Open Discussion - Teamplay, Leadership, Mission Variety, and COOP Gameplay in Arma 2

[=VG= SemlerPDX]

CASTOR HAD NOTED:

Castor =VG= LAN_WROTE ...

we usually get +10 players on arma but if we advertise a bit we could easily get +20.

personally I think m113 patrol is a good idea because we have no experience on it and its not that hightech so we get a bit more difficulty on it. I'd wish to see more OPFOR and UN missions and possibly German Armor missions, I've actually never played any UN missions, Defend, Ambush and missions where you gotta find something before its too late. Search and rescue missions are cool too!

complaining from here on forward so cover your eyes kids if you don't want to see.

It's a shame most of us aren't interested in toning their skills of teamplay, leadership, and their combat effectiveness, I'd really want to see us doing Events with other community's later on.

for example I've heard the sentence ''we don't need a leader because we are experienced ARMA players''.

1st of all we aren't, I've seen SO much better people out there that you wouldn't imagine, the ability to use some equipment doesn't make you an experienced player, the ability to use it together with a buttload of other assets like infantry and armor does. I mean C'mon we aren't even good at being Infantry! which is the most basic thing!

2nd of all a group is ALWAYS better with a leader, even with a bad one because for a multitude of reasons, like the fact that if there is no leader its basicly a democracy: everyone has their vote. ''well I guess we just sit down and vote here!'' <-- not literally but you get the fact that every decision takes longer. also no one is there to tell others to cease fire, take a formation, crouch, lay down etc.

but this all is only for anyone interested in serious fun, not just ''hey lets fly there and blow up some shit!''

Note here that I'm not thinking that I'm better than you, in fact I'm worse than most of you but I'm willing to learn.

TL;DR: frustration because people are not playing for serious fun.

GAZ REPLIED:

Gaz =VG= LAN_WROTE ...

I'd like to point out here - I have had no problems leading a team like a democracy... Just for the fact that a lot of the lads are very experienced around here and when your desiding what to do next other people have seen diferent situations and have a multitude of idea's that could be used quickly and effectivly... if under fire. I personally find its better to have everyone shouting out the directions and leading an assault on a position than one person who has half arsed facts on it...

Im not sure what you mean by we are not experienced INF. For the most part we have been doing it for 2 years, and if you were in a squad with the lads that have done it for that long you would see the experience shine very bright...

Using armor and INF together dosent make you great at anything.. It just in a sence means you want to use other options to get the job done rather than brawling through with INF. Its not a statement to leadership or how good someone is - I Can tell you i see using inf to take on 50 guys would impress me more than using INF to kill 5 and a tank to blast everything else away.

I Find your statement about the Leader is kind of true, but voting can be better. In a combat sitaution a leader to call cover - Fire, throw frags - Drop smoke... That is a good call. But having a group that desides where to go next is a good idea in my opinion, thats how i lead my teams...



Now about the missions - I think 10-15 is our regular amount, maybe another quick whip up of the mision with an extra fire team incase we get more is a good idea...
Also maybe an op-for mision or two could be quite a fun consept...

And castor i also agree on doing events with other communities... Me and calv have discussed the consept of doing it with LAMBS some time.

CASTOR REPLIED:

Castor =VG= LAN_WROTE ...

Gaz the thing is that when you have no leader for, lets say a group of 6, 1 of them usually takes WAY too much gear and will slow the team, 1 dude is the one who runs and guns and dies all the time and the rest of the guys are having a hard time deciding what to do when they're under heavy fire, which brings more casualties.

But to be honest I play like I'm on an event all the time, trying to everything organized and properly and with a level of professionalism.

In my mind the more you are able to cooperate with other assets the better, it doesn't matter how many we have against us and how many do we have. all that matters is that they die and we live, the less we lose the better.
of course this might take the fun part from the infantry but then you can just limit the assets before hand.

OH but now Im using this thread wrong :) sorry!

CALV REPLIED:

Calv LAN_WROTE ...

Castor =VG= LAN_WROTE ...

It's a shame most of us aren't interested in toning their skills of teamplay, leadership, and their combat effectiveness, I'd really want to see us doing Events with other community's later on.

for example I've heard the sentence ''we don't need a leader because we are experienced ARMA players''.

1st of all we aren't, I've seen SO much better people out there that you wouldn't imagine, the ability to use some equipment doesn't make you an experienced player, the ability to use it together with a buttload of other assets like infantry and armor does. I mean C'mon we aren't even good at being Infantry! which is the most basic thing!

2nd of all a group is ALWAYS better with a leader, even with a bad one because for a multitude of reasons, like the fact that if there is no leader its basicly a democracy: everyone has their vote. ''well I guess we just sit down and vote here!'' <-- not literally but you get the fact that every decision takes longer. also no one is there to tell others to cease fire, take a formation, crouch, lay down etc.

but this all is only for anyone interested in serious fun, not just ''hey lets fly there and blow up some shit!''

Note here that I'm not thinking that I'm better than you, in fact I'm worse than most of you but I'm willing to learn.

TL;DR: frustration because people are not playing for serious fun.

Sorry, but neither knowing how to use equipment OR knowing how to practice combined arms makes you an "experienced player". Experience is being able to read a situation and react accordingly, being able to think quickly and make decisions rather than blindly charging into areas or getting people killed as you stand around deciding.
Applying knowledge with a "buttload of other assets" is neither here nor there, if people can't work together as infantry then there is no point throwing additional assets into the mix. Not to mention that co-ordination between infantry and other assets is usually pretty minimal, as both parties need to focus on their own tasks, and its down to the overall commander to direct each party, not the units themselves.

