Medic system on EU3

[Ron L.]

Hello all,

I am referring to the new changed medic system on the public EU3 modded server. I would appreciate a little overwork with losing consciousness. The medics have no chance to revive the players when they are totally dead, means no heart rate with the actual settings. That doesn´t give the medic the importance because the players mostly patch themselves up or die instantly. The medic is just there for stitching or giving some saline. I can understand that players don´t like situations where they are unconscious for a long time, but that’s just realistic in most cases. Please remove the instant death feature and make the EU3 medic system realistic again.

With best regards,
Ron L.

 

 

I apologize in advance for my bad English because it is not my first language.

[Copey]

3 hours ago, Ron L. said:

If this was real life you'd be happy to not be instant death and you'd be happy to return to your family. Take this a little bit more serious @Blue-958-

The other point is that there is a function that you can AVOID instant death and not deactivate it. So you would still die by a tank shell but not by a rifle round that hits your steel plated  west.

 

There is, and we have used it in the past. However, it introduced some issues regarding a bug. This bug meant people suffered broken legs constantly and it was not possible to fix without staff being present to manually execute a code. This bug does now have a fix but it can be cumbersome in its implementation.

Broken legs are not something we at all want to return to

[Colsta]

When we had no insta death no matter what, the gameplay devolved as did player skill. Massively. Players just rushed head-on with no fear of dying, because they couldn't, in fact, die.

[Ryko]

So getting hit by a tank shell and not dying is realistic for you? 

 

There are problems associated with disabling instadeath that we have encountered before which led us to the current implementation. 

[Ron L.]

I said in most cases it´s realistic. And when you got shot by a tank shell the medic can´t heal you anymore because your body is full of wounds then and it would take to much time and resources to patch the guy up. If you set the final death time 2 minutes with no heart reate it would be realistic because he would die after 2 minutes treating.  @Ryko

The other thing is that players still rushing because they can easily respawn. Without instant death they have to wait some time @Colsta

[Colsta]

I'd say respawning and having to go back to the AO takes longer than being revived in the middle of it.

[Stuart.G]

Well it's not like you die instantly. You can easily just be unconscious from pain. It's just the period of you having heart failure which is disabled for reasons stated above. 

 

Just yesterday a shell struck about 2m next to me and I got blown away. I was lying there unconscious for about 4 or 5 min. Honestly, I don't think a human being should be able to survive anything more then that. If a medic would have revived me  and patched me up (which he could completely, you can do a good two dozen wounds in 2 min if you know what to do) I would be fully combat effective again which is unrealistic and that's using our current system. 

 

In RL (and I am guessing here), I might have survived being blown to shreds, but I would have had to been stretchered out and medevaced ASAP. Being up and gunning again within 10min of treatment is a little silly. This would be possible with the "insta-death" disabled.

 

[Blue-958-]

If this was real life you'd have to leave the server, uninstall the game and lie in your virtual bed for six months, just for taking a couple of bullets. This is not real life and the server must strike a balance. I think it works perfectly as it is.

[Ron L.]

If this was real life you'd be happy to not be instant death and you'd be happy to return to your family. Take this a little bit more serious @Blue-958-

The other point is that there is a function that you can AVOID instant death and not deactivate it. So you would still die by a tank shell but not by a rifle round that hits your steel plated  west.

[Guest]

I agree with @Colsta. Without insta-death we would be playing a slightly more complicated version of EU1. It shouldn't be changed.

[Theronas]

On 5/27/2017 at 7:37 PM, Stuart.G said:

In RL (and I am guessing here), I might have survived being blown to shreds, but I would have had to been stretchered out and medevaced ASAP. 

 

 

I will not comment/talk about the issue of instant death or not. However, I would like to see a gamestyle where a wounded player would have to be stretchered out and medevaced. That would make gameplay more realistic, and pretty awesome too. Its not just about "pew pew pew, boom", but also about a functioning logistics for wounded.

 

Now if you can sort out the technical issues (tank shell = kill, bullet to the knee shouldn't = kill, and actually have sqauds call in emergency medevac, that would kick ass.

 

Arma realism should not only be about battle, but also all the other military things that come along with it. This includes logistics beyond just taking players to an AO for a quick first person Shooter.

 

Regards,

Theronas.

[Noah_Hero]

11 hours ago, Theronas said:

Arma realism should not only be about battle, but also all the other military things that come along with it. This includes logistics beyond just taking players to an AO for a quick first person Shooter.

Of course it should (=must if possible) but AWE is no milsim and more important it is just not always possible since for using LOGI you require way more people than usually are online (for example look at this weekend: max playercount was about 1x squad). This implies that you just can't always do it like it should be done which makes your suggested gameplay mostly impossible or just annoying.

