Zeus PvP w/Luetin: What did you think? (Feedback)

[asdasdasdsadasd]

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!

[razgriz33]

I think you nailed it there.

 

Great teamwork throughout one and two, three destroyed us with the mortar strikes, marshall and machine guns. We tried all angles but couldn't get a way in, we even tried death from above. Wanting to be a sporting lot we didn't want our hellcat to obliterate the central "hold" area. Overall credit to NATO, well held.

 

Good behaviour from an admin perspective throughout, this was a bit of a test as we mentioned before, if we do something similar again we know where we can improve but do keep your feedback coming in.

[Guest Luetin]

I havent had time to really go through and break down last night but I am pleased that Zhen enjoyed it enough to make this post. I think the fact that I had the most viewers ever on my livestream - over 300 for a fair time of it shows how much people wanted to see this.

I am hoping to bring the pvp night back again in 2 weeks time. I think it went down really well overall but the public way in which I tested it was always going to be difficult. Overall I was very impressed with peoples discipline and that we had so many people on teamspeak that was extremely positive. I think though where things fell down was an overall lack of co-ordination. I will go through the fine details and try and plan something for 2 weeks time.

 

The next event I would like to test as ahoyworld members only to see if we cant bump up the coordination between players

[ParabolicAJB]

I agree with the above, as we didn't have statics to start with, we naively believed it would be the same when we were attacking.

For me it was a mixed experience, comms were very good considering but I don't think we could have made them better given the basic ingame comms and TS, so this was a limitation in my opinion.

I enjoyed the pvp and think this will get better and more consistent as more missions are run and lessons are learned.

Thanks to all those involved in the setup and running and also other players.

Regards, Alex.

[Guest Luetin]

Just to list a couple of changes I hope to be able to bring to the next event would be:

 

Add:

- another pilot slot

- helis only useable by pilots

- set arsenals with infinite availability so you can build kits

- medics

- more set squad roles - explosive etc

- fluid missions (these seem to be the most enjoyable)

- more time for timed missions (45 mins minimum)

- Missions + Briefings - Give an overall mission in game - but then give more detailed specific briefings to each team in teamspeak

eg. In game the mission could be CSAT are holding an important diplomat nato are required to rescue him. Then in the teamspeak briefing I could explain to the CSAT they need to set patrols for their team around the base, and have some of the guys on set positions some on walking patrols. The Nato briefing would be that they have two options a direct assault, or attempt a stealth infiltration by creating a distraction.

- try and streamline distances to missions or set rally/staging points for teams to reach before missions begin - this would be especially important for timed missions

 

 

Remove:

- tents and sleeping bags (this didnt work well as intended - may test it being SL useable only)

- limited static weapons (the nato team had too many on defence)

 

 

I agree with the above, as we didn't have statics to start with, we naively believed it would be the same when we were attacking.

For me it was a mixed experience, comms were very good considering but I don't think we could have made them better given the basic ingame comms and TS, so this was a limitation in my opinion.

I enjoyed the pvp and think this will get better and more consistent as more missions are run and lessons are learned.

Thanks to all those involved in the setup and running and also other players.

Regards, Alex.

 

 

 

Yeah I do agree with the Nato defence the stations and mortars were too much. I wrongly assumed that because the base was open not so well fortified that the CSAT could approach more easily but as we saw this was not the case and they got cut to shreds, part of the experimenting this was important for us to learn so as to avoid in future missions.

[Werzion]

I've just watched a majority of the stream on Twitch (I had to work this morning, so wasn't able to join the game last night)

 

Was awesome to just watch it all pan out, looked real fun and professional most of the part. Would love to be able to join up next time

 

A thought of feedback; would it be possible to give the teams more info and time before the match, so SL (and the rest) can plan out approaches and defence and so on more. (more time = an hour or even a day, so everyone is more up to date on things)

Just a thought, I don't know it people felt that they had time to make out a great plan, or if it was to much "chaos" and stressful gaming.

 

Anyway, two thumbs up from me Luetin, keep it up

 

 

 

 

02:13:00 on the stream and about 30-60 seconds forward, OMG! Brutal

(Heli taking out a landed heli and troops with both missiles and minigun)

 

 

*EDIT*

 

Add another pilot, good choice, maybe even with "rules" that one is for Little Bird to insert "spec ops" and/or scout info while the other is for transporting troops and/or vehicles.

 

Maybe add a (unarmed) drone? Maybe with or without another pilot/Little Bird. To let the intelligense input becomes a more major part.