I'd disagree, nothing gets people killed quicker than a bad leader. Someone needs to be in charge to make overall decisions, but it is not necessary to have someone constantly yelling and barking orders at everyone and basically micromanaging the entire team because that just leads to confusion, clogged comms and basically lowers everyone's ability to maintain a clear overview of the situation.
The best leaders rarely need to speak or give orders because they have trained the guys they're leading and trust them to adapt to the situation and adjust themselves without needing to have their hands held.

CASTOR REPLIED:

Castor =VG= LAN_WROTE ...

Calv, I did forget the most important part yes, by ''buttload of assets'' I meant that you can basicly work with anything, and yes Infantry is an asset too (i think?)

and about the bad leader when you put it that way I agree, but going without one is pretty bad too.

GAZ REPLIED:

Gaz =VG= LAN_WROTE ...

i Dont think you see it like we do, When we leave on domi. Like me, sparky and random usually go after side misions together. There is always a subconcious leader. Usually me or Random but we always clarify who it is. We just never really have to give out orders because we trust each other in knowing exactly what needs to be done.

CASTOR REPLIED:

Castor =VG= LAN_WROTE ...

that is true, you guys play it like you know it already. which is way too repetitive for me, like you know there is going to be aprox. 1 brdm, 1 bmp and 1 t72 + 2 squads of infantry. you know how they set around the objective and you do almost every side mission in about the same pattern.

while I try not to think about it and do it outside the box, unfortunately no one wants to do it this way and want to carry silly weapons that we wont be using in proper Events, everything I do in ARMA is to make myself better at missions, trying to evolve and get better all the time, silly me I know :)

but I guess we can put the blame on DOMI for this.

EDIT: anyways we should remove all these comments and give some suggestions, I dont think Dman meant this kind of conversation.

[=VG= SemlerPDX]

@Castor - Well, I can't see how this input would hurt dman's efforts to make missions that cater to our skill levels, and challenge us, too.
With any luck, this feedback will help us to interact better in his missions, and it's good to get this out now so that we are all on the same page.

@Castor/Calv/Gaz/Everyone - I am very interested in "mini-missions" because after years of playing, I am all too familiar with each and every sidemission that Domi could throw at us, and Insurgency, though always different in some ways, is also always the same in the same ways - which can make for repetitive gameplay and the dreaded "one or two RIGHT ways to accomplish the tasks".

When you simply throw a situation at gamers, then they get to react and act on their own decisions. I look forward to any such missions dman can make - and I will try to be there for every one of them.

I've been busy with 'real life' this week, but at night, I keep working on my opus: USMC Platoon Ops (empowered by MCC)
I really think it will allow mission makers such as dman, Poffadder, Savage, Calv, Charry, myself, and any others, to instantly (and while in game) send groups out onto fresh, new missions at the push of a button (or three).

It's the framework and ease of user interface that is needed as a wraparound, and then you will be able to throw anything at them. I studied the ShakTac Platoon manual online, and the F2 Framework (st version) and saw why they did what they did, and made my framework very similar so one could play with us, and them, and say, UO, and structures are familiar. (law of 3: any leader only ever has 3 subordinates to command from PL to FTL)
-- One of the first things I wrote was a system that anyone can access to tell them what ACRE radios they should have, what channels they should be on, and a list of all active players, the role they are in, pre-made callsigns to use or not, and a channels list that shows every role's radio network.

As far as leading goes - good leaders are not born, they are made. Democracy has no place in a chain of command, and though we do not play "super strict" mil-sim, we can benefit from trusting each other, and letting go of the control - and handing it off to a trusted leader.

I personally have become confidant in my leading over the years, but I still love to be the grunt - I don't have to call the big shots, and just have to listen to, say, Poffadder, who tells me to take my Fire Team up a street, and secure a building while the rest of the Platoon moves up.

This is so easy for me, but when I have to be the guy giving out the orders, I never feel like I need to ask my members what they think will be the best move - if I did, I'd let them lead, and just be a grunt. A leader by definition has the situational awareness, or knows where to obtain it, before making a decision, and unless they needed input, a Leader should never feel so un-confident that they must ask their subordinates what the next move should be.

If you are a leader, act like one (even if you don't know what you are doin! This applies to life, too, kiddies and gents - Act like you know what your doing, even if you do not. Don't make mistakes as a result, but when you do, learn from them and do not reveal it to your subordinates. They must have a certain trust in you, do not diminish that by admitting fault all the time - save that for the debriefing.)

[Terremer]

I think the real problem is that not a lot of us have actual training operating as a squad or fireteam in different situations. We all know ARMA and most of its mechanics, so playing something like Domi is really straightfoward for most of us and we dont really need complicated tactics or strict orders when we know how to clear a side mission in 5 minutes.

I agree with Calv though, once your team knows what they're supposed to do, there really shouldnt be any kind of communication other than simple directions, such as Lets head to that building, or Go to this grid for extraction, etc. Obviously spotting targets is much higher priority.


Domi is getting extremely old, and I'm not sure it really contributes much playing it, honestly. Especially when someone always wants to take the A10 or arty and destroy the AO before the troops even get a parachute on their back.

