+- Comrades in Arms Discussion Board (http://forum.ciahome.net)
+-- Forum: Comrades in Arms Life (http://forum.ciahome.net/forumdisplay.php?fid=3)
+--- Forum: CiA Coop Nights (http://forum.ciahome.net/forumdisplay.php?fid=6)
+--- Thread: The Debriefing Thread (/showthread.php?tid=2437)
Pages:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
Re: The Debriefing Thread - Alwarren - 02-02-2015
(02-02-2015, 01:12 PM)Variable link Wrote:Comes to think of it, is there anyone here capable of getting back to playing without a radio simulation mod? I know I couldn't...
No way. Even if it sometimes adds extra hassle, it is one of the few things that really make a difference in gameplay. It was one of the best additions we ever added to the server
Re: The Debriefing Thread - McGregor - 02-02-2015
It was a really bad night for me last night. Nothing to do with the missions or anything, just that I died within 2-5 minutes on every one of them. I think I fired a total of 15 rounds or so. The final straw was when I died exiting the rubber boat on SPhoenix mission (I think). I subsequently rage quitted. Well not really "rage" but I'd had enough by then. Too bad, it seemed like a cool mission. Oh well shit happens and I'll be back with a vengeance on Thursday.
On the radio matter:
There is no way of going back. The game is unplayable without TFAR. We just need to adopt some kind of standard formula when it comes to splitting up teams on different channels and such
Re: The Debriefing Thread - doveman - 02-02-2015
(02-01-2015, 10:26 AM)Variable link Wrote:I want to stress out one point that repeated itself several times over the past month under different leaders. If you are threatened, shoot, even if that means revealing yourself. If you are threatened, shoot, even if that means firing on an unaware enemy. That goes to leaders but also for individual soldiers. We die more because someone is waiting for permission to fire than someone shoots prematurely. I trust the people that play on coop nights to use their judgement on cases like this. For example, if there's an enemy vehicle that is approaching your position and there's a good chance that it will spot you, take it out before it detects you, even if there's a chance that it will not notice you. The threat in such a case is too big for us to take the chance.
If you watch Gwyn's video starting from 0:59, you'll see that Bravo team is proned right on the road, and an enemy BTR is patrolling on it. The risk of being detected is too high in this case, the enemy should have been taken out at the point that it was clear that it's going to pass dangerously close to the team. In this case, I was on the other side of the road with Alpha, it took me some time to realize what's about to happen and I took the shot immediately when I saw that the BTR has turned off its lights (indication for its AI crew switching to combat mode, which means they have detected Alpha). If Alpha wasn't in a firing position, Bravo could have been wiped out.
Damn, that looks really embarrassing (for me) from Gwyn's perspective! I was on the other side of the road hiding behind a big tree after someone reported a vehicle on the road and didn't actually know how near it was, so was reluctant to give permission to open fire in case it was so close that the explosion would hurt us and hoped that if we were all lying down in the trees by the side of the road it wouldn't spot us.
If I had realised that we weren't actually that well concealed and someone had already crouched into position to fire and the vehicle was still a safe distance away I would of course given permission but I thought we were all lying down and reasonably concealed when I was asked.
So maybe we do need to allow players to fire on their own initiative but we need to be careful that we don't end up with people firing whenever they feel like and pissing off the leaders who've told them to hold fire. On Lost Squad I recall someone did this and the leader was a bit annoyed but the person explained we were threatened and the leader said fair enough but in future say this before you fire so that he knows what's going on, which seems like a reasonable compromise.
We might also want to look at amending the Server Rules as it clearly says here http://ciahome.net/server-rules/ "Donât open fire without being ordered" although here http://ciahome.net/forum/coop-nights-internal/(cia)-standard-operating-procedures-(workshop)/ it says it's OK to fire without permission if you're threatened.
Re: The Debriefing Thread - doveman - 02-03-2015
(02-02-2015, 01:51 AM)Alwarren link Wrote:It was difficult in this situation since we had no NVG's and couldn't really ascertain whether our lasers were on or off.
I did, not sure who else had them but even if everyone did I guess we'd still need some sort of co-ordination to avoid everyone having their lasers on and confusing the pilots, when what we'd want to do is just lase the biggest threats at any one moment. Not really sure how this could be managed though other than by people notifying the leader about their targets and letting him decide which one should be lased.
Quote:I noticed in this mission a general problem with keeping formation, there was a lot of running about and crossing line of fire. That is really something we need to get a grip on, it's frankly a miracle that it didn't result in FF incidents yet.
