Leave any comments and videos here! 
20 people with zero armour against 120+ US forces. I demand instant reinsertion or more wildcards for this.
I think if you used the mindset and tactics of an insurgent (hit and runs, rushing and such) instead of using the OW and flank that most modern military forces use the attack on the base may have been more favourable for you. But hey, hindsight is 20/20 
Plus the wildcard you used first I think was a bit of a knee jerk reaction from you, it definitely could have been used later on to a better effect
Thanks for playing though
Using hit&run tactics implies a couple of things IMO:
- We are trained to deploy them, which we are really not (see discussion for squads collapsing to sections, same thing)
- There’s something to run to and get in cover, which there wasn’t for either of the locations
Concerning point #1, I still find it hard to understand why it takes us so long to abandon a position and fall back (see first attack on the main base). While we generally improved in the last months, this time around retreating was made even more difficult by losing essentially every single vehicle we brought in. So yeah, I don’t see how the run part of hit&run could happen by any means.
Regarding the first wildcard, in hindsight it definitely wasn’t the best moment to call for it. If only I knew we’d lose 15 people only 20 mins into the hour I would’ve waited. Don’t have that crystal ball I ordered on Amazon last week though The rationale behind it was being absolutely aware of the fact that it had been tough already to capture an oil facility, I bet my sweet cheeks that the main base would’ve been even harder (and I was absolutely right).
Next time I’ll listen to Mr. [user avatar=“https://assets-cloud.enjin.com/users/12591864/avatar/small.1526326563.jpeg” name=“Dachi”]12591864[/user] and avoid the roads entirely. Apologies to [user avatar=“https://assets-cloud.enjin.com/users/13011722/avatar/small.1671107493.jpeg” name=“Quantum”]13011722[/user] for sending you out as scout, you were really useful in detecting mines though so thanks for that.
Closing up, a Tuesday version of antistasi is definitely not my cup of tea and I will absolutely retain myself from playing insurgents again any time soon. Thanks for the effort you put in building the mission though Garf.
This ended up being a quite frustrating op. We’re set in our ways of fighting like a modern military and due to respawn rules that isn’t going to change much anytime soon. Having looked at the mission file I really dislike that there was no indicator that I was about to run over a mine/IED and was just doomed to die (some sort of object, even if it was a pile of rubbish would have been nice)
Noted! [user avatar=“https://assets-cloud.enjin.com/users/8061610/avatar/small.1616680218.jpeg” name=“Henrik”]8061610[/user] chances are I won’t be making any more though tbh
[user avatar=“https://assets-cloud.enjin.com/users/16274568/avatar/small.1591361600.png” name=“Garf”]16274568[/user] no I think you should make more missions if you feel so inclined. Bad chances happen to everyone, it doesn’t mean you’re bad at it
git gud
I disagree with the criticism on this mission or the respawn rules. In the end even with 5 disconnects mid-op (of which 3 in leadership roles) of various reasons, we managed to complete the objective of the mission. It wasn’t easy and we had some major setbacks, but we did do it and I had a good time.
Firstly, respawn rules are and always have been the same. To my knowledge there’s only been 1 op where we deliberately changed them. This means in all other insurgency ops we played etc it was also fine. I don’t get the demand for needing different rules for this op. I’m not saying our respawn rules are perfect, but I have tried before to think of a significantly better way to do it and failed to do so. Death should be meaningful for surviving to be meaningful.
On the hit&run tactics, I think this is mostly down to our unit structure. A 10-man element by nature is just much slower to move than a smaller element. In other insurgency ops just 2-3 man teams with a car have been very effective, but this requires a lot of autonomy for every team to work (choosing their own OW points, when to fall back, and especially not having to ask permission before every movement). A full squad will have a very hard time to pull it off unless the intent is made very clear. (Even this op at the very start [user avatar=“https://assets-cloud.enjin.com/users/20330489/avatar/small.1594394879.png” name=“Mattdogs”]20330489[/user] told Alpha he didn’t want us to ever overcommit and have the option of retreat, but sheer familiarity with our normal playstyle meant this never materialised.)
