Posts by Joe Malley

Quote from Oksman

I'd say it would be nice for a campaign much like GM it can't be standard, think it's pretty rare out there in the wilds

Honestly, I think the real value will come from the building props and editing modules, at least for our group since I agree that creator DLC should never be required to be.

But using the workshop compatibility we would be able use those props and modules in any mission, allowing us to place the buildings on any map e.t.c

We will also be able to fight against enemies using assets from the DLC without watermarks, so in theory, with only the compatibility mod you could have a pretty good Vietnam mission on a map like Tanoa fighting against good looking Vietcong, as long as the equipment we use isn't from the DLC nobody would get a watermark.

This is also a reason to add the GM Compatability mod, so we can fight against good-looking BMPs and stuff, especially as were looking at ditching cup. However I would argue that we would get less value from GM since we have RHS and other mods, but maybe it will be worth it when the CSLA creator dlc comes out and we could use all 3 compat mods

Steam page: https://store.steampowered.com…tor_DLC_SOG_Prairie_Fire/

Looks kinda cool, as an editor I'm more interested in the modules they're adding:

S.O.G. Prairie Fire is complemented by a wide range of additional content, usable only when the DLC is loaded. This includes:

• a Master Arm module for servicing and arming aircraft
  
• a Logistics module for transporting items and casualties
  
• a completely new voice-acted Battlefield Revive system
  
• a Tunnel module for easy creation of tense underground missions
  
• a Vietnam-era Artillery and Air support module to quickly call support from actual US callsigns
  
• a quick-to-enable earplugs system
  
• a vehicle jukebox
  
• a melee system for close-quarter fighting
  
• tree platforms and foxholes that enable soldiers to hide above or under ground

Got to love a good curry,

Though being a student, of course, it's all Asda own brand cheap as fuck ingredients.

Any reason to use that over the vanilla arma GUI builder? They seem pretty similar and building GUIs in vanilla is something I've done before and isn't particularly hard imo

Quote from hoofed

Is Tanks DLC not mandatory at this point?

I wouldn't say so, all the tank DLC gives you is access to in terms of assets are the NYX, rhino, and the t140 Angara. The vehicle interiors for the majority of the IFVs came as a free update with the tank DLC. That being said for its current price it definitely worth getting, and the campaign that comes with it isn't half bad.

anyone managed to get in contact yet?

Quote from Filth

Any recruiters up late, to about 12:00, 01:00 UK time on weekdays?

Yeah, ill try and make contact today

While I think a majority of arma players do look for casual big scale groups, there definitely is an audience for our kind of game play.

As a group were in a weird sort of middle ground between the groups such as Rimmy's where tacticsa and formations boil down to attack the enemy in a tactical blob and the more serious groups where you have to go around saluting people and calling them sir while only playing as one particular faction or unit.

And this setup to me at least is perfect, but I dont think we market ourselves particularly well, mainly because it can be hard to communicate how we operate through a text post.

An unofficial motto I've used to describe us in the past is: we take the game seriously but not ourselves

basically trying to communicate where here for fun tactical coop without all the bullshit that comes with those hardcore milsim units that will make you sit on a hill for 3 hours pulling security with nothing to shoot at.

Im fairly certain with enough time and effort refining our out of game procedures and recruitment methods we could attract new people without adjusting our gameplay.

300 members is not what im aiming for at all, for me ideally being just above platoon strength so that even with a few absences we can comfortably operate as a platoon would be perfect.

As said, I dont think our LoA system is the only thing holding us back, we absolutely need to look at more recruitment posts and what not.

As for LoAs, not requiring them for recruits is actually a pretty good idea and one I hadn't thought of, seems like the best compromise we've come up with so far.

This is true, but we should also consider what happens on the rare occasion someone does apply, at the moment were trying to push our strength up to platoon strength, we need everyone we can get. And if even only 20% of potential recruits are turned off before even applying because they see we have a LoA system then it something we should consider changing.

The podcast had something like 50,000 views when I watched it earlier, Arma's avg player count was around 12,000. Its worth considering that many new potential recruits will be taking Rimmy's advice on group selection, and like I said earlier if they are turned away before even applying due to misunderstanding our group then thats a problem.

Im not saying changing our LoA policy will suddenly have us drowning in recruits or magically overnight bring us up to platoon strength, but we need to be doing everything we can to get new people in the door.

I definitely dont think we should remove LoAs entirely, as false said with the way we run our missions we need to roughly know if we will have enough or potentially too many people. And switching to entirely Zeus missions in my opinion would result in a drop in quality of our events.

My concern lies with a scenario like this: Someone has been convinced to give arma coop a go after seeing this Rimmy's podcast or for any other reason, they look at GOL and see we have an LoA system and after remembering that in the podcast they said that this was a red flag and should be avoided they withdraw their application.