Yeah, this bugs me as well. I can deal with people getting out of formation when moving sometimes but when someone moves right in front of me when I'm firing, forcing me to move so that I can keep firing without shooting them, that really annoys me. Even worse is when someone moves in front of you and then can't decide where to stand and keeps moving left and right, so just as you think "OK, they're standing there, I'll fire to their left" they move to their left and into your line of fire again!
People really need to check where the other players are and move BEHIND them or if that's too difficult in the situation, identify who they're about to cross and radio something like "doveman, crossing" and wait for a confirmation like "OK, cross" before running past. Otherwise you've only got yourself to blame if you catch a bullet in the arse
Quote:Good job overall, but I noticed in this mission that some people still have difficulties following "disengage" orders and go on shooting. This is either intentional or because they didn't hear the comms. In the latter case, I can only say, please listen to the comms.
I noticed watching Gwyn's video that it's very hard to hear the comms when there's a lot of firing going on. Maybe it's just the way it was recorded but for anyone who finds it difficult to hear the radio in those situations, please try the TS3 Volume Control plugin, which will lower the volume to the % you set when someone is speaking (you can select whether it also lowers it when you're speaking or not) and allow you to enjoy the full game volume the rest of the time. I think this is the current/latest version http://addons.teamspeak.com/directory/addon/result/Volume-Control-(Windows7-only)-remake.html
Re: The Debriefing Thread - Den - 02-03-2015
"Den, sorry we didn't get to you on time while you were bleeding, we tried."
It's alright, no problem. Part of the game. It was our fault for being in that situation. :-[
"Den, Outlawz, good cooperation as the last survivors on completing this mission."
I agree. I feel bad that people died as I didn't notice the scale of the casualties at first as I was AFK for a few brief moments but at least we got the job done. One moment many people are fine behind barraks. Next moment, Variable and our PKP Gunner bleeding and he bled out before Variable.
Many infantry to keep track of inside the compound. Outlaws did great job with the vehicle too. The others did a great job too overall."On Lost Squad I recall someone did this and the leader was a bit annoyed but the person explained we were threatened and the leader said fair enough but in future say this before you fire so that he knows what's going on, which seems like a reasonable compromise."
That was probably me. The enemies were about 400m away but they were 2 snipers with SVDs. The first started shooting at our group. I should've announced it properly.
Re: The Debriefing Thread - Alwarren - 02-03-2015
(02-03-2015, 12:35 AM)Den link Wrote:That was probably me. The enemies were about 400m away but they were 2 snipers with SVDs. The first started shooting at our group. I should've announced it properly.
The reason for my annoyance back then was that I hadn't heard any shots. I just saw that someone was shooting at (what I thought) unalerted enemies, so yeah, I was a bit pissy about that. As I said, it would be good to notify the leader/rest of the team of the fact that we had been spotted, but yeah, you did the right thing at the time. I just didn't know.
Re: The Debriefing Thread - doveman - 02-03-2015
(02-03-2015, 01:53 AM)Alwarren link Wrote:The reason for my annoyance back then was that I hadn't heard any shots. I just saw that someone was shooting at (what I thought) unalerted enemies, so yeah, I was a bit pissy about that. As I said, it would be good to notify the leader/rest of the team of the fact that we had been spotted, but yeah, you did the right thing at the time. I just didn't know.No question, Den did the right thing to return fire there. What I'm worried about is if we start saying that it's up to each player to decide when there's a threat, not necessarily shooting at us or even aware, then there's going to be a lot of conversations along the lines of "what the hell are you doing, I said hold fire", " but I saw a threat", "well, OK then" and it could make it that much harder for leaders to maintain order.
Just saying, I don't think we shouldn't let my useless leading displayed in Gwyn's video change our SOP radically. Sure, there will be occasions where players can see something that the leader can't and if there's sufficient immediate threat they should feel free to fire without permission but that should very much be the exception and if there's time, they should advise the leader of the nature of the threat and ask for orders, whilst still having the right to fire without permission or even if permission is refused by the leader, if the situation suddenly changes and the threat justifies doing so. Otherwise we could have situations where a leader is aware of a threat and has a plan to avoid it or get in a better position to deal with it but someone gets trigger happy, alerts the enemy to our presence and ruins the leader's plan (which he may not have had time to explain to the team yet).
Re: The Debriefing Thread - Variable - 02-03-2015
(02-02-2015, 05:59 PM)McGregor link Wrote:The final straw was when I died exiting the rubber boat on SPhoenix mission (I think). I subsequently rage quitted. Well not really "rage" but I'd had enough by then. Too bad, it seemed like a cool mission. Oh well shit happens and I'll be back with a vengeance on Thursday.Damn, had I noticed I'd have done a quick restart. Guys, if someone dies due to a bug or a disconnection and anything that is "natural" within the game universe, let me know. Especially if it's in the beginning of the mission, and especially if you died so often before. Use Steam chat since dead guys can't talk now.