 

And this is maybe more a choice for the team more then the Zeus/admin - but have a player to stay at base and "just" order and arrange the rest of the team. Maybe fly with the Little Bird (far up in the sky and FAR AWAY from AO, to collect info and coordinate the team).

 

*/EDIT*

 

*EDIT 2*

 

And oh yeah, would it be possible to start earlier in the future?

Most people should be home and ready two hours earlier, instead of having to wait so long and play althrough the night instead of evening to maybe around 2-3am?

(Just a thought/question, if most people like the 00:00 - 05:00 time more, then I wont fight for a 22:00 - 03:00 time, but at the moment I think that would feel and be better)

 

*/EDIT 2*

 

 

 

IDEA FOR A MISSION

Like "Mission 01" but let both teams defend and attack. Split up the teams and let ~6-8 people defend a town and the rest of the team attack the other teams town (secure and bring home a hostage or so). Winners are the ones to first grab the hostage and get him back to base.

(Could be possible to have both team start and stop at the same camp, going for two different towns with approx. the same distance, but might be easier to have seperate camps as usual and seperate towns)

 

The add/twist with this is that it becomes a "race" against each other, not "just" against a clock

First back to base with the hostage wins!

[Cyteless]

I had fun when I was able to get in for the 3-5th rounds on Blue. I realise that as an experimental session it was important to run a vanilla experience, particularly with the performance implications of running mods; however, communication from my perspective is really hampered by using strictly TS. If Arma's VOIP system continues to be as unreliable as it showed last night (i.e. wholly unworkable), then I'd like to see either an ACRE or TFAR implementation. It'd really ease the problem of command and control, and communication in general. Really, it's hard to have any sort of coordination when you can't talk to the person right next to you.

 

The spot-height defence mission which I joined, while fun from my perspective, seemed heavily biased towards the Blues. With the number of mortars we had, rackham and I were able to coordinate with the team and just walk the shells onto anyone who tried to approach the base. Next time I'd recommend a more judicious distribution of these sorts of assets - from what I gather that's just a default Zeus object-composition, so I understand if whoever is running game-master at the time doesn't have the time to go into too much depth with object placement, but even limiting the mortars to 2 rather than 6 would've probably made the fight more interesting for the viewers. The TAOR for that objective was far too large as well - realistically, the Reds would've needed to be a lot closer and maybe even limiting the area to a 3km x 3km box. When you only have 20 vs 20, a smaller area would make for a far more frenetic round.

 

The mission to take the AAF tank, while fun (because my team won!), seems like it's open to exploitation. From my viewpoint, it looked like the Reds were leathering all the AAF forces in the base, while we in Blue encountered minimal resistance, and were just able to blow our way into the base, take out the few remaining AAF troops and complete the objective. I disagree with the OP on bringing the tank back to the base, given that Arma doesn't make stopping a tank all that easy without destroying it; however, there needs to be a continuation from there, otherwise players of one team can leave the other team to do all the hard work of fighting through the AI, only to swoop in and nab the objective. Obviously we didn't do that deliberately ourselves, but I think a round like that leaves itself vulnerable.

 

Team deathmatch is team deathmatch - I had no qualms with it. Yes, we were outnumbered in Blue, but when it comes down to individual ability I guess we just have to get better! I realise it was just a fun round, and the choice of area and the ever-closing boundary made it interesting. No issues with how this was run, and given that Red didn't survive due to rocket strike, I think this counts as a draw due to technicality!

 

Overall, I enjoyed it. I think it's more interesting to have a live Zeus dictating the scenarios and leaving the scope open to allow for different scenarios. I'd just recommend, especially with less than a platoon per side, that the areas used for scenarios be made smaller. It went well given Arma's obviously lacking quality-of-life features, but if a modded solution could be implemented for communication I think it'd up the ante and make for a more engaging experience for both the players and the viewers. And hey, if you guys are up for hosting realism/milsim groups to play, I'd be all up for that! I'm sure my group would love to play in an event like this. Maybe a public event one day and an organised tourny another day could be a thing, haha.

 

Anyways, very good for a first attempt. As long as everyone had fun, and I know I did, then I think that's a success for now.

[Guest Luetin]

And oh yeah, would it be possible to start earlier in the future?

Most people should be home and ready two hours earlier, instead of having to wait so long and play althrough the night instead of evening to maybe around 2-3am?

(Just a thought/question, if most people like the 00:00 - 05:00 time more, then I wont fight for a 22:00 - 03:00 time, but at the moment I think that would feel and be better)

 

I unfortunately cant start earlier due to work commitments.