I think the best missions we would have would involve either light or no asset support, just straight up infantry squads that have to adapt to the situation with the tools they've got. If theres supposed to be enemy armor on the map, maybe there could be a pilot on station who comes in only to kill the armor, and then RTBs, instead of spraying GAU8 across the AO. I've really just wanted to play some basic infantry stuff lately, where I can operate with a squad and just shoot things, instead of having them get blown up by a plane, or sniped from the other half of the team carrying snipers and sitting on various hills around the AO. I've played too much insurgency lately that i'm tired of the "Lets land on this hill and snipe the AO for 10 minutes, then move in to the objective".

Finally, I think that if its just a random game that everyones jumped into, i dont think thats the best place to try to force everyone to start using tactics and have strict squad rules and all that. We just jumped into this random game to play with each other, and i think that other than general squad order and a simple leader that basically tells you where to go and what weapon to carry, is too much. Also, i dont think that yelling at people because they dont want to follow your strict command and orders solves anything, either. They jumped into the game and didnt expect or agree to anything, if they want to go on their own, thats perfectly fine. If its an organized event, where we define leaders and roles before the game begins, that's a completely different story. Everyone knows what they signed up for and should act accordingly.

[=VG= SemlerPDX]

Very good point, Terremer - there is a tendancy to get either a feeling of non-cooperation or anti-solidarity from players who just want to go off alone and try something, or from players who literally want to play alone (say, CAS) while online with an active group of players, even in non-event games.

When we use ACRE, we almost assume that everyone will be available on some radio, and cooperate directly in the team effort at hand. It's one thing to selfishly spam an AO that infantry players are planning to assault on foot, but to expect full "event" structure in a casual game is another thing entirely.

Again, not to keep touting about this MCC thing, but it can cater to EVERYONE at the same time - want to snipe with your buddies, but don't want to interfere with the Squads taking an AO? Fine - MCC can drop them somewhere different with a different mission without lagging up the server in any way for the other players.

Hell, maybe even the sniper mission preludes the Squad's next mission - things can work together even when the are functionally separate.

keep the discussion going, guys!
!2cool

[=VG= Murderface0151]

yeah because without a leader i cant think and decide for myself, my brain shuts down and i am physically incapable of making any decisions without someone there holding my hand. wtf... we're all adults here so lets treat each other like it lol. if there's just 4-5 of us in a Domi or Ins then there's no point in having a leader as the chances are everybody already knows the drill and can handle themselves and look out for their battle buddies. working without a leader sometimes works a lot better, more minds for decision making and ideas, and the stress of giving orders and deciding what to do and where to go under pressure. like Gaz said i have no problem being in a democratically ran squad - i know and respect the clan members and i won't condescend or patronize them with un-needed, orders. and if there was a leader to be present i'd want a straight vote for it, nobody self electing.

[=VG= SemlerPDX]

@Murderface - haha! nothin worse than a self-appointed leader when you're trying to play casual or have been for the game so far. Very True - if we're gonna play casual, we don't need self appointed leaders - and when we could use them, they should be chosen not forced on players. Like in Project Reality for BF2 - you choose your squad, can see it's leader before entering it.

Democracy in gaming groups seems to work fine with small numbers, on familiar missions or game modes, and non event style play - it becomes more like a "spec-ops" squad than an independant "rogue" team, where input should be encouraged from the members that make it up.

[suomikeizari]

yeah murder I did not mean that, the thing is I'm kind of a perfectionist when it comes to ARMA gameplay. which means that I probably shouldn't come in when you guys are playing Domi/INS or any other game mode that has casual gameplay.
I just cant do that, I might just might have 1 day in a month when I want to just goof around but then Ill play on BF3/BF2PR or some other game.

also as a note I'm perfectly capable or even willing to work as a grunt but it doesnt feel right if we arent doing it the way I have described before.

In my mind ARMA should be played as if we are going into a real fight in future, constantly honing our skills at leading, shooting and teamplay.

[=VG= Gaz]

The point I am trying to make here.. People are independant. They should have learned the basic skills by now. Sure some newer lads havent fair anuf. The basic consept is that if someones looking one direction. Face another! Unless of course you know the fight is that way. A team leader is only neccisery to communicate across squads - thats my way of looking at it. And for making the quicker decissions...
Almost everyone here has played for a increased span of time and has anuf sence to know what they need to do and when. What they need to be carrying. Also a squad that roles out without checking things like whos carrying what is a doomed squad from the start.

Peoples combat experience should be valued in every situation. Thats why i always ran with ingo in every event - because i knew as a FTL that if i died, Ingo could handle it.

I didnt like the comment about us not being good INF for the simple fact as you havent seen many of us playing together because we tend to stay out the way from the "Decision making" Unless we are asked or forced into it. Like being in a small like sem called is Spec-ops team. If i lead a squad i will ask every memeber on there idea's before we advance (Depending on having time and if the situation calls for is i will take primary command) but again, all these lads have a lot of experience between them.

[dman248]

What you need is training, starting with just basic stuff so every one is on the same page. We all play different ways so why not just get together one day and train. I would be more than willing to do this.

[=VG= Calv]

Terremer =VG= LAN_WROTE ...

Domi is getting extremely old, and I'm not sure it really contributes much playing it, honestly. Especially when someone always wants to take the A10 or arty and destroy the AO before the troops even get a parachute on their back.

I think the best missions we would have would involve either light or no asset support, just straight up infantry squads that have to adapt to the situation with the tools they've got.

