Leave your feedback, stories and else 
Thanks for all the blood and bandages and the lift! Sorry I got blowned up.
[youtube]pTUmJlIYoCw[/youtube]
I was playing for the first 2.5 h of the mission as MATT gunner, had to leave early unfortunately, passing my equipment to the team.
From mission making perspective:
Having images of enemies and map with objectives in OPORD would help with becoming more familiar with the environment.
Map markers should be already on the actual mission - so PLT does not waste time finding the objectives and marking them.
I also think we should only provide slots to elements that are usable in the mission itself, both for late joiners and for PLT to select what they want to pick for the scenario (we can make our composition more modular). This is a more general comment, not directed towards this specific mission.
I liked the pace and environment, there were some minor inconsistencies story wise, but from gameplay perspective it quite good.
Sometimes I’ve seen some lag or things being moved by Zeus in front of player’s face - there’s no issue with adding some flair to the scenario, but make sure no one is able to notice stuff being moved around.
From gameplay/tactics perspective:
What I liked is coordination with mechanized elements during assaults, where infantry cleared the way, while our LAV was moving closely behind to be able to deal with any high priority threats or clusters of infantry.
I’ve seen also some decent CQB movement and sector coverage.
I was a bit sad to see us failing in other areas. We have many things to improve on.
When dealing with multiple objectives we need to select priorities, plan for just the first part, and roll out as soon as possible while keeping everyone briefed.
Entire mission I had no clue what’s the situation, who’s doing what, where are friendlies stationed etc.
I’m fine with not having the detailed picture, however some general plan should be presented to all units for situational awareness, alongside any updates.
This was mainly due to poor communication and map markers. I had to guesstimate my way and assume a lot of things when driving the BRDM, suppressing targets or spotting contacts.
Another thing that I’ve noticed is people mentioning stuff like "im sure zeus controlled this guy", "because zeus has technical difficulties" etc.
As a soldier I don’t want to know that zeus exists. I want to be immersed in the scenario and execute proper tactics to help my team succeed in achieving the mission objective. Keep the 4th wall away from the game.
Convoy execution was really bad. Took us long time to mount up, callsigns were not assigned, convoy command was not present, often I was met with "follow blue line" or "follow that vehicle in 300m in front". No correct markings on map, no radio comms, people randomly jumping in or out of vehicles without "mount up", "dismount" or "X all in" commands.
I would really encourage everyone to participate in trainings (both regular ones and role oriented) and just refresh their knowledge, if we want to have serious fun - we need to be serious about tactics and execute them well.
As others have said this was a really fun mission in terms of the different tasks we had and how it was run on the day with an amazing atmosphere. Because the designer and zeus asked for feedback I will go over some things that I think could be improved for next time.
Number one the OPORD could have been more to the point and straight forward. The OPORD sections contained language that was not appropriate for the OPORD sections. For example in the Enemy Forces section there were sentences like "What is enemy expected to do?" and "If we do not leave they will try to eliminate us." These were unnecessary and slightly confusing. I do not think the OPORD is the place for rhetorical questions and statements of the obvious. Usually the Enemies section contains a list of enemy forces and a short description of the equipment they might be using that is of interest to us. For example: Takistani Armed Forces equipped with lightly armoured APCs (BRDM). Local Militia with no AT capability but using technicals.
The OPORD with the signup did not include a map or a image of the enemy forces. I know it was in the tactical planning forum post but that is supposed to be an additional resource. Players in a non-commanding role should be able to find all the information they need on the signup post.
The map provided on the tactical planning thread contained eight points of interest with a text balloon pointing to the location. This is a complete departure from our previous convention which is to label with a number, letter or code name points of interest then refer to those in the OPORD objectives and mission description. Putting them on the map then leaving the in game map without labels but only shaded areas was confusing and unclear.
The image of enemy forces shows eight possible enemy forces which is also very confusing and I believe does not add anything to the mission. I can see that these enemy forces are tied to a complicated back story but I think this is effort that could be best used elsewhere.
Our starting base was placed in the middle of the enemy forces in hostile terrain with this statement in the OPORD:
"Whoever is on base (waiting to full hour reinforcement) is on duty and have to eliminate any direct or indirect threats. If our base will end in surrender or overrun we will fall to captivity and will be send to prison camps somewhere at archipelago Podagorsk, Kolgujev, Bystrica !!" "Whoever is on base (waiting to full hour reinforcement) is on duty and have to eliminate any direct or indirect threats. If our base will end in surrender or overrun we will fall to captivity and will be send to prison camps somewhere at archipelago Podagorsk, Kolgujev, Bystrica !!"