Also if one of my guys gets wounded I would rather want to call in a medic than a medevac since for a medic we would just need to do a pause in our push but for a medevac the whole team would need to fall back with the wounded/downed one to a more or less safe LZ/Pickup point (since when you get heavily wounded the area you are in is probably hot AF => medevac can't get there). This would then drastically slow down gameplay and be unbelievable annoying if you'd always have to fall back again and might be ending up doing nearly no progression. Since all of this would take more time as being killed and reinserted (about the double amount since you have to get evaced and then flown in again) I also can see everyone just respawning when they get downed since it's just a unnecessary waste of their playtime.

So overall I like the idea but I like it only for milsim and not for AWE. The only AW server I could see this working on would be EU#6 where Kennys MSO is hosted and we also have a used LOGI squad but even there it seems a bit too extreme in most cases, it would take away the work for the medics and mostly I also got other things to do with my LOGI guys and would do this not as a real medevac but instead just get wounded people out when we are getting in Ammo/vehicles/medical supplies/reinserts anyway what would take away the "medevac feeling".

 

Also it's not like this is never happening. I for example did a "medevac" with my team once since there was just no medic in the AO and we had no morphine and couldn't give him blood.

[Theronas]

I understand and do agree with your arguments. My idea for a medevac was a bit more along the lines of an addition, not a substitution. I always like to believe (not just here in arma/AWE) that adding options (not forcing/replacing options) just to give more possibilities when and if a situation allows, could be beneficial and add to the fun experience. Its nice to have multiple options for many misc. stuff rather than being forced to just 1 solution. 

 

Note: In general, not just for this thread here. I see many people give some pretty sweet ideas here and there. Most of them are being denied with the argument "Its not needed". It's not about "needed" or not, but rather to have more possibilities and choice to approach a situation. (No, it's not about my suggestion here, its general I'm talking about). No one is saying to not implement what others have suggested, but adding some of the other various ideas just offers more.

 

I didn't know that AWE does not fall under the category "Milsim", so it appears that I am unaware what the actual Milsim is then in Arma (yeah yeah, im an old fart, and a n00b in many aspects) but I love this game, and sometimes i just scratch my head at the issue of knowing that Arma has so much to offer, but a lot is being limited to the player base. (No offense, I'm not criticizing this community or anything, I'm just wondering, thats all). I definitely understand that my suggestion is not feasible if you barely have enough players to fill up 1 squad, and about the time it would take to go through such a hassle. I guess i was just in my mind visualizing some war movie and thought "hey, this would kick ass in-game".

 

Maybe someone could elaborate for me what "milsim" actually stands for, if not AWE?

 

Regards,

Theronas

[Noah_Hero]

3 hours ago, Theronas said:

My idea for a medevac was a bit more along the lines of an addition, not a substitution.

As said I like the idea and agree with the addition but we just need more players for that. But if there are enough players I could at the moment also see LOGI do medevacs since their tasks are totally up to commands orders + we don´t have a squad that is just sitting at base waiting for a medevac but rather the LOGI squad that does their tasks until a medevac is called in = no waiting times for tasking.

 

3 hours ago, Theronas said:

In general, not just for this thread here. I see many people give some pretty sweet ideas here and there. Most of them are being denied with the argument "Its not needed". It's not about "needed" or not, but rather to have more possibilities and choice to approach a situation.

I think that most of the ideas you are talking about are denied because most of them are somehow "Wow, that would look super cool!"/War movie-Ideas but don´t directly fit into gauntlet in a way that it would be used or they don´t fit in because they are just not realistic enough for AWE (since the core idea is to only use real-life assets that are actually used by the military). And since adding things is most likely about coding it mostly would afford work to implement these things. And this is were "Quality above Quantity" kicks in because if the ideas then aren´t that popular it is just somehow "wasted" worktime that could´ve been spend on bugfixing or something similar to achive better performance.

 

3 hours ago, Theronas said:

Maybe someone could elaborate for me what "milsim" actually stands for, if not AWE?

Well on AWE we are still very much causal actually. Real MilSim is way more "hardcore" like first person only, basically no choice of what gear to take, harder/stricter rules, usually only bigger operations (and not like how we do it where you can hop on the server and complete an AO on you own), no or extreme limited HUD, advanced ballistcs (and not like on AWE only for high power rifles) and even up to ending every sentece with "Yes, Sir" and all that stuff.

Or to quote Dslyecxi: "In our eyes, hardcore milsim is chock-full of "tactical fluff" that is irrelevant to the games at hand. This hardcore milsim typically presents itself though excessive rules, regulations, attempted recreations of full military rank structures far beyond what is relevant in the scope of your average Arma mission, doing things "because the real military does them" regardless of their actual application to the game at hand, and other things that we believe do not have a place in these games." (quotation from this site: http://ttp3.dslyecxi.com/)

 

 

Best regards

Noah

[Colsta]

To add to the last post, I would call AWE "tactical realism".

 

I'll close the topic since it's been answered and discussed extensively, and as such is getting derailed.