Aye, agree about Domi, never been a huge fan of it myself as it always seemed to just be a large number of solo players that just happened to be operating in the same area. Insurgency was a bit better for encouraging teamwork.

The missions I made were mainly infantry focused for the exact reasons you mentioned, I was trying to get people trained in fireteam combat and the basic infantry doctrine without complicating matters with combined arms and such, but everyone just wanted lots of weapons, and tanks and planes and such so they lost interest in them.

[aarongooding]

damn you guys need like a million CCs of PR stat

[=VG= Murderface0151]

Castor =VG= LAN_WROTE ...

yeah murder I did not mean that, the thing is I'm kind of a perfectionist when it comes to ARMA gameplay. which means that I probably shouldn't come in when you guys are playing Domi/INS or any other game mode that has casual gameplay.
I just cant do that, I might just might have 1 day in a month when I want to just goof around but then Ill play on BF3/BF2PR or some other game.

also as a note I'm perfectly capable or even willing to work as a grunt but it doesnt feel right if we arent doing it the way I have described before.

In my mind ARMA should be played as if we are going into a real fight in future, constantly honing our skills at leading, shooting and teamplay.

so what you're saying is you don't want to have any fun with your clan buddies or just getting hours under the belt with people if it isn't done YOUR way? that's a bit ridiculous... sometimes playing the game pisses me off and makes me angry (Lag, bullshit deaths, glitchy/crappy game mechanics (though unusual, and yes i did do brackets inside of brackets.. bracketception) but the latter is rarer than the others) lol, but i don't leave or quit just because it's not going the way i'd like it to go as i appreciate spending time with people i'd consider good friends of mine. plus in a real world situation things will never go the way you want them to.

as for your statement with weapons selection, if i feel i'm going to need an M109 for example to death-deal then i'll bloody well take it, i'm not about to put myself or the team at a dis-advantage. there are reasons we take the weapons we do, it's not just "OH YAH I LOVE BIG GUNZ DERP". i take an M109 as it can engage at incredible distances and double as anti vehicle asset as well. we don't haveto do it all by the modern day book of warfare. i'm sure if ISAF forces or any other for that matter had readily available supplies of M109 anti-materiel rifles then they would not think twice of using them effectively. (Again, M109 being an example)

i agree with the over usage of CAS, the infantry fight is where it's at. getting into the nitty gritty and showing your capabilities lol. even though i usually get a 7.62 in the kisser.

@Calv, i LOVED the campaigns you put together, that is what i feel we should be playing more of. orchestrated assaults with 1 life, which, @Castor would make us focus more and not want to lose our lives. at that stage leadership and good strategy and tactics are needed, nobody wants to lose their only life in the first 10 minutes lol. whereas on Domi or Ins there's respawn which is always subconsciously there and kind of makes you not give a shit sometimes.

perhaps we need to put together some Campaigns like Calv made for us.

[suomikeizari]

Murderface =VG= LAN_WROTE ...

Castor =VG= LAN_WROTE ...

yeah murder I did not mean that, the thing is I'm kind of a perfectionist when it comes to ARMA gameplay. which means that I probably shouldn't come in when you guys are playing Domi/INS or any other game mode that has casual gameplay.
I just cant do that, I might just might have 1 day in a month when I want to just goof around but then Ill play on BF3/BF2PR or some other game.

also as a note I'm perfectly capable or even willing to work as a grunt but it doesnt feel right if we arent doing it the way I have described before.

In my mind ARMA should be played as if we are going into a real fight in future, constantly honing our skills at leading, shooting and teamplay.

so what you're saying is you don't want to have any fun with your clan buddies or just getting hours under the belt with people if it isn't done YOUR way?

NO, GOD NO! I only meant that I have learned a way to play ARMA and I dont enjoy the casual play anymore. and if I come I might try to make you guys play the way I like (or try) which will ruin your fun!

also a note about overpowered guns like M109 or guns with TWS scopes: I don't like their use because they make the game too easy at times. Its just me though, I can play with them as well :)


To me any leader is irreplaceable, from FTL to SQL and Platoon lead, in my mind if you think that you can survive without them you start to listen less and less and he becomes less and less important, making his work harder and harder.
SOMEONE INVENTED THE ROLES OF FTL, SQL and OTHER LEADERS, SO THEY ARE NEEDED, if you do good in Domination or insurgency without a leader, good for you but lets be honest; how many succesful ARMA platoons have actually thrived without these leaders?

IMPORTANT: this is the part many do wrong, the more YOU talk the more you distract others specially the leader, DO NOT question your leader!(unless its possible to change the leader but this still should be done after asking for audience) this will put him in an awkward position which will cause others to question him and make the team less and less capable NO matter how experienced they are.

FTL is there to connect the fireteam to the Squad, he also makes sure people stay in line and dont get left behind, he is there when everyone else is gone. he is the senior member of the team who can guide the rest of the team in many ways, from movement, firing direction and the choice of armament. also in most cases he is the grenadier also.
if you don't like being bossed around you shouldn't play on events (depending on the type of event)

And what do you mean no teamleaders, spec ops style? of course they have teamleaders! more like no teamleaders, internet style.

@GAZ: we are not good infantry, in most missions most of us die and we usually also fail the missions, it doesnt matter how good you are on insurgency or domination, as said before they are just casual play, yes you can learn to shoot there but it doesn't help much because the AI wont work in the same way and they wont have the same armament.
if we were good we wouldn't get casualties, and the missions would be done in a much quicker rate.
sure there are worse but we haven't gotten better either.

