Hey guys please leave your feedback for the mission and share any stories you may have from it.
Even though we were short handed, I had a great time on the mission being in the engineer team. I did miss some more information on the enemy positions around the town.
And then there were some more funny moments. Made a quick, blurry edit of them.
[youtube]XkxMHK1wpWU[/youtube]
Ellis seems to have a knack for being wherever disaster is about to strike…
[youtube]ivt9SK7uiN8[/youtube]
The BMP moment was pretty great
I’m gonna repeat what was already said at the debrief: the landscape was great and the mission too. The op could have been much, much better with more people attending and also without the zeus lag issues (ai desyncing all over the place is hard to fight against). Also, some people need to stop goofing around and start being serious. It really kills the immersion as well as the overall quality of the ops.
I really liked the fact that the dead players could be part of the "base of fire" element on top of the hill. It added to the immersion knowing there actually were some allies in the FOB trying to support the troops on the ground.
Also as en engineer it is great to have some static weapons to deploy, unfortunately, arma being arma, one of them glitched trough a trench and got instantly destroyed, and also two of the bags were impossible to interact with, leaving us with 3 statics instead of 5. If someone knows if there is a mod or something that allows manual placement that would be really great. Another thing about the statics is that I (personnaly) didn’t recognize each type by its name (maybe I will now) so maybe placing an empty model at the spawn to show which is which would be great so that we don’t deploy a machine gun when we are facing a armor. All of these are not issues, just suggestions 
Overall really interesting mission, hope we can do it again in the future (with some minor tweaks), on a friday
That moment on 1:02:16 is just PTSD inducing, thanks for recording zcribe 
The highlights in which I appear never seem to be in my favour 
First I wanna say "thank you" to the background wizards who made this mission possible!
Here my feedback regarding the mission, I agree with all the points that were made in the debrief:
- The landscape on this map is indeed atmospheric and for defense missions very interesting. It reminded me somehow at the defense manouvers settings I encountered in the Swiss Alps.
- In a defense mission we should be able to use prepared positions, inclusive substantial ammo resupplies at hand (we just lacked the manpower to delegate such logistics). As an AR with 150 shots I could not use the AR as it is supposed to, becoming actually a RFM. The FT is loosing this way its strongest weapon and cannot achieve local fire superiority anymore, becoming ineffective. I would really like the AR to carry a backpack with 800 shots as standard, otherwise the AR cannot be deployed as it should. In the last 3 OP’s I could not engage once as usual with the AR because the ammo is so restricted. The just sporadic fire used on the Southern flank defense of Ranger 1 was a direct result of this.
- When a defense force is engaging armored platoons and companies we need adequate AT tools. The AT4 is not useful on this ranges. We need the Gustav for the dedicated AT slot as standard equipment, the real Armies use them widely as a standard already, also in CQC intensly against buildings. It would also enhance first the AT slot and make it more interesting and it also would enhance the tactical possibilities and make it more diverse for the AT guy: A win - win situation.
- A big impact in the game has the Shacktac. The version we use is buggy and unreliable and often just hilariously hindering efficient FT`s and squad deployments in the field. It restricts and sabotages the unit cohesion and destroyes a lots of the natural flow of the units in movements. For SL’s and FTL’s its a nightmare, they really should be able to focus on other tactical things. I would advice to use the normal Shacktac version again, so that we all can concentrate more on the tactical teamplay aspect that is much more fun. Ingame we are already seriously "engine technically" handicaped SA wise anyway, I don’t see any reason why we should make it additionally even more difficult as it already is.
- Leadership: It was inconsistent in this mission. Not beeing supplied with efficient Radios how should effective coms be possible? The Radio noice and breakdown was hilarious for that terrain and distances involved, specially with the height advantage. Such units become actually inoperativ. Leadership is the most important pos here, making their job artificially more difficult makes no sense to me, its already difficult and challenging enough. We have seen commonly leadership breakdowns in OP’s for many reasons, we really should not add more causes for it.
- I agree with Pantoufle about the sometimes lacking discipline. The defense of the Northern village was an uncordinated mess, the counter attack also. Really a mess. The used Shacktac and the Radio issues didn’t help here either.
- Using respawns for special "base defense" makes a lots of sense, I liked that idea a lots.
- With enough people this mission has a huge potential for very intense fights, if we get enough ammo and AT capabilities - and enough enemies. Under such conditions I would love to see an entire Mechanized Company coming up against us…
- Regarding the Ammo bearer for the AR: If the AR gets his backpack full of ammo the AAR could actually be deployed as a Grenadier, enhancing the FT’s applicabel firepower tremendously, making it tactically more versatile.
- Last note: I don’t think that using "Russians" on "Russians" is a helpful choice. PID’s get very difficult and confusing. The enemy colors and equipment should be clearly discriminable.
Regarding some things I mentioned I wanna add: I understand the reasons for some choices beeing made (like the Shacktac, lacking Radios, etc.). For me its a question about having fun and having the best tactical teamplay possible, but we need conditions that support us in that regard. That said: We are always free to create on top of that missions with special aspects on ammo conservation, etc., so that we can experience together the game in the most versatile and rich way possible.
Excellent points Gravity and Pantoufle, I have to agree. Mission needed MAT. AT minefields are usually guarded by AT elements. In my opinion larger numbers would have increased the expierience significally, but I understood that Volken plans running the OP again later on. Looking forward!
Overall a really nicely done mission. I especially liked the fact that it was tactically interesting and an actually defensive position where landscape was well used. I also applaud creating a defensive mission. Defensive missions are much more difficult to Zeus. Mission maker had actively thought about how one would defend the location and it was clearly reflected in unit choice and the location. MMG team in middle would’ve done amazing damage. Engineers were tactically relevant. Static weapons would’ve been much more useful if we had split them much better. (Should’ve spread them out between teams before set off). Respawns as a base of fire element was also a good choice.
Couple of points mission making wise:
Overall:
- Use different looking units for enemy and friendlies. Yes there are currently conflicts where same uniform is being used but considering our our skill level it creates too much of a possibility for blue-on-blue fire.
- Go less heavy on air units. Infantry is traditionally bad for fighting air units. 1 attack helo is a major threat.
- Possibly add a MAT team since many of the static AT weapons are somewhat bad. Maybe swap out the basic one shot RPG-s with heavier RPG-s or provide them in a weapon crate. Whatever the russian equivelant of AT-4 just doesn’t have the range and the punch. It is fine in a common patrol op but not sufficent in this case.
Engineers:
- Add more AT mines. You want to use atleast 30 mines per small minefield in a chokepoint for it to be useful at all. Had to spilt the current 30 into sets of 15 and 15 which had some effect but did not create the blocking function. I suppose possiblity was that you wanted us to make a choice and pick only one road to mine. If you want us to use AP mines, then more prep time is neccesary since AT mines are going to be the priority. (Possibly unit leader can just send out engineers ASAP)
- Use large empty backpacks so more mines can be carried or atleast one does not have to keep unloading all the gear from them. (Speeds up the minefield creation)
- Since unit is small anyway you might aswell give the FTL all the engineer stuff so he can actively contribute.
- No need to add sandbags. They are pretty much useless when compared to entrenching tool.