//

Overall, I enjoyed it. I think it's more interesting to have a live Zeus dictating the scenarios and leaving the scope open to allow for different scenarios. I'd just recommend, especially with less than a platoon per side, that the areas used for scenarios be made smaller. It went well given Arma's obviously lacking quality-of-life features, but if a modded solution could be implemented for communication I think it'd up the ante and make for a more engaging experience for both the players and the viewers. And hey, if you guys are up for hosting realism/milsim groups to play, I'd be all up for that! I'm sure my group would love to play in an event like this. Maybe a public event one day and an organised tourny another day could be a thing, haha.

 

Anyways, very good for a first attempt. As long as everyone had fun, and I know I did, then I think that's a success for now.

 

Yeah I have taken into account most of this already, overall I wanted to keep modding as minimal as possible and this was a test to see how well a public event would go. Next time we will try a closed member only event and see the difference. Implementing a comm mod might be possible.

[asdasdasdsadasd]

It's very nice to read all the responses and see what others had to say about their experience and what they thought of the Zeus night. It seems everyone had a lot of fun, and we're all looking forward to the next one.

 

Overall the event went really well for a test run, and hopefully, a few kinks can be worked out for even more enjoyment next time. There are a couple other things I would like to see in the next one:

 

• Command: It'd be cool if each side a sort of commander, just to make sure all the teams are well informed of any important intel, and that communication and coordination are intact throughout the event. It would also be better if this role was assigned.
• FOB: For missions that are a longer ways away, a commander should be able to set a FOB point, where players can respawn and rearm.

 

All in all, I look forward to the next; and as always, great job Luetin

Also, thanks for the staff for doing a great job managing the event.

[timmiej12]

I've played the entire event on CSAT side and enjoyed it greatly, even more when I rewatched the broadcast.


Mission 1:
For this mission i'm glad we didn't get any statics, we already were heaviliy fortified in terms of entry points and cover. However our team did push out quite far out the town, which pinned the NATO forces for a long time of the mission. Distance wise I don't think there were any unfair advantages. Both were decently close. Overall quite balanced and a great mission to play.

Possible improvements for this mission :

• If further than ... KM from attackers base, use of FOB (eg. sleeping bag + transport vehicles)
• Sleeping bags for defenders to strong
• Limited area of Operation for defenders

Mission 2:
Now this mission had so many ups and downs it's my most enjoyed mission of the evening. Both teams being so close from eachother and the objective. Having to stop the truck and secure the perimiter alround it, pushing the communications and teamwork to the limit. Top quality!

Possible improvements for this mission :

• one or two ATV's to give the teams some more options in term of chase / defending the objective

Mission 3:
While playing this one, as a team we made a couple of mistakes for our landing zones and tactics which screwed us over. Being the 3th mission of the night it became apperant you automaticly spot an enemy unit by looking at him for a couple of seconds. This marks the enemy on the map for your squad (or entire team, not 100% sure) to see.
Add this with the ability of Thermal sights on the statics + armed vehicles and the option to use the Artillery Computer on the mortars, made NATO quite powerfull. After rewatching the stream the mistakes were visible and it could've been a diffirent story if done correctly.
As a last ditch effort we tried paradropping right on the objective, however a shortage in parachutes prevented us dropping more than 5 people.

Possible improvements for this mission :

• Thermal sight + Artillery computer + Automatic spotting combination to strong for PVP
• Add parachutes in Arsenal

Mission 4:
For me this one turned out to be dissapointing, both because I wasn't even close to any NATO before the mission was over and it being won by jumping in first. It felt like CSAT kept the AAF busy while NATO took the objective, this is ofcourse smart play.
I can't realy think of any improvements.


Tiebreaker:
Last team standing, sounds promising but turned out to be a campfest (myself included). It's understandable, both teams wanting to win this and thus staying back a bit. Marking the playable area is a great idea, which might be used in Mission 1 + 3 for defenders aswell. Making the zone smaller was inevitable and a good choice to keep the action going.

Possible improvements for this mission :

 

• give people an objective to prevent prolonged camping periods.

For example: Place down a Box or vehicle on each side 1 per team, in this box you put a side specific item (oficers baret etc.). This will act as a Flag. First team to bring the enemy specific item to his side wins.

 

 

• Don't punish the winners of the tiebreaker

In summary a great set of missions and the night was a succes! Some missions might need a bit of tweaking here and there.
For a public game, I found it pretty well orginized in terms of coms and Mr. zeus+admin were on point with PTFO of GTFO. (key for PVP)
Hopefully I will join the closed event, otherwise I'm definitly going to (re)watch !!
I tried to keep it short, hope you can use my feedback.