I found this to be a little ridiculous and also against all mission making conventions. I understand it was an attempt to add an element of urgency and desperation to the mission as we took on the role of guerrilla forces. However, our missions are built around the concept of leaving the base to complete objectives and if we die we respawn in a safe area and then reinsert at the appropriate time. I waited around for a while after I died and shot a missile at a passing plane but I was not going to man the bunkers for 50 minutes on the off chance the place where we respawn was going to be attacked! FOBs can be attacked and placed near our area of operations. Where we first start does not need to be the same as where we respawn, but the place where we respawn should not be under threat.
I found the presence of an AI marker on the map distracting and apparently commanders on the ground did not know what they were (we asked and never found out) if there are allies on the map then either turn off AI map markers or actually give us some information about them like what they look like (perhaps a picture in the OPORD) and what they are doing. Or even give them a meaningful marker name.
In summary several things that obviously took a lot of effort like the background writing and the design of the enemy forces could have been better spent by instead providing a more simple map with clear objective markers, an OPORD without unnecessary text that was unclear and did not provide useful information. Roles that were not appropriate or completely pointless like Mortar and Reaper could have been removed. In other words this effort could have been spent polishing the already very enjoyable mission experience itself.
Remember I really enjoyed this mission but I felt these problems got in the way and I hope this feedback is helpful and not discouraging.
Reacting on Abuk post:
Thank you, Abuk. I like to read it. I believe it will help me in future MM and Zeusing a lot. My intention is to do serious fun and do both - missions and zeusing, well.
From mission making perspective:
Having images of enemies and map with objectives in OPORD would help with becoming more familiar with the environment.
------- I do totally understand it. At least I tried to give it one week forward to the tactical planing thread, where only Stuka had interest in planning forward. I will, for next time, upload the images somewhere externally, so they could be added to the OPORD. (but, again, in the comments there was the link to the tactical planning - it s just one click away)
Map markers should be already on the actual mission - so PLT does not waste time finding the objectives and marking them.
------ Understood, will remember this as it couses problems for planing the mission at beginning of game.
I also think we should only provide slots to elements that are usable in the mission itself, both for late joiners and for PLT to select what they want to pick for the scenario (we can make our composition more modular). This is a more general comment, not directed towards this specific mission.
----- I personally was affraid to delete anything from the TFN composition. Will do those things next time.
----- As Ive got prohibited to add flashbangs, silencers and maybe other things for player for first mission I did not tend to add anything, even the explosives.
(Note: in the AT launchers (2x on UN abandoned position) was enoug missiles to destroy the tanks + some more (I did tested that personally)
- It is needed to reload the missile in the launcher by pressing "R"
- It is possible to zoom in by +
- The missiles are laser guided
I liked the pace and environment, there were some minor inconsistencies story wise, but from gameplay perspective it quite good.
------ Inconsistencies were made probably becouse there were 2 GMs. Which I even did not know till about 1 hour before mission. On the other hand I could be really bad bad GM as I did it first time.
…— one for example was:
"""""J) Mission succeed if:
-
- if TFN is not surrendered
-
- If TFN controls 75% of Isla Rubina"""""
So, even when stated in OPORD, what does mission succesfull, can make a mission failure, when you do not let speak the mission maker enoug 
(but i would forgot that say that )
Sometimes I’ve seen some lag or things being moved by Zeus in front of player’s face - there’s no issue with adding some flair to the scenario, but make sure no one is able to notice stuff being moved around.
------ Can you be please more specific ?
— We were there 2 GMs, so I do not know if it relates to me
— (Its easy to make mistake to drag unit as it s just a click of LMB and you littlebit move it.
— Have to say I saw same dragging of the BMD there too (I did destroy a heli by "dragging" mistake somewhere else)
— Yes, and once happened me, that the AI group was from some reason in the Vulcano Turk bunker. Did not wanted go out of the bunker and I wanted them run away - they were not reacing unless I moved them. So, yes, there was technical difficulties - AI groups was nor reacting when ordered to move, bc if you give them order to lets say "occupy house" they after that do not react too well.