Maybe the issue isn't the with the LoA system itself, I think once we explain to someone how ours works compared to the examples given in the podcast they wouldn't have a problem with it, but they might never reach the stage of asking about it since they see we have one at all and then decide to not apply. Perhaps we should consider our presentation of our system to newcomers.

Im just spit balling here, but a couple ideas that pop to mind are:

Perhaps hiding the LoA forum, and when someone wants to post an LoA they simply message an NCO or forum admin through steam or any other method of communication saying they wont be here, and then that NCO puts up an LoA for them. It would seem less formal and restrictive to newcomers while still allowing the same functionality as before, people message others through their phones and what not so would allow people who may be away from their computer and forgot to mention it earlier to quickly drop a message saying they wont be attending.

On the other hand we could simplify our LoA system so that all a user fills out is the start date and end date, not providing a box for a reason means people wont feel like they have to provide one, or that they're being judged for not providing one. I think our old forum used to work like this?

Putting this here so the meme thread doesn't get filled with non meme related content.

If you haven't read through the recent comments on that thread here's a quick TLDR:

In a recent podcast on Arma related subjects Rimmy a relatively popular Arma you tuber stated that he sees LOA systems in groups as a red flag and something to stay away from, while this is only the opinion of one person it's worth considering since

1.) he probably is the most popular Arma you tuber out there so his viewers are likely to agree with him

2.) he knows his shit, his unit has over 300 active members last time I checked so he must be doing something right.

So this thread is here to discuss everything related to out LOA system and maybe some brainstorming for ways to make it better, obviously the council and Pilgrim get the final say if we do/dont change anything so this thread is purely here just to get everyone opinions and suggestions down in 1 place rather than spread out in the comment sections of unrelated threads. I think we all agree that more members is better, and if our current policies with attendance are turning off a large number of potential recruits then its worth at least evaluating how we do things.

In the podcast they are specifically talking about LoAs that need to be approved, our aren't like that, they are no questions asked LoAs that can be posted for whatever reason without any justification needed. We also aren't very strict about them either, some groups will kick people out or demote them for failing to post LoAs, here I think the most i've seen done is being moved into reserves and that was after excessive failings to post them. So there definitely is an argument to be made that are system is fair and reasonable so should be kept as is.

However as PARKER pointed out on the meme thread only a handful of people actually fill out LoAs before absences so the question is: If people aren't posting LoAs, and we aren't particularly strict about it, whats the point in keeping the system?

In my opinion we definitely need some way of knowing who will be coming to ops, specifically because some missions may require x amount of pilots or x amount of people on the ground in order for the mission to work, but with the current unreliability of our LoA system is it worth having them mandatory for all active members.

When it comes to potential suggestions to improve our system, my current train of thought is we remove the reservist system in our group and instead only require LoAs for people above a certain rank, maybe only needing them from NCOs since there presence (or lack thereof ) could cause us to play a different mission. Attendance of pilots can also be mission critical sometimes so including AAC members above a certain rank may also be a good idea.

If however it is decided that our current system is fine and not in need of changing, I think it would be worth it in the long run that we make it clear to all new recruits that our LoAs are no questions asked, we should explicitly state that in interviews and put it in our recruitment material. Because as some people may just see that we have LoAs and not ask questions about how they work assuming that we are stricter about it than we actually are leading to new recruits being put off.

Either way, post your opinions and suggestions in the comments. More recruits can only be a good thing and the better we are as a unit the more recruits we will get and hopefully keep.

New 10.1 update just went live today, supposedly they fixed a bug with the greycat ROC's extraction laser making it actually pick up the mined gems 100% of the time. People are saying that mining hadanite with it is a lot more profitable now.

The different components in game actually make a decent difference now, and is much cheaper than buying a better ship, I use https://www.erkul.games/calculator to experiment with different loadouts, I dont quite have the capital to make fully upgrade my fighter yet, but once I do it'll be a very good close range brawler. different power plants and coolers are also useful even if your not in a combat ship.

Also I got released from prison so can re join you guys when we play again.

Pilgrim sent you an invite aswell

When Arma crashes a .RPT file containing information about your play session is recorded. This file can be extremely helpfull to mission makers when trying to bug fix, follow these easy steps to locate your RPT file:

1.) Open up windows file explorer and click the address bar

2.) Paste "%LocalAppData%\Arma 3"

3.) You should now be in the directory where RPT files are located

4.) If your game just crashed, it will be in the latest RPT file so sort by date modified and select the latest, if you have played since your last crash you will need to remember the time you crashed ans select the RPT file with the correct time stamp.

"It's not true," head of marketing Petr Poláček told Hospodářské Noviny. "Tencent didn't buy us. Bohemia Interactive remains an independent studio. We don't know where this information came from."

Times should be fine for me