suggested the American style because that would, in my opinion, help open up the leadership roles, make them more accessible. With that said, some people would more likely take up those roles and with time, a level of leadership would train itself to work together, which in turn would make the newcomers' experience a bit more seamless, when they jump in a role of a rifleman. In my opinion teaching the community, and providing less daunting environment where they can easily hop in to learn should be the goal for us, so the community can grow. We, as players can do so much, lead by example, and offer help along the way, but ArmA's learning curve is already pretty steep with the million keybinds, adding a communication layer over it with TFAR, for people who just started to participate in these missions can be intimidating.
I've heard too much that nobody wants to step up. I encourage all of you to take on these roles when situation arise, a little bit harder, but get your feet wet, because the appretiation from your fellow lads after, even when you try to carry out a hastily made half-baked bad plan, is worth the effort.
Making the SL role more accessible and providing the option with an extra TL in the squads could provide more opportunity to get the experience, give more capacity to SLs to help their TLs learn. I usually join in at the latest time i can as to fill the missing roles if needed, and lately i've seen that SLs likely taken, but TLs are empty.
 
Either way, even if the squad structure stays the same as is, it's upon the community to cultivate an environment where people won't feel intimidated to take these roles, and in the same time everyone can find the courage to tackle the challenge. I'm sure, if anyone interested, the more experienced guys and zeuses are willing to help, just ask for it. In the times i've been around, everyone (ofc with a few exceptions) was more than happy to help or eager to learn, this is why i personally prefer to hang around in this community. Great potential, incredible amount of effort from the zeuses, staff and regulars every week.
 

In I&A you would have been dead on approach, you would have lost your main rotor at least twice, blown up about 6-8 times. Hitting the fence is wonky, sometimes works, sometimes doesn't. The very first landing you did, you tried to use the buiilding as cover, yet you still landed on the far side of the compund, exposing yourself.
In KOTH these might work, but AI is far more efficient with lock on missiles and everything else.
 
And just curious, because i dont really like compilation videos, how many landings didn't make into this video. How many ended up in flaming wrecks. Skill is one thing, but consistency is the key. If you blow up 10 times then make it once and record the one to show it off as skill, well, in I&A and ovarall anywhere, wont get you good pilot status. Doing one extraordinary stunt is not as impressive as doing the less extraordinary but still hard to do stuff all day every day.
 
What about the 99% J-hook landings? There are far more landing types out there for every situation. Barrier landing, out of trim cutback, etc. Every situation requires to use the appropriate landings. Flying is so much more than just speed. Starts from picking the LZ while doing a map-recon. Fisinhing it with getting back to base intact. Reliability is key here, on a long OP like I&A or zeus ops, players prefer a pilot who gets them to the fight, every. single. time. And not in front of an enemy squad to get instantly moved down while the heli leaves riddled with bulletholes forcing the players to watch the respawn screen and hop on the same heli just to repeat this process fr about 5 times more until one day, finally they get to fire at least one bullet and take down an enemy with it.  
 
Being overconfident, disregarding the environment factors (big difference between KOTH player accuracy and available weapon systems and I&A AI behaviour) makes you less of a reliable pilot, hence they will mock you, until you adapt to the environment and needs of others. In I&A infantry wants to be on the ground, in cover, not immediately under fire while landing. In KOHT, they want to get next to the other guy just to shoot him and tbag him. Big difference. A good pilot takes these into consideration, not just trying to do the best airshow. Entertaining yout passengers is one thing, but you have to know when you can do a barrelroll to entertain, and when you have to switch to serious mode and place your passengers' safety above everything else. And by safety i dont moean get them disembark and whatever happens to them afterwards is on them. No. You are resposible for that. That would be like, here, im gonna drop you in a pond filled with piranhas, if you die, its on you.
 
If you accept an advice, slow the approach, pick safer LZs, and take the humble approach. Be consistent, They want to get there, they want to fight. Help them achieve their goal.
Either they trust you to do safe landings, getting them close to their goals, being consistent, every single time, or they will find another pilot and mock you when you say you are the 3rd best pilot in the world. Because in their eyes, you are fulfilling your goals (flashy, dangereous, unnecessarily extreme landings just to flex your skills) and not helping them achieve their goal (get on the ground and fight, not hopping on a helicopter, taking part in an airshow then die on approach).
 
Good luck

dont you worry, i wasnt asking how you do it, rather asking for the why. A lof of the situations you describedw can be solved with out of trim cutbacks, and it is even faster.
 
 
 
Sadly, no. First off, you dont have to meet my standards. Being on top of a leaderboard in a ranking system that has absolutely no correlation with the scenario we are playing on AhoyWorld sadly doesnt prove anything. Im not the one to be convinced here. FYI, ive been flying on a 2.5-3 hours zeus op, without losing a heli. Does it matter? Sadly, no. Gotta do it a thousand times, then it might start to matter.
 
 
your opinion, but here is mine :     give it time my friend, just give it time.
 