…— I personally give "occupy builidng" order only in the Training centre
…— As there was so much radio chatter it was hard to talk with Skippy
From gameplay/tactics perspective:
What I liked is coordination with mechanized elements during assaults, where infantry cleared the way, while our LAV was moving closely behind to be able to deal with any high priority threats or clusters of infantry.
I’ve seen also some decent CQB movement and sector coverage.
I was a bit sad to see us failing in other areas. We have many things to improve on.
When dealing with multiple objectives we need to select priorities, plan for just the first part, and roll out as soon as possible while keeping everyone briefed.
Entire mission I had no clue what’s the situation, who’s doing what, where are friendlies stationed etc.
I’m fine with not having the detailed picture, however some general plan should be presented to all units for situational awareness, alongside any updates.
------ I think, there was lack of tactical planning before the operation itself
This was mainly due to poor communication and map markers. I had to guesstimate my way and assume a lot of things when driving the BRDM, suppressing targets or spotting contacts.
------ Im sorry for the markers, It is my mistake.
---- I have tought that the BRDM will not survive longer than 30 minutes or will be out of ammo
---- Generally there were some names on the map like Maribu, Vulcano Turk or red/blue circles.
---- In reallity you would not have any markers on your map and thus have to read the map itself
---- On the other hand PLT had possibility to do it itself, to mark area (so lesson learn - no markers - do your own - common sense)
Another thing that I’ve noticed is people mentioning stuff like "im sure zeus controlled this guy", "because zeus has technical difficulties" etc.
------ Yes, i noticed that too, even when they were just AI (or it was not me). On the other hand, the normal soldiers would throw a granades on you instead of flashbangs. (so, yes of course, I did took over about some AIs but without casuallities - CNTR veryffied)
— the only one technical difficullty I had during mission was that my Avatár was deliberetely on me, walking around and there was no way to stop him to do that (so he just like than simply went into see by itself)
— Other thing was that I did not know how to volume down the long range radio, which was not so bad but I started totally ignore the radio chat. Generally - I do not need hear your comms. Im simply looking throught eyes of my AIs and try act along what they can know and see - so it is realistic.
— generally I was doing my stuff all the time and did not care about TFN at all, except the bombing runs and MI-28 deploying some incendiary / phosphorus cluster bombs. (have to say I was slow + affraid to hit)
As a soldier I don’t want to know that zeus exists. I want to be immersed in the scenario and execute proper tactics to help my team succeed in achieving the mission objective. Keep the 4th wall away from the game.
------ Please be more specific about particular situations, name exactly please, as the GM does a lot of things during mission.
Convoy execution was really bad. Took us long time to mount up, callsigns were not assigned, convoy command was not present, often I was met with "follow blue line" or "follow that vehicle in 300m in front". No correct markings on map, no radio comms, people randomly jumping in or out of vehicles without "mount up", "dismount" or "X all in" commands.
----- Generally I was shocked that anybody could také the vehicles, when the Training centre was about 400m away.
— It was stated that TFN base is under enemy owerwatch (so there could be a RPG rifleman for example)
— I tried to stressed it by firing red flares above your head, that you are not alone
— It was very risky in my eyes and it surprised me a lot too.
— I was the guy near the flag at the beginning, shooting into air to make "intentional warning fire" instead I hear disembark and got shot with lowered weapon and showing some gestures. (but still I had fun not angry)
— The AIs in the deadspace (which again I stressed in OPORD) showed some revenge for me, which was extremely unlucky as an AI got headshot Churizo, while I was still in the "dead" state. Very unlucky but it happens - everybody probably has similar experience yet, being shot after reinforcement or one minute after full hour.
— You simply drove the vehicles 20m from the AI group and like 70m from the Training centre marked as red circle
I would really encourage everyone to participate in trainings (both regular ones and role oriented) and just refresh their knowledge, if we want to have serious fun - we need to be serious about tactics and execute them well.[/quote]
----- I think this mission was littlebit about dynamic battlefield, so this was very hard to plan something forward except choose of objectives.
— there is no way the enemy will do the what you want till you either lurk him into trap or distract your true intentions
— Objectives are nice thing but - in RL they will move and not wait - it s realistic. My point is to react well on enemy movement and assume what a enemy HQ (GM) can do - it is what does AI smarter.
I will post my things later, as it s better to at first react on feedback. As I have some things to say too.