Please note that I haven't joined the army yer and I have played arma for a year only so many of my comments might seem ignorant.

[=VG= SemlerPDX]

Castor =VG= LAN_WROTE ...

Please note that I haven't joined the army yet and I have played arma for a year only so many of my comments might seem ignorant.

No worries, Castor, I am getting used to taking what you say with a grain of salt. !crazy


It's only natural that we will have differing opinions about one thing or another - let's be mindful of our different styles and when we bite each other's heads off, at least have the decency to bite above the nose, so they have a chance to reply again.
KEEP IT CONSTRUCTIVE - I myself will always welcome criticism if it has a constructive purpose (and it isn't presented offensively).

2 great points have come up.....OP Weapons, and Small Group Leadership.


OverPowered Weapons

While down to the Mission Designer, OP Weapons which have such high superiority can make the game "unfun" for the rest of the group, just like infantry fighting along side a Bradley may feel less danger, shoot less enemies, and have what they may consider a less than awesome video-warfighting experience in said round of gameplay.
The Persistent missions with repetitive attack styles are the worst for OP Weapons, in my opinion, because the only thing a group has to keep a fresh gameplay style on the next AO is to mix up how they attack - and I feel that OP Weapons, unless agreed upon globally for the assault, can detract from the others "desired difficulty and vulnerability in game".

I always feel "safer" when I have an overwatch team, perhaps with snipers or CSW all scoped and zeroed in, but not everyone wants a constant "safety bubble", and going through the motions as it were can be boring, and unentertaining..
Sometimes, we may want a particular kind of challenge, so, that means agreeing on or designing Ops and Missions that either favor them or that do not use them at all. (ahem, again, touting the USMC Platoon Ops (MCC))

@Murder - "yes i did do brackets inside of brackets.. bracketception" !rofl


Small Group Leadership:

Before any of this gets too far out of hand, I think we should all agree on a thing or two: That there will always be times when you will run into some of our regular Arma 2 battle buddies who don't really want to play a longer, structured, ROE and "request permission to fire" kind of match (at that particular moment). This will happen - dude, this is Arma - you could probably get some form of stress from this shit if you pushed yourself too hard and took things too seriously all the time.

Again, good thing we don't play that super-strict mil-sim style, beleive it or don't, but VG has the most awesome chill to it, and I'd never want to lose that. But as we get into using our Calandar for "all day" or "1 life to die" events, we also need our "Blow off the steam and go grab your favorite Arma toy" missions. Gotta respect when people are in a game like that, and have the personal tact and flexibility to either fall in with what the current group is into, or offer the opposite style yourself on one of our other servers.

Be grown up, be respectful - if your good buddy =VG= JoeAnyone is happy farting around with an A-10, with three random soldiers also farting around just consider offering an impromptu Event with ACRE and Platoon Structure, on a different server if they don't want to all stop, and if they don't want to join you, there will always be another day.

Never feel bad for saying, "I just want to play around in Arma 2 right now - I do want to play with Radios and Squads, just not at this time...." !gam
or my personal favorite, "Not tonite, honey - I have a headache"

To Quote PITN a year ago - "you can have CAS monkeys, just keep them away from the AO - give them some mission somewhere else, that way they are in the air if needed, but not shooting all our Tangos..."
(or something to that effect - hell, it was a year ago)

I know it takes most the team to make a structured game work, but imagine if we had more numbers - more Arma players who hung around, there would be plenty for ACRE Platoon Games and we wouldn't suffer for not having, say, Gaz and Oni and Wooz who are (example) not wanting to do a group thing but fart around.
(again, MCC can do anything all at once...it may smooth out this very issue...)

Anyway, there will always be times when we all get together, seems more than once a week now. If it isn't happening - don't whine - fall in, be cool, be patient. Arma ain't goin anywhere - you'll get your fix before too long in any given week.
!cmdo

[=VG= SemlerPDX]

*On the MCC note: I am pushing to have a playable BETA up asap because the initial structure I have made is strictly Infantry oriented - as in, it's a Platoon - max 50 players (I wish we had that, lol) - 3 Squads, 3 Fire Teams in each, FT's have 4 members.

HMMWV Mounted (M2 only, not CROWS), and the FT roles start at a cool default mix (ex. FT1: FTL, MG, Asst. MG (ammo bearer and takes up MG if MG dies), Rifleman)
or AT FT example: (FTL, SMAAW Operator, Asst. SMAAW, Rifleman)

Rifleman is always newest member (noOb, or new to ACRE) and is the FTL's Battle Buddy. You get to choose your role pre-op, wanna change? Jump back to lobby w/your friends and nab another FT. Ezy Pzy.

If you haven't, this is the coolest guide to skim over or read thoroughly, and this particular page makes huge ACRE missions easy (we ACRE junkies should all at least read this one page, most of it that relates anyway):
Arma 2 Tactics, Techniques, and Procedures Guide by Dslyecxi

(I will add an Armor Platoon and Civs one day,
teaser img:


...but this playable BETA will make for great Inf. focused experiences we can all use to get on the same page, as dman suggested. okay - less talk, more code - back to work with me now. COMING SOON, I SWEAR!)

[=VG= SavageCDN (Inactive Duty)]

Great thread BTW

dman248 LAN_WROTE ...