On the very first ambush Quantum got unlucky I think? The IED script didn’t work as intended, and exploded like 6x instead of once. Additionally, afaik the intent was for it to only disable a vehicle and at most slightly injure the crew, but because we sent a motorcycle up front the damage was much worse. Personally, I think if we have an IED script that can disable vehicles without (seriously) injuring people, that would be great since it allows MM’s to make difficult scenarios without completely screwing over whoever is driving in the front.
On objective 1 Alpha had got themselves a spot with a lot of hard cover. Still it was a very long shootout with the enemy, since we weren’t fighting as close combat as would be most effective. However, due to the medics we were still able to just get everyone up after getting knocked down and so slowly whittle down the opponent.
The final objective had a similar flow, except the cover was a lot worse (with it just being the crest of a shallow ridge). But even here after a period of many people going unconscious constantly, we won out in the firefight.
Looking back at the recording, this happened:
T-2:50 Alpha lead gets hit by the first mortar that landed. Since he’d just gone off on his own to retrieve a vic 300m west and nobody was with him, nobody noticed this.
T-1:50 Alpha yellow AAR (me, now acting Alpha lead without FTL’s and red AAR) finds a functional hilux, which is needed to also get PLT out since the humvees are locked. This is relayed over the long-range I was given 2 minutes earlier as a spare from Alpha lead.
T-1:30 We notice Alpha lead is down, this is communicated over radios.
T-1:25 PLT mentions there’s a big supply crate on PLT pos, where yellow should bring the Hilux to load and extract. This is missed since at this time Alpha is looking around and communicating to find Alpha lead.
T-1:00 Alpha lead is found and treatment on him has started.
T-0:50 until 0:25 PLT repeats his extraction plan. Yellow team hilux to go to PLT pos to pickup crate and ppl.
Lots of mortars are dropping at this point.
T-0:05 Just as I’m getting into the car with my team, we get hit by a mortar, killing me and Richard.
It’s true we wasted a lot of time in there, but it was mostly down to Alpha lead going down instantly without anyone realising and after we found him the confusion that followed. In the end I think the moment mortars started landing the big supply crate should’ve been immediately abandoned, as well as the regroup point being placed well outside of the base.
Thanks for the relevant criticism [user avatar=“https://assets-cloud.enjin.com/users/8030574/avatar/small.1500627185.png” name=“Hateboarder”]8030574[/user] . I will definitely keep this in mind next time I lead.
Personally, I don’t care whether the mission ends with a "MISSION SUCCESSFUL" or "MISSION FAILED" screen. It’s not what I play for. What I care about is that we play in a tactical and non-stupid way. This could mean that from time to time we stop and reposition and such (more on this in a different thread some time in the future). Our tactics, training and SOP obviously don’t apply to this kind of mission so I guess that’s the end of the discussion.
I am wondering how much it makes sense for our kind of unit to run missions that require us to completely discard everything we do and are used to doing.
When death can be avoided by deploying tactics, yes. When there’s nothing you can do better I find it utterly stupid to have 80% of the platoon waiting at base for more than 20 minutes.
Yes. Did I mention anything about tactics, training and SOP already? 
[quote user_id=“8061610” avatar=“https://assets-cloud.enjin.com/users/8061610/avatar/medium.1616680218.jpeg” name=“Henrik”]
When death can be avoided by deploying tactics, yes. When there’s nothing you can do better I find it utterly stupid to have 80% of the platoon waiting at base for more than 20 minutes.[/quote]
I think this is a very important point and what I was trying and failing to describe on Discord. Current rules are based on the mindset of "You died, you made a mistake, you are being punished". What about the instances where its intentional both from a mission maker and a Plt perspective that casualties are expected and unavoidable. Now people are being punished for something that is out of their hands
First of all, thank you for the mission [user avatar=“https://assets-cloud.enjin.com/users/16274568/avatar/small.1591361600.png” name=“Garf”]16274568[/user] . Here is my key takeaways with this mission:
- I’ve found very helpful to talk with Platoon commander before the mission if the mission requires different than usual tactics and procedures. Unfortunately, we do revert to standard tactics and usually this ends in tears.
- From design standpoint, putting mine and an ambush on the road to objective did change the way we play. We didn’t take enough vehicles for mobile hit and run assault on the objective and even that small convoy got ambushed just forcing players to completely abandon any mobile warfare and revert to "security first, speed second" mindset. Unfortunately, that’s when we were defeated completely.