Reacting on Teddy’s post:
As others have said this was a really fun mission in terms of the different tasks we had and how it was run on the day with an amazing atmosphere. Because the designer and zeus asked for feedback I will go over some things that I think could be improved for next time.
----- I very appreciate any feedback and také it like recommendations to make things better for next time, again I very appreciate your feedback Teddy.
Number one the OPORD could have been more to the point and straight forward. The OPORD sections contained language that was not appropriate for the OPORD sections. For example in the Enemy Forces section there were sentences like "What is enemy expected to do?" and "If we do not leave they will try to eliminate us." These were unnecessary and slightly confusing. I do not think the OPORD is the place for rhetorical questions and statements of the obvious. Usually the Enemies section contains a list of enemy forces and a short description of the equipment they might be using that is of interest to us. For example: Takistani Armed Forces equipped with lightly armoured APCs (BRDM). Local Militia with no AT capability but using technicals.
----- "What is enemy expected to do?" - so, this rhetorical question is from the original briefing - it gives me the possibility to tell players, how the enemy see us. What they want to do ? Exterminate us ? Capture us ? Are they affraid ? Are they agressive ? Are they in their homeland or we are in their ? and so on… it simply tells the players what they can expect. I consider it very important as it can help to decide PLT how to behave. Would an affraid enemy ambush you on road ? What about agressive one ?
There were stated VDV and SIR AF = full war with Russia and Iran, in small gameplay scale
(generally I had no word at beginning of game, as I was late I assume, as "bad_pool_header" bug happens to me very offen, had to restart pc couple of times. (it ussually happens only when I delete or download, actualize something in my PC for example delete some mods for arma, do not mean CNTO mod file, from about 200 I have).
The OPORD with the signup did not include a map or a image of the enemy forces. I know it was in the tactical planning forum post but that is supposed to be an additional resource. Players in a non-commanding role should be able to find all the information they need on the signup post.
----- I do totally agree with that. Im simply not sighn up in any upload pictures site and except here, I do not have any reason to do so.
The map provided on the tactical planning thread contained eight points of interest with a text balloon pointing to the location. This is a complete departure from our previous convention which is to label with a number, letter or code name points of interest then refer to those in the OPORD objectives and mission description. Putting them on the map then leaving the in game map without labels but only shaded areas was confusing and unclear.
----- I really assumed it s not complicated, but began understand that not everybody read the tactical planing. The baloons are pretty self-explanatory and extremely easy to remember. The cirles on the map were the same.
Bubbles:
A) you see the map and you can read the objectives on map
B) you see the map and you can read the objectives on map (purposely written 2x)
Opposite
Standard:
A) you do not see the map becouse you read the objecties
B) you see the map but you dont se objectives so you have to go back to read the objectives
— I will highly consider to do the standard marking from now at least for the official OPORD. Tactical planning is than different story.
— The bubbles vs standard - point is the bubbles are easier to understand and remember than the standard markings
(Alt+Tab or Ctrl+Alt+Delete usage, can send you back to screen, and you can read the oppord, in EI or Firefox, or else - I do this every mission i play)
The image of enemy forces shows eight possible enemy forces which is also very confusing and I believe does not add anything to the mission. I can see that these enemy forces are tied to a complicated back story but I think this is effort that could be best used elsewhere.
----- I agree, except different uniforms and weapons they had today were all enemies. Got no PTS about it. So it looked it s clear.
— This mission there were only two UN forces FTs and others were enemy forces
IMPORTANT general note : Please, if anybody saw any markings on map - groups, inform me pls and give me advice how to ged rid of this. (I just got the disable blueforce tracking option) If there are any group markers on map, it is 100% unintentional and it is problém.
(I did not see anything like that - but it can be my basic arma settings - as I do have some thing prohibited - as for example, lets say:
"game options" => "general" => "extended map content" => "enemy" Off
(so I do not have always in 100% cases any enemy groups under any circumstances on my maps)
IF I do not know there problém exist, I can not change it - so for it is the feedback so important.
Our starting base was placed in the middle of the enemy forces in hostile terrain with this statement in the OPORD:
"Whoever is on base (waiting to full hour reinforcement) is on duty and have to eliminate any direct or indirect threats. If our base will end in surrender or overrun we will fall to captivity and will be send to prison camps somewhere at archipelago Podagorsk, Kolgujev, Bystrica !!" "Whoever is on base (waiting to full hour reinforcement) is on duty and have to eliminate any direct or indirect threats. If our base will end in surrender or overrun we will fall to captivity and will be send to prison camps somewhere at archipelago Podagorsk, Kolgujev, Bystrica !!"