What you need is training, starting with just basic stuff so every one is on the same page. We all play different ways so why not just get together one day and train. I would be more than willing to do this.

^ this.. ie: basic squad movement and formations ..yes it's 'boring' but it gives everyone some base knowledge to work with. The more of this we do.. the less 'micro-managing' required within your squad as members will know what do to in most situations.


Domi is OK but it kinda gets old after a while... I'm liking more the toned down approach to missions like using iron sights and not having air support. The problem with using heavy assets in Arma (as someone mentioned) is that you have to even that out on the OPFOR side and that is very difficult to do when playing vs AI.

Dman - if you're willing to do some training I can put together a schedule and/or sign-up thread.. we could also get an idea of what others want to learn besides the basic squad stuff ie: corpsman, mortars, static gun sights, explosives, etc.

[suomikeizari]

That is exactly what I meant Semler, thanks for clarifying! :)

SavageCDN =VG= LAN_WROTE ...

Great thread BTW

^ this.. ie: basic squad movement and formations ..yes it's 'boring' but it gives everyone some base knowledge to work with. The more of this we do.. the less 'micro-managing' required within your squad as members will know what do to in most situations.


Domi is OK but it kinda gets old after a while... I'm liking more the toned down approach to missions like using iron sights and not having air support. The problem with using heavy assets in Arma (as someone mentioned) is that you have to even that out on the OPFOR side and that is very difficult to do when playing vs AI.

Dman - if you're willing to do some training I can put together a schedule and/or sign-up thread.. we could also get an idea of what others want to learn besides the basic squad stuff ie: corpsman, mortars, static gun sights, explosives, etc.

as savage said the more you do the formations the better you get, formations better the combat effectiveness of a team by 30% at least, they know their sectors so their situational awareness is high as long as they keep scanning.

also training! for any special role that someone wants to learn, I think we have a someone specializing in almost any role around here!

like JTAC, Pilot (CAS and TRANS), Sniper, Mortar.. etc. and even some kind of leadership training where you get 3-5 volunteers that you need to lead through a simple mission.

but as Ive said, I blow off steam elsewhere than ARMA (BF3, BF2PR, DoW, CoH etc.) I will still stay on TS3 so anyone can hop in with me but I probably wont be seen that much on domi/ins.
I'm willing to try MCC of course, it seems very nice!

EDIT: and dont take this the wrong way! I love playing with you but Domi is just so freaking boring.

[=VG= Gaz]

[quote]
IMPORTANT: this is the part many do wrong, the more YOU talk the more you distract others specially the leader, DO NOT question your leader!(unless its possible to change the leader but this still should be done after asking for audience) this will put him in an awkward position which will cause others to question him and make the team less and less capable NO matter how experienced they are.

FTL is there to connect the fireteam to the Squad, he also makes sure people stay in line and dont get left behind, he is there when everyone else is gone. he is the senior member of the team who can guide the rest of the team in many ways, from movement, firing direction and the choice of armament. also in most cases he is the grenadier also.
if you don't like being bossed around you shouldn't play on events (depending on the type of event)

And what do you mean no teamleaders, spec ops style? of course they have teamleaders! more like no teamleaders, internet style.

@GAZ: we are not good infantry, in most missions most of us die and we usually also fail the missions, it doesnt matter how good you are on insurgency or domination, as said before they are just casual play, yes you can learn to shoot there but it doesn't help much because the AI wont work in the same way and they wont have the same armament.
if we were good we wouldn't get casualties, and the missions would be done in a much quicker rate.
sure there are worse but we haven't gotten better either.

[/quote]

I got some major isues with this reply - I'd like to get out the way, Spec ops squads have leaders, i never stated they dont. But to become spec ops you have to be a SGT. so everyone in the squad is asked before every mission on there ideas and plans because they have all seen war at the front, all fought, seen people die. Its needed to be spec ops, you dont find spec ops below sgt - They all have extream prior service, in my country you have to do 4 years service 6 in some branches and have to achive the rank of SGT or higher to be even remotly looked at for it. I never said they dont have TL's but everyones treated as if they are a TL.

"@GAZ: we are not good infantry, in most missions most of us die and we usually also fail the missions"

None of the lads are bad INF at all, some dont know all the basics, it happens? Training may help it? Maybe if you dump them in a hell hole with 2 other guys and they should pick it up real fast.
The fact they are dying is from overcomplex commands. a team should understand all there objectives, AN FTL DOES NOT ORDER HIS MEN IN EVERY POSITION HE WANTS THEM TO MOVE TO. they decide this for themselves, you dont need to place every single shooter where you want, they have common sense and will get it done, giving them order after order after order is what gets them killed, its the stress from feeling they need to do what there FTL says all the time. And they dont. I wont listen to a leader that conastantly puts me in my positions and tells me how to fire my gun. i'll tell him to back off and stop trying to command me on everything. As i have done in the past.

I think people should be capable enuf for working out firing direction and realizing what the squad needs E.G. the choice of armament.
Movement is something a FTL should direct, after consulting his Team in most cases. fair enuf he has to take the initiative most of the time, and that you dont always have time to take other's needs into account. But asking your team, would you prefer using the treeline aproach or a urban aproach is a big difference in a warzone. Some guys find it easier to fight from the treeline, some find it easier to fight urban... its the needs of the team that should go first, not just Decision making because your pressured..


"this is the part many do wrong, the more YOU talk the more you distract others specially the leader, DO NOT question your leader!"