- Always take realism of the scenario into account. 25 weakly armed insurgents attacking a guarded military base? Likely never gonna happen. Sure, there was an idea to reinforce the existing onslaught of the insurgents, but the area of operations and the way of doing it was not what insurgent commander would do. Likely, they would use noncombatants to infiltrate near the military base, maybe some car bomb to distract them and definitely cover of the night. This document might give you some ideas of how "they operate" and can give you ideas.
Even despite best intentions and lots of work, we all know every mission can be a disaster. Players and leaders play their part too.
Thanks for the mission Garf, apologies to Bravo for leaving early was my wedding anniversary and had to make an effort when the Wife was ready.
[quote user_id=“13011722” avatar=“https://assets-cloud.enjin.com/users/13011722/avatar/medium.1671107493.jpeg” name=“Quantum”][quote user_id=“8061610” avatar=“https://assets-cloud.enjin.com/users/8061610/avatar/medium.1616680218.jpeg” name=“Henrik”]
When death can be avoided by deploying tactics, yes. When there’s nothing you can do better I find it utterly stupid to have 80% of the platoon waiting at base for more than 20 minutes.[/quote]
I think this is a very important point and what I was trying and failing to describe on Discord. Current rules are based on the mindset of "You died, you made a mistake, you are being punished". What about the instances where its intentional both from a mission maker and a Plt perspective that casualties are expected and unavoidable. Now people are being punished for something that is out of their hands[/quote]
Firstly I disagree to seeing death as a punishment. This doesn’t mean that I enjoy dying, but I definitely enjoy the threat of dying due to the consequences it has. Death is part of the challenge. If nobody ever died it would be very boring indeed. Game modes where death has no consequence except a 2-minute setback (such as antistasi/liberation/mike force) quite quickly wear out on me because eventually death just becomes a grind.
Also, the two instances you describe are very different. You either have:
- A situation where death is unavoidable: In general these are bad (or unintentional) mission design and not fun. Death from driving on an invisible and impossible-to-predict mine does fall into this category, however in general these situations are pretty rare.
- A situations where (some) death is expected: These are the hardest parts of missions where the platoon really gets tested. Usually some people die here, which imo is as it should be. If everyone plays exceptional you might all make it out alive. If big mistakes are made it might lead to a (near) wipe. If somebody gets unlucky they might die as well. In the end coming out of these situations in the best shape possible gives me the greatest satisfaction when playing Arma.
[quote user_id=“13011722” avatar=“https://assets-cloud.enjin.com/users/13011722/avatar/medium.1671107493.jpeg” name=“Quantum”]
I think this is a very important point and what I was trying and failing to describe on Discord. Current rules are based on the mindset of "You died, you made a mistake, you are being punished". What about the instances where its intentional both from a mission maker and a Plt perspective that casualties are expected and unavoidable. Now people are being punished for something that is out of their hands[/quote]
Honestly if a mission maker lets people die on purpose they are bad mission makers. Change my mind.
If your mission requires casualties in order to be enjoyable for the survivors, just know you are making the mission intentionally very bad for the people you are killing off.
To get back to a point Koffer made early on. Reinserts are here for a reason and we never deviate from them except once when the mission was a campaign mission and required it. It’s never an issue because what I said above should never happen.
I wasn’t here for the mission so take my view with a grain of salt if I am speaking out of order here because I don’t know what happened in the mission except for the posts made here.
I had to let this op sit for a bit before writing about it. The rest of this thread has some very interesting stuff in it that compliments thoughts that I heard people express during the op too. I really like the discussion we are having on how to play a lightly armed insurgency force and how we might change organisation, tactics and training.
As for myself this op was definitely more of an interesting and thought provoking experience rather than a "fun" one, although there were of course fun bits. I really liked how despite being in a bad position and having lost half our force we managed to get off the side of the mountain and survive the first attack. I also enjoyed the final attack and how it was planned and carried out.
Most of the problems with us and the mission have already been discussed save for one or two problems I had with how a supposedly Western Army acted. First of all I think it highly unrealistic that a NATO force would mine a highway. Secondly I found it really annoying that a Western Army would grenade their own base shortly after it had been attacked and still contained their own VIPs and for all they knew friendly forces.