I found this to be a little ridiculous and also against all mission making conventions. I understand it was an attempt to add an element of urgency and desperation to the mission as we took on the role of guerrilla forces. However, our missions are built around the concept of leaving the base to complete objectives and if we die we respawn in a safe area and then reinsert at the appropriate time. I waited around for a while after I died and shot a missile at a passing plane but I was not going to man the bunkers for 50 minutes on the off chance the place where we respawn was going to be attacked! FOBs can be attacked and placed near our area of operations. Where we first start does not need to be the same as where we respawn, but the place where we respawn should not be under threat.
----- Yes, I agree. Simply I made a bad planning. I did assume that the casualities will be higher. But there were always like 3 ppl only. One person was doing greate job with the ZU-23 AA gun (the gun got 3 helicopters or more). I could not loose time for making 3 ppl happy and abandon others. I had plan but it was not working.
I found the presence of an AI marker on the map distracting and apparently commanders on the ground did not know what they were (we asked and never found out) if there are allies on the map then either turn off AI map markers or actually give us some information about them like what they look like (perhaps a picture in the OPORD) and what they are doing. Or even give them a meaningful marker name.
-----I think this is very very important thing: Please MMT, I need help with this problem. There should not be any other group except the TFN. The thing is I never had any problem with this on my home PC.
I do not want anybody to see any friendly or enemi group markers on map, at all, never. Ive got not before any feedback on this, asked and got disable blueforce tracking. Have to be in 100% cases the bluefor tracking disabled ? It was said to me, it s just for friendlies but this mission there were no friendlies. Even the UN were OPFOR, but under GM orders !
Attributes were from me set right OPFOR and BLUFOR are enemies. When I was Zeusing or even not, did not see any group markers at map. Maybe I just misunderstood and im affraid of the worst ??? That you could see actually the enemy ?
I do not know how to disable AI markers on map.
(I do not see anything like that on my home PC. There were no friendlies this time at map at all !! I did not see anything vierd as a Zeus or even in single player while testing mission on my PC)
In summary several things that obviously took a lot of effort like the background writing and the design of the enemy forces could have been better spent by instead providing a more simple map with clear objective markers, an OPORD without unnecessary text that was unclear and did not provide useful information. Roles that were not appropriate or completely pointless like Mortar and Reaper could have been removed. In other words this effort could have been spent polishing the already very enjoyable mission experience itself.
----- I asked in mission submission and in "mission attempt" threat many times for any changes. There is many things prohibited. For the first part I gave there box with flashbangs, silenced short weapons - prohibited, deleted. I asked so many times so I give up to change anything. Ammo crates are quite a prohibited too. So, If I would give you create outside of base I do not comply with MM rules, not joking. The same with the explosives.
Rember I really enjoyed this mission but I felt these problems got in the way and I hope this feedback is helpful and not discouraging.
----- I did this op in December 2017. I stopped worked on it, as Ive got explained I should not do 10 missions on Pantera. (as, if I assume right, the Campaign on Panthera of official MMT was in progress)
The first Idea of this all was 10 missions long campaing in December 6 first mission created. So, becouse it I made it complicated. I did not know, there will be a Campaign on Panthera from MMT. I did not know that there can be campaign only every 3 months. And officially is not allowed to do any other "official" campaign.
So, now you know why the OPORD is so complicated
But I have fun to do things in Eden - I mean Im talking, not complaining
I have to say, I’ve noticed the AI group markers on map yet few times before my two missions. Is it not forced on the server ??? Is it up to the players to see or not see the AI markers in personal ACE settings ?
Or do I have to force it while I do create the mission ?
Do I really need to set even the Ace settings ? (did not found any settings in guides)
But again, I do not see any friendly or unfriendly AI group markers on map even when have standard CNTO server settings loaded from the Settings - Add Ons options - load - server CNTO cnto private server…
A) There is forced BFT on the server ?
B) Is there Not forced hide AI groups ?
C) It is depended on the Mission Maker Ace settings ??? (It s not - had the right settings)
I think there is pushed the BFT on the server
I did force the CNTO server settings on my PC - the result is that I see now the BMPs, static veapons but still I do not see any group AI markers.