I hate this line. A leader that is not questioned is a commander. No one likes commanders... they're annoying.
I have and will always question my leader if someone is doing it wrong. and if i am leader i would expect ANYONE to question me. If im doing something wrong i dont give two craps about being embarrassed, i dont want them to get killed for my idiotic ideas. This is why people die, they fear telling there leader "You sir, are an idiot!"
I believe its the best way to prove your point, and should be done whenever it is required.
If a leader gets embarrassed because he did something wrong and someone told him about it? God thats just stupid.. He should take it on the chin and lead them to victory...
I don't respect a leader who gets embarrased cause he was questioned but didn't care much about getting his men killed in the first place.


"(the leader being questioned makes) the team less and less capable NO matter how experienced they are."

This is so un-true, I'd respect anything Ingo, Sem, Poff anyone like that.. i dont care Spiers (E.G.) had a problem with what i was doing, he can tell me, It dosent make me less capable it makes me more adaptable. More minds to solve a problem never hurt, unless the problem is having too many minds. (Editor's Welsh to American translation: "..unless the problem is too many Chief's, not enough Indians")

"if we were good we wouldn't get casualties"

You say this? You believe LAMBS are the Shiz... you love them?
Those guys (also) come back from missions with 2-5 guys left.. they die all the time.. they deal with it they dont argue they lol.
on the helibopper back on how Nixxen blew up the Forward air controller and in turn the a10 bombed a truck full of there guys...
It happens? its unavoidable. The ones you should question are the avoidable ones.
Every team gets casualties, my methods seem to work, I have a record of only 1 fatality in my FT's except for bugs and when i had to take over for calv when he couldent play. In turn we had a jackle get RPG'ed but listening to your men is an incredibly important part of your role as a FTL and if one cant do it, one shouldnt lead.
If you strongly belive no orders should be questioned, "FTL's are gods", then you're wrong in my eyes. and thats what causes ALL fatalities in battles.


EDIT: Lol ruined my quote box if anyone could fix it. I'd be very happy for you to lol ;-)

[=VG= Nvram]

leader!"
I hate this line. A leader that is not questioned is a commander. No one likes commanders... they're annoying.
I have and will allways question my leader if someone is doing it wrong. and if i am leader i would expect ANYONE to question me. If im doing something wrong i dont give two craps about being embarrassed, i dont want them to get killed for my idiotic idea's. This is why people die, they fear telling there leader "You sir, are an idiot!"
I belive its the best way to prove your point, and should be done whenever it is required.
If a leader gets embarrassed because he did something wrong and someone told him about it? God thats just stupid.. He should take it on the chin and lead them to victory...
I dont respect a leader who gets embarrased cause he was questioned but didn't care much about getting his men killed.



This: Only leaders who could explain WHY and What are legit the more the guys talk to each other the safer they are and better coordinated they are

in the rest i go 1000% with Gaz

@GAZ: we are not good infantry, in most missions most of us die and we usually also fail the missions, it doesnt matter how good you are on insurgency or domination, as said before they are just casual play, yes you can learn to shoot there but it doesn't help much because the AI wont work in the same way and they wont have the same armament. <-- We fail because half the time FTL dosent?t realy listen to his guys, we get dropped WAY off target (like that rocked one got almost 1000m away dropped while the was no enemy inf for ~15 min)

[=VG= Murderface0151]

i'm with you all the way Gaz.

@Castor, Domi is what you make it. whenever i play i play just to chill with friends or have some fun. sometimes after a hard days work all you want to do is relax.

at the end of the day i will not follow a leaders commands if i do not respect the way they are making decisions or leading the squad. let me put it another way, i'll follow the team but not the leader.

i agree with Gaz 100%, your sentence "DO NOT question your leader!" i find a load of grime. if i were your squad leader and ordered you to run directly towards 2 x HMG nests on high ground with absolutely no cover would you do it?... if a leaders mind can not deliver the guidance a team (made up of very experienced players) requires, then the team will soon supersede the leader and start making their own decisions as they know what is best for them on their level.

and just for the record, i would say we are good infantry. it's not about what pattern you stand in, or which gun you choose to wave around, it's about inter-personal team dynamics, without that it will all fall apart.

btw @Castor, 68% of all percentages are made up.

[PITN]

Leadership. Leadership is nothing without trained soldiers in the unit.

Commanders form the battle plan. Leaders carry out their portion of that plan.
That plan changes upon contact with the enemy.

Leaders explain the mission to their soldiers.
Soldiers carry out the mission until it's completion or relief.

I understand where Castor is coming from and a well organized fire team is four times better than one that is not. However, ARMA is a simulation and it cannot reflect every aspect of combat. Therefor you must work within it's limitations. When you understand these limitations you can then form missions designed around it. Understanding these limitations is why small unit tactics are the only sustainable mission for the Virtual Reality Engine. Honestly, if you want to blow shit up or you can't accept the boring jobs some squads must perform then just play Domi. But if you want to play as a team then Insurgency w/OPFOR is for the new to moderate player and ARMA:Project Reality is for the most experienced units.

Over the last few days we have had some good coordination on the Insurgency server during peak Euro times. When we get a good squad we rock. When we get several good squads we dominate.