[Anyone]

 

This was one of the most fun experiences i have had in arma! i was the pilot on the csat team and it was super fun being on the csat team beacuse the comunication in the team was great. everybody fixed fireteams and only the group leader would call in CAS/heli pickups. but i noticed at the same time that the team were just a bunch of random people that had joined the event, especialy on the last mission i participated in (could't sadly be there for the whole event. it got waaay to late) which was the third mission. the problem was that the mission was really far away from the base so people didn't really want to drive and our the got their asses kicked by the mortar, so i wanted to get in as a CAS but i allways got pressure from the team to RTB and do pickups. so i had a hard time as a single pilot to get a balance between CAS and pickups. buy i liked  the missions overall. it had it's flawes but it was a test run so it was expected

 

 

 

02:13:00 on the stream and about 30-60 seconds forward, OMG! Brutal

(Heli taking out a landed heli and troops with both missiles and minigun)

 

felt sooooo good after that initial missile barrage 

[asdasdasdsadasd]

Mission 1:

For this mission i'm glad we didn't get any statics, we already were heaviliy fortified in terms of entry points and cover. However our team did push out quite far out the town, which pinned the NATO forces for a long time of the mission. Distance wise I don't think there were any unfair advantages. Both were decently close. Overall quite balanced and a great mission to play.

Possible improvements for this mission :

• If further than ... KM from attackers base, use of FOB (eg. sleeping bag + transport vehicles)
• Sleeping bags for defenders to strong
• Limited area of Operation for defenders

 

Thanks for the reply, it was nice to read. I agree with what you said on this. Defending missions should be closer to the Attacker's base, unless is supposed to be some sort of siege. The idea of an FOB where players can rearm and respawn is also a good idea. A limited AO size for defenders is something I haven't thought of. I would support that as long as the AO gave some extra room for scouts and such.

 

Possible improvements for this mission :

• one or two ATV's to give the teams some more options in term of chase / defending the objective

 

More light-weight vehicles sounds like a good idea.

 

Tiebreaker:

Last team standing, sounds promising but turned out to be a campfest (myself included). It's understandable, both teams wanting to win this and thus staying back a bit. Marking the playable area is a great idea, which might be used in Mission 1 + 3 for defenders aswell. Making the zone smaller was inevitable and a good choice to keep the action going.

Possible improvements for this mission :

 

• give people an objective to prevent prolonged camping periods.

For example: Place down a Box or vehicle on each side 1 per team, in this box you put a side specific item (oficers baret etc.). This will act as a Flag. First team to bring the enemy specific item to his side wins.

 

I thought the same thing during the TDM. I was surprised that Luetin didn't have to force the players to move. A objective sounds like a good idea to reduce the camping. I thought perhaps allowing respawns in the TDM zone would also make it more fun, but of course throwing out any sort of tatics and realism with it. CTF in a small zone with 20 players does sound like fun.

 

----

 

This was one of the most fun experiences i have had in arma! i was the pilot on the csat team and it was super fun being on the csat team beacuse the comunication in the team was great. everybody fixed fireteams and only the group leader would call in CAS/heli pickups. but i noticed at the same time that the team were just a bunch of random people that had joined the event, especialy on the last mission i participated in (could't sadly be there for the whole event. it got waaay to late) which was the third mission. the problem was that the mission was really far away from the base so people didn't really want to drive and our the got their asses kicked by the mortar, so i wanted to get in as a CAS but i allways got pressure from the team to RTB and do pickups. so i had a hard time as a single pilot to get a balance between CAS and pickups. buy i liked  the missions overall. it had it's flawes but it was a test run so it was expected

 

You did a great job as a pilot for CSAT. I really enjoyed watching your helicopter battle on the stream recording. I understand the issue with the pressure from being the only pilot, it probably would've been better with more pilots or a close FOB. Overall I agree, the PvP was one of my most fun experiences too, and it went really well for an experimental run.

 

 

---

 

Some ideas I thought of for future PvP missions is to sort of recreate some of Luetin's best Zeus missions for PvP, such as the Fortress assault or the CSAT campaign thing. Also, incorportation of AAF would be cool to have as well.

 

Thanks,

Zhenylas

[Guest Luetin]

Just a reminder and note to say that I am planning the next pvp night for Friday the 29th.

 

This will be a sign up for ahoyworld members only, I hope this will enable us to iron out some of the small errors both made by me and by some of the teams co-ordination. I will make a new post this weekend outlining the plan and so on.

 

thanks for all the feedback im glad everyone enjoyed it, was very enjoyable to watch as well.