It simply looks like the server CNTO settings is forcing the BFT and AI markers ?
I could not export bad setting from my pc, when I can not see it with my basic Ace settings I used while creating the mission. So logically I would say it is the server ?
BTW the what is on the map, and has color is unoccupied ! It has no crew ! The color is there becouse it s unknown or RHS opfor or RHS bluefor or RHS greenfor but still - unoccupied ! (it shows color along the factions it belongs to even there is no crew inside the vehicles or static weapons)
Would like to know if everybody could see just this or really like AI markers for groups. (Again, I could not see that in my PC before I forced the CNTO server settings - than I started see units on map - I mean even single soldiers)
Had you there the AI markers even before you died or it appeared after you did died ? Were it unit markers for soldiers or group icon markers for AI groups or just unoccupied vehicles ?
I would have to play for OPFOR to see any group markers on map, like is on the last picture.
Hey [user avatar=“https://s3.amazonaws.com/files.enjin.com/821401/site_logo/small.png” name=“Mother”]18447842[/user] - Just so you know - tactical planning is not an official thread to follow in terms of OP’s.
It’s just to theorize and make some plans, which may or may not be used in game.
OPORD is the place where you want all the information presented to public.
As for BFT - it’s configured server wise, I’ll be making adjustments this weekend.
Hey [user avatar=“https://s3.amazonaws.com/files.enjin.com/821401/site_logo/small.png” name=“Mother”]18447842[/user] first and foremost thank you for contributing to the community, you’re doing an excellent job at putting your energy in this community and even if the main topic is about making sure that energy isn’t spent on superfluous things do keep in mind that you still have my full appreciation as well as, I believe, most of the community’s.
Most of the issues we had in this mission will be solved through an improvement of the existing mission making processes (including reviews) as well as a fair bit of work R&D-wise (mainly Abuk) when it comes to ingame settings.
However, I would like to give you a friendly advice: Keep it short.
You are easily one of the most prolific writers in the forum as well as in OPORDs, and I believe this is acting against you.
Let me elaborate: I, for the first time since I was in CNTO, skipped a member’s post on a given topic when I arrived at your three posts in this mission feedback. "TL;DR".
I just don’t have the energy of going through all that text.
Short OPORDs will re-become short as a consequence of re-enforcing the 17-months old regulation of having someone read OPORDs aloud when doing the ingame briefing (with preference for a sexy sounding english speaking player, as per regulation), so don’t worry on that end.
But on the topic of forums threads, if you work on your condensing and "to the point" writing skills you’ll be able to get so much more out of your interactions with other members of this community.
Once again, this is just an advice. You are free to ignore it in the same way I am free to give it away. Similarly, it is not my responsibility to actually check if this advice is applicable, that’s up to you to decide if this advice is even feasible. No better than yourself is aware of your level in english writing
Reacting on Lastmikoi post:
I have learnt a lot by writing here, even when in my manner. As my spoken english is worse than written, I tend rather to write, excessively Maybe Im too strict with the "what you speak you forget what you write you dont".
I believe my other OPORDs in future will try to bring more brief and clarity and will not anymore overcomplicate things.
The two posts above, from me, are so long becouse I really care about the things get better in future and have tought about the feedback. Now I just can come back and read what my first conclusions were, and if they were right or wrong.
Im really glad I will not have to read the OPORDs aloud (it would limit the writings or really bare minimum )
How I saw this mission as GM: (not important, just my story)
I was not affraid as I was well prepared and tought the ways players will act and how I will react on their movement by eyes of present enemy forces and not abuse the GM powers to see or hear everything.
At beginning of the mission, I found out, was too dark and nothing was possible to see. So I did add two lamps and made a time run quicker by ace module. Added some EI to houses of traning centre, and was prepared that TFN will go for the closest objective.
Is I did TP myself away, I did not hear any conversation or any planning of PLT as I believed I will react more realistically and I tought I will not need to listen too.
I shot two red flares from roof of building, when it looked like TFN is preparing to move, to warn AI about TFN preparation to leave the base.
I did move to the MG AI. When surprise come you took the BRDMs and moved so quickly ! I had intention to warn you off from my training centre by one shot into air and showing gestures, but heard "disembark" and got shot really quick. The others AI were eliminated were quickly. With one unlucky TFN casuality. (but there was 8 guys in defilade 20m from you, so it was success more than anything)
When I tried to cover my AIs from roof, I was eliminated very quickly by GL. (There were about 3+3 AIs on two roofs) I was very surprised by how quick and effective you were, I had almost no chance with about 25 AI there… When they were eliminated I tried to flank you from South but squad was eliminated pretty quickly too.