I yearn for the same teamwork that Castor is mentioning. To accomplish this everyone needs to be on the same page and to do this you need to conduct training and battlefield drills. If playing as a cohesive unit sounds good to you then I recommend that you start playing with experienced leaders as battle buddies, then fireteams, then squads and eventually as a platoon. If you want to succeed as a virtual soldier then you must learn the vocabulary and tactics needed to be an effective unit. Semler pointed out an excellent guide by Dslyecxi. i recommend that you read it.

[suomikeizari]

I give up, you know that my english aint that good so I cannot communicate in the way I mean. still you insist raping my comments

@Gaz I see you have something personal against me so just PM me and lets get it over with.

@Murder, percentages give a direction, they dont have to be exact, like your 68%

@PITN thank you for that, pretty much explained what I'm going at, sorry for clinging in the details, that was a mistake form my part. I will train on my English and communication.
Anyone still wondering what the hell am I talking about look at PITNs post.

as a reply the teamwork and communication here wont be the same because our community has not been built around that type of teamplay, it also seems that I've watched this topic too much from ''real'' point of view.

Ill jsut go with training and such to somewhere else, you wont see me bothering with this topic again. (much :D)

[=VG= SemlerPDX]

Castor =VG= LAN_WROTE ...

I give up, you know that my english aint that good so I cannot communicate in the way I mean. still you insist raping my comments

@ Gaz I see you have something personal against me so just PM me and lets get it over with, other wise you could've seen through my post and understood the true meaning behind it (which I guess I cant tell without someone else correcting to me, thanks a gain Semler.)

Screw Gaz, *(well, not literally, of course), but I have something against you if you are going to take criticism and difference of opinions so personally.

Time to take some chill pills and remember that this is an OPEN discussion, we are going to have different opinions, and we need to be able to talk to each other about our differences - not to berate or feel berated by the comments and criticisms.
How else would I know that I had to take off the "Where's the Beef?" T-Shirt when I had been wearing it 5 years after it was old? We need our friends to mirror back at us our flaws at times, and have the maturity to accept it or take it in stride.

No one hates you, Castor. Stay off the defensive - keep on topic, guys.
(And please, everyone, continue to try not to be offensive, but be truthful with your opinions on this topic.)
And, Gaz - I have different opinions than you on one or two matters, but I wouldn't kick you to the curb. Same with anyone who posts in this discussion.

If you let any of this get to you on a personal level, I will point and laugh at you. !rofl
Be mature, and be respectful. Basic stuff here.


PITN and Castor brought up good points -

PITN is so right about this being a rather limited simulation - we can try all we want, but it does seem the closer we get to any kind of "realistic" large group ops, we find ourselve with the very real (and not so entertaining) aspects such as "dry, dull" ops that need to be done by someone, while the other group "goes in for the glory".

It's almost like we need a video game reward system for the dull, boring logistics roles if we were to continue on a route to a "full realistic op" scenario to be simulated.


Castor mentioned that... "also the problem is that we dont learn that much from our mistakes, look at our missions: we do it and then leave. where is the after action report? we did it last time with Calvs missions."

Well, I feel some learn differently than others. Some prefer a debriefing while others play so often that they are quite clear on what happened, what went well, what went wrong, and what should be done differently the next time for maximum fun/success.

Since they take up several minutes, or longer, of "non-playing" downtime, I feel this would be more important and should be followed more if we were, say, a competitive clan. As we are casual, but serious about having fun - I suggest we do debriefings when appropriate, like Events or Large ACRE Ops, but nothing to say we can't have a more relaxed debriefing here on the site, over the days following the event, using the forums.

I can understand how some people may not have time or desire to hang around for 15 minutes after a long, 2-4 hour gaming session with ACRE and tons of restraint and patience. Forum is best bet in that particular example, in my opinion.

Castor =VG= LAN_WROTE ...

5. I like commanders.

Me too.

But, I hate the "automated" commander that is the "Server" in most persistant missions. Rather have a real evolving world with changing front lines, and a human commander offering up some sick ops.



!butcher IF ANY OF YOU START SLINGING MUD AT EACH OTHER IN PM's AS A RESULT OF THIS THREAD, I WILL SEND A FLAMING BAG OF DOGSHIT TO YOUR DOORSTEP! KEEP IT COOL, GUYS! KEEP IT CONSTRUCTIVE AND ON TOPIC - DON'T MAKE ME TURN THIS CAR AROUND, CAUSE I WILL AND THEN NO ONE WILL GET TO GO TO WALLY WORLD!

"He who makes a beast of himself gets rid of the pain of being a man" - Huxley

[suomikeizari]

Roger that Sir, will calm down Sir! (well what can I say? you're a superior officer to me)

[=VG= SemlerPDX]

Wow? Really Castor?

Maybe that is best.... you seem to be taking all this way to personally.....

(and since we're replying in re-post edits, I'd like to say I'm not a superior officer, but a superior lunatic...)

oh, and btw - Murderface was trying to inject a little humor to break the tension with his very dry and perfectly appropriate comment: " 68% of all percentages are made up. " - hell, I think that joke was from the Simpsons, if not directly(they have done everything)

BUT STILL, you took it offensively and threw it back like a hot potato.

As far as I know, no one is taking any comments out of context before offering up their views on them or their personall feelings on that topic or quote. (except now, I am getting the feeling you are. be mindful of it, no one is attacking you or your opinions by asking, commenting on, or debating them)

Being called on what one says is not an offense in itself, if it's done with constructive criticism in mind. And that's what this thread is. I don't see any other people getting pissed off here....


Time to chill and stop taking things too seriously, but still take things seriously - how does that translate?