 
 
In regards of your 30 min video, i watched the first takoff-landing-egress so far (will watch it in the foreseeable future), and i can see a few flaws. You rely on luck, take unnecessary risks and disregard others. LZ was cold, EZPZ, anybody could land in that space with a little bit of practice, and there was no problem with it so im gonna skip it over. On the other hand...
 
The ingress, you opened the map while mid flight, low altitude with significant speed and lingered on the map for more than 10 seconds. Trees, lamp posts, heck, even bushes are a threat at that altitude, yet you didnt give a fck about it.
 
Egress, another hummingbird heading your way, with speed, low altitude, close distance. Your evasion was to overfly him. At that split second, you gave up control. What if the other pilot's reaction was the same? What if you would have taken off of your lz a second later? Luckily you scared the other pilot into indecision. That save wasnt skill, it was pure luck.
 
 
I dont want to spoil the rest of the footage for myself, since i dont have enough time to watch its full length now, but if you want to go over it either in private or in public, i am willing to share my critique, maybe point out what you doing right and what you could improve on. It would be nice to share some of it with the others, they might learn from it too. (Maybe we can do it private first, then pick and choose what you are willing to share) or you know, just say no and ill leave it at that.
 
Oh and if you want to keep schooling me about how to land a helicopter and explain how and why a J-turn landing is done, i suggest you go over my transport heli 101 (on this very forum, if you need i can send the direct link to it - which is about to be expanded on, as soon as i am finished with polishing the material and got it peer reviewed), really basic stuff, just so you dont try to teach me things i already know about.
 
I hope you dont take this wall of text as picking on you. You might see your skills as the best, and im not here to race. Being a pilot is serving, one might say self sacrifice. I think you get the point.
 
Anyway, offer still stands, if you want i will try to help you transition your koth experience into a bigger scale and longer mission environment. 
 
Have a good one

There was a bit of an issue and I forgot to edit the event start time:
 
From this sunday and onwards:
 
Even Start Time: 15:00 UTC

In I&A you would have been dead on approach, you would have lost your main rotor at least twice, blown up about 6-8 times. Hitting the fence is wonky, sometimes works, sometimes doesn't. The very first landing you did, you tried to use the buiilding as cover, yet you still landed on the far side of the compund, exposing yourself.
In KOTH these might work, but AI is far more efficient with lock on missiles and everything else.
 
And just curious, because i dont really like compilation videos, how many landings didn't make into this video. How many ended up in flaming wrecks. Skill is one thing, but consistency is the key. If you blow up 10 times then make it once and record the one to show it off as skill, well, in I&A and ovarall anywhere, wont get you good pilot status. Doing one extraordinary stunt is not as impressive as doing the less extraordinary but still hard to do stuff all day every day.
 
What about the 99% J-hook landings? There are far more landing types out there for every situation. Barrier landing, out of trim cutback, etc. Every situation requires to use the appropriate landings. Flying is so much more than just speed. Starts from picking the LZ while doing a map-recon. Fisinhing it with getting back to base intact. Reliability is key here, on a long OP like I&A or zeus ops, players prefer a pilot who gets them to the fight, every. single. time. And not in front of an enemy squad to get instantly moved down while the heli leaves riddled with bulletholes forcing the players to watch the respawn screen and hop on the same heli just to repeat this process fr about 5 times more until one day, finally they get to fire at least one bullet and take down an enemy with it.  
 
Being overconfident, disregarding the environment factors (big difference between KOTH player accuracy and available weapon systems and I&A AI behaviour) makes you less of a reliable pilot, hence they will mock you, until you adapt to the environment and needs of others. In I&A infantry wants to be on the ground, in cover, not immediately under fire while landing. In KOHT, they want to get next to the other guy just to shoot him and tbag him. Big difference. A good pilot takes these into consideration, not just trying to do the best airshow. Entertaining yout passengers is one thing, but you have to know when you can do a barrelroll to entertain, and when you have to switch to serious mode and place your passengers' safety above everything else. And by safety i dont moean get them disembark and whatever happens to them afterwards is on them. No. You are resposible for that. That would be like, here, im gonna drop you in a pond filled with piranhas, if you die, its on you.
 
If you accept an advice, slow the approach, pick safer LZs, and take the humble approach. Be consistent, They want to get there, they want to fight. Help them achieve their goal.
Either they trust you to do safe landings, getting them close to their goals, being consistent, every single time, or they will find another pilot and mock you when you say you are the 3rd best pilot in the world. Because in their eyes, you are fulfilling your goals (flashy, dangereous, unnecessarily extreme landings just to flex your skills) and not helping them achieve their goal (get on the ground and fight, not hopping on a helicopter, taking part in an airshow then die on approach).
 
Good luck