I heard you need resupply, so I did my thing away as I tought you will have no probléms with resupply, as PLT or others know about the script for the ammo crates, and it s needed to také it out of the base. I know in opord is always written the same - supply are at base - but I had no idea you will také it literally this time and will not move the crates outside of the base.
I was doing some things with heli and other. Saw the very close combat in woods at entrance to Maribu. When the police traitors spotted you and run against you. It happened very quick and I had no idea how to help you there. I think the enemy was like 5-10 meters from TFN and taking cover behind trees sometimes. Took some AI to prevent some bigger damage and just throw couple of flashbangs to keep you away.
Later I found out the situation with the garrisoning of the houses and tried ungarrison them and later that there is a hostage and later that skippy is roleplaying
In Maribu the enemy was, at the end, garrisoned in the houses. So I did not do there a much. I have in plan to let some AI surrender in future, as they are alone yet or something. So, it s realistic to let the last guy surrender, I believe.
Officers in the Turk Vulcano, first garrisoned the bunker but, it was better for them to run away from sure death. I think about 2-3 escaped at the end and unite with patrol and come back on the vulcano top while you were clearing the bunker. Sniper team, did some good work there with elimination of them. Later scared helicopter off with SIR AF squad but at the end were flanked by squad moving along beach.
To také the UN OW possition was easy as there were no enemies capable to také this possion anymore.
Once TFN was at UN OW marker a lot of the AI groups has spotted you and began with suppressing. Especially from the lower hill on right side from UN OW. From there by MGs came a lot of suppresive and it was distraction too As I did send two squads to flank you from the Church side of map. They got pretty close but, somebody with BRDM spotted them getting closer. So the flanking failed.
When the SIR HQ began understand, they are getting overrun, they deployed BMP, BTR and BMD. The BMD got on the UN OW hill and started attack on the compound lower and was threating you till the end of mission, almost.
I was surprised that, you moved on the beach. You were spotted there and marked by red flares and suppressed by yellow smokes. It was meant to give me more time to flank you, as the AIs are really unreliable - extremely slow - once they switch to combat mode or they were even not moving.
So, there were last two squads for flanking you, BMD and one Land Rover. They were very slow in movement and the flanking failed as they got eliminated.
After you moved to base.
Important points in short:
-
Pretty good work even when I heard there was a lot of confusion (It did not look from my perspective)
-
I saw at least two unclucky deaths, as the enemy was very close (could not be avoided even by my help)
-
I would call the mission succesfull as two conditions from opord were met
-
The tanks were not mandatory objectives but you destroyed 2 (?) i think (so it is success too)
-
The HQ in city was not objective too, but you almost eliminated them (I have never expected you will get there !
) -
Good work with the AA as at least 3 helis got shot down. (some had cluster incendiary bombs)
-
I think you had not many casualities (When I always looked at base there were only about 3 ppl)
-
I believe everybody should always assume that they are under OW by enemy and enemy is present in the building or the deadspace behind even tiny hill (like at beginning of the mission)
-
Be carefull as the MI-28 has probably similar sound like Apache, maybe on long distaces can look like Apache too
-
Some types of static launchers is necessary reload by pressing R (TOW, Kornet, AA turrets) If the AT is laser guided it is needed to hold the sights on the target to have succesfull hit.
-
What I regret I did not také any screens from the mission as I had a lot of work
-
What was not working as I did planed was defense of the base and the tactic I posted in Tactical planing - as the AI are not able to be quick enoug or against TFN it s much harder than I tought
-
I will delete from now the TFN groups which will not be usefull for that particular mission
-
I was deleting dead bodies as it improves FPS significantly
-
I have to be very carefull about moving objects or units on map like Zeus to not breake immersion as I did it without thinking, automatically as it got hectic
-
I think I learnt really a lot by this one GM game
PRESS 5 FOR HOT SEXY SQUAD PEELING ACTION: https://media.lastmikoi.net/player/20180309-CNTO-COOP_Operation_Panthera_Part_Two.mp4
Also be being FRENCH Actual.
Le motion blörr is tüü möch. :LOL: