(12-30-2013, 11:11 AM)Lefty link Wrote:I think we should encourage people to lead rather than just criticize their decisions,
Oh come on, if I'm no longer allowed to point out anything I found peculiar, we can about close this thread. I just pointed out two things I found peculiar, and that's it. I wasn't "just criticizing".
Honestly, I don't know why you both are so defensive about it ?
Good job Phantom! You have lead two successful missions. I think the idea of making a desired path by the force of explosives to avoid dangerous arcs is a good one! It's actually a tactic that was implemented here during the last uprising in the occupied territories.
I liked "Under the Hill". I think we did a good job covering the arcs and not letting the enemy get too close to us, at least those who moved through areas we could cover. For defense missions, I think it would be wise to assign responsibility arcs. Of course when the shot hits the fan it all goes to shit, but once an attack wave ends, all goes back to their assigned sector and cover it. If casualties were sustained, leader reassigns the sectors for way fighter.
We had some nice firefights on that Sander mission, good job on managing to disengage those forest buggers. It wasn't easy. It's hard to cease fire, my brother told me that when told to hold fire after a successful ambush no one held fire until the platoon commander yelled a hem a couple of times. He says it is very hard to stop firing since the wall of fire provide a great extent of adrenalin and a sense of protection. I guess it's the same in the game. Moreover, it's hard to put your back at the enemy and indeed, disengaging often demands casualties. I'm glad we managed to break contact then, and think that without it the missions would have failed I a much sooner phase.
Good job everyone!
P.S sorry to have let the Bradley move up fast without infantry protection. My penalty for rushing it.
In any case, target the RPG gunners first!
(12-30-2013, 11:11 AM)Lefty link Wrote:I think we should encourage people to lead rather than just criticize their decisions,
Seriously, why? I invite everyone to point out when I do something wrong when I lead. I'll make the same mistakes again if I don't hear what I did wrong.
Quote:This is why I am reluctant to lead. It is much more intense and unforgiving when we step into leadership positions, particularly when some of us don't have as much experience with the game as others. Making mistakes is an essential part of improving, and I sometimes get intimidated by Arma as a grunt rifleman let alone a leader.
Which is all the more reason to point out when someone does something wrong, and I quite frankly don't see what is wrong with that.
In the case at hand, I agree with Varanon that it would have been better to go with more/all than just one. Freeman had no cover, and from the top of the hill there was no way that targets could be effectively engaged since there was no more in the open. If we are not allowed to say that, I don't see the point of this thread.
Quote:By the way, we DID win the missions Phantom was leading.
That doesn't mean that you cannot point out something that you think was a bad idea. After all, we lost all but two people, and Freeman was IMO avoidable. Phantom did a good job, but that part IMO was a bad idea. Why is it so difficult for people to accept that? Why must we all go completely defensive on that one?
~~ Alwarren
My second night witch CiA and first playing ArmA2. Still didnt have names (not in game, not ts3 overlay). So i really was concentrating on remembering voices. Still have some issues with understanding key words/commands. But i hope i learn fast. Really enjoy sniper position mostly and in last mission i think that best position for me would be from distance when you guys engage town as i could give better cover fire and spot enemies. Really did enjoy this night as well. What about Tuesday, it is NYE and as i understand co-op night may not happen?
(12-30-2013, 08:20 AM)Phantom link Wrote:I'm not as good as giving orders to people around in a large group as you, Alwarren, or Variable.
I'm not good at it either. I would prefer smaller groups of four or five men and only have to boss team leaders around.
In the case in question, I would have taken everyone down to the camp to cover each other instead of just freeman, he couldn't possibly cover any angle so this was bound to happen. Stick went AFK in a pretty bad moment, so I would have gone down with yourself, BlinDog and Freeman to cover more of the camp, since from the hill there was no possibility to see a lot.
Quote:I'm not sure about how to lead a defense mission besides having people get to cover and defend off a position...
The only piece of advice I could imagine was assigning specific sectors to people, and have one or two guys that are "flexible" enough to move around to reinforce specific sectors. The second stronghold to the west was getting overrun pretty quickly last time we played this mission. Assigning sectors ensures that no direction is kept unwatched, more so since people have a tendency to all turn into one direction once someone calls out a contact.
Placing a sniper further up the hill to the south might have been beneficial, although I don't remember how the cover was on that slope - there ought to be at least one or the other rock up there.
Generally, I think we were too static in the mission. We should have been more agile, moving outside the perimeter of the sandbags from time to time to see where the enemy is coming from.
Hi
Just to take a step back and reflect more broadly on last night's missions. This is the ONLY community I have ever been on where I want to return because people have the right balance between being serious AND having fun. You are right Alwarren in pointing out that
' all the more reason to point out when someone does something wrong, and I quite frankly don't see what is wrong with that. '
We do need constructive criticism. I guess I was concerned with the way you said it. I know when Variable asks for leaders there is sometimes a big hesitation in getting people to jump in. But small squads of 3-5 are better. I have enjoyed the missions where we are in small squads. I have led a couple of those. I am quite happy to try leading more of those but leading the whole team is intimidating -but I guess the only way to get better is to step up and do it.
cheers,
Lefty
(12-30-2013, 08:40 PM)Lefty link Wrote:We do need constructive criticism. I guess I was concerned with the way you said it
1) The original post by Varanon was a request to explain the decision, nothing else.
2) My post said I thought it was a mistake to send in Freeman alone, and offered an alternative (Send the whole team in). What could I have done differently in your opinion?
I suggest we all try to be a little bit more gentle and a little bit less defensive. This thread is a great thing and it will be a shame if people people will stop posting here either because they don't want to offend anyone or because they are offended.
Variable is right -I apologise to everyone if I came across as overly defensive. This is a great community and I want it to get even better, particularly when it comes to people (including me) stepping up to leadership.
(12-30-2013, 01:36 PM)CheezMak3r link Wrote:My second night witch CiA and first playing ArmA2. Still didnt have names (not in game, not ts3 overlay). So i really was concentrating on remembering voices. Still have some issues with understanding key words/commands. But i hope i learn fast. Really enjoy sniper position mostly and in last mission i think that best position for me would be from distance when you guys engage town as i could give better cover fire and spot enemies. Really did enjoy this night as well. What about Tuesday, it is NYE and as i understand co-op night may not happen?
Cheeze, you had a very successful second session! Good job with the sniper rifle. Looking forward to playing with you even more. About the Sniper slot - whoever is quick enough takes it hehe, you got some competitors on the race to the sniper slot
Mk HUD will help you to orientyourself between everybody. It's A MUST! Let us know if you have trouble activating it. Default is the space key. Stand close enough to a friend/AI from your team and click it, you will get a hovering name tag. When it's on, when you point your cursor at a vehicle, it says who's inside and how many slots are available. Works from inside a vehicle too.
Blood Gulch
First part is tough. On that second attempt I guess we got more survivors and actually survive this time, but going down the road without our APC was certain death. We're pretty much mowed down by that BMP and AI shooting through trees and bushes is tough.
Impassive Aggressive
3 Tanks instead of 2. Many infantries to defend it. After a surviving tank, it pretty much mowed down the entire infantry team. The bombardment on the enemy's base was great nevertheless.
All great missions tonight (31/11/13). Sorry about my two major fuckups: not checking map and assuming wrong rendezvous point(died) + missing tank from the bridge. No excuse just clouded judgement and low concentration
Have to add about Blood Gulch, that my leadership on it wasn't really great. First time around I got the APC killed in a jiffy, and second time I had us stay on the slopes of the hill way too long which got Variable killed... should have disengaged and moved... meh
On Impassive Aggressive, I failed to hit the tank with the wire-guided missile, which gave it the opportunity to shoot us... with the APC down, it was just a matter of mobbing up the floor with us...
Hedge Creeper
Good leading, and overall good performance of the team. Too bad half of us crashed at one point. I'm still wondering how the heck Freeman could see those guys at the house...
Bear Claw
Again, good leading and good performance of the team. I messed up my satchel but Freeman corrected that error. Went pretty good from there until the bridge. The odds are pretty bad there with the tank and all. Slightly overdone, if you ask me.
Overall, pleasant games last night!
Happy New Year!
Blood Gulch:
Pretty hard mission IMO, the steep valleys and trees prevent spotting, but the AI seems to have no trouble spotting the BMP. After I took over command, my mistake was to stay too much on the road; I had not anticipated that the enemy would send another BMP to investigate, I would have thought that all reinforcement was already there..
I always wonder why people insist on grouping the whole team and APC crew into one team. I usually separate them, and that works IMO much better. Team leader in an APC just doesn't work.
Getting eyes on is the biggest issue in this mission. Those little NAPA vermin seem to be everywhere.
Impassive Agressive:
Not quite sure what to do with that mission. The tanks are a real problem, maybe it would have been better to move in from the north instead of from the hill to have the town between us and the approaching tanks. If we'Re quick enough, we might take over the town before the tanks arrive.
Hedge Creeper:
Well I guess this went quite well until that point that four or five people crashed simultaneously. Must have been something with a defective model, or maybe it was all ATI people and only the NVidia guys survived. Up to that point I think we did good, but of course with so many crashes, things quickly went fubar.
Bear Claw:
I seriously love-hated this mission. The beginning is great, up to the second objective. The third objective is bollocks. It's basically Spetznaz vs. the whole NATO, leaving you with a failed mission after over an hour of playtime. It would have been great if the last objective would just have been to evac, or something that felt a bit more of a realistic target.
Up to the bridge everything went fine, but I have no idea how to handle that rest.
The reason the mission caused people to crash might be other than just ATI's fault because i have ATI and didn't crash .