(02-02-2015, 11:44 PM)doveman link Wrote:So maybe we do need to allow players to fire on their own initiative but we need to be careful that we don't end up with people firing whenever they feel like and pissing off the leaders who've told them to hold fire.We never meant to "allow players to fire on their own initiative". Maybe I wasn't completely clear so let me rephrase the rule: Never open fire on the enemy without ordered to, unless you or another friendly unit are under a direct and immediate threat.
(02-02-2015, 11:44 PM)doveman link Wrote:We might also want to look at amending the Server Rules as it clearly says here http://ciahome.net/server-rules/ "Donât open fire without being ordered" although here http://ciahome.net/forum/coop-nights-internal/(cia)-standard-operating-procedures-(workshop)/ it says it's OK to fire without permission if you're threatened.Right, corrected!
(02-03-2015, 03:44 AM)doveman link Wrote:No question, Den did the right thing to return fire there. What I'm worried about is if we start saying that it's up to each player to decide when there's a threat, not necessarily shooting at us or even aware, then there's going to be a lot of conversations along the lines of "what the hell are you doing, I said hold fire", " but I saw a threat", "well, OK then" and it could make it that much harder for leaders to maintain order.I do not share your concerns. The player base of the CiA coop nights is well capable of understanding the meaning of "direct and immediate threat".
(02-03-2015, 03:44 AM)doveman link Wrote:Just saying, I don't think we shouldn't let my useless leading displayed in Gwyn's video change our SOP radically. Sure, there will be occasions where players can see something that the leader can't and if there's sufficient immediate threat they should feel free to fire without permission but that should very much be the exception and if there's time, they should advise the leader of the nature of the threat and ask for orders, whilst still having the right to fire without permission or even if permission is refused by the leader, if the situation suddenly changes and the threat justifies doing so. Otherwise we could have situations where a leader is aware of a threat and has a plan to avoid it or get in a better position to deal with it but someone gets trigger happy, alerts the enemy to our presence and ruins the leader's plan (which he may not have had time to explain to the team yet).You wrote a lot of things here in a very long sentence but let me try to put some order into the confusion. Let's not confuse routine with cases of "direct and immediate danger".
First, if there's time, as you put it, the exception rule of having an "immediate threat" does not apply, and therefore should be treated as the general rule of holding fire unless told otherwise, so this is not relevant to this discussion. For example, if you see an enemy running in the distance and you suspect that he's in combat mode, that does not constitute as immediate and direct danger. However, if an enemy is close, draws his weapon and takes aim, or suddenly detected in a very close range, sure, take him out even if the team is under hold fire. You are OBLIGATED to do so.
Second, in "immediate and direct threat conditions" we definitely do not expect people to report to the leader before protecting themselves or the team to remove that threat. There's simply not enough time for communication under these cases, and if there is, the situation does not constitute as "immediate" and therefore should be treated in the common manner of providing a contact report and waiting for instructions from the leader.
Your explanation to the situation on Gwyn's video demonstrates that clearly. As you said, you were not in a position to determine whether the situation is dangerous so you ordered to hold fire. However, given that the threat was significant and immediate, McGregor should have opened fire regardless of your orders. Explanations should always come after responses to immediate and direct danger situations, never before them. You are about to be detected and/or fired upon? Shoot. If you are capable of talking while firing, report as you fire. If not, keep your explanations to after the firefight.
Re: The Debriefing Thread - Gwynbleidd - 02-03-2015
(02-02-2015, 11:44 PM)doveman link Wrote:Damn, that looks really embarrassing (for me) from Gwyn's perspective!
Damn, sorry about that, I just included it because i didn't think much of it other then it was a interesting and tense situation, and no matter how good leader you are, you can't see everything.
And McGregor as the only AT in our team, did the right thing getting ready on it in case we're spotted. If arma allowed you to at least get your launcher ready, without forcing you to crouch position (damn, i really miss ACE), it might have been a completely different story.
If it makes you feel any better, I would totally hold fire even when you give the order ;D
Re: The Debriefing Thread - McGregor - 02-03-2015
(02-02-2015, 11:44 PM)doveman link Wrote:Damn, that looks really embarrassing (for me) from Gwyn's perspective!
No Doveman It's embarrassing for me :-\ . I should have taken the shot. Next time I will!
Re: The Debriefing Thread - doveman - 02-03-2015
(02-03-2015, 12:55 PM)Gwynbleidd link Wrote:Damn, sorry about that, I just included it because i didn't think much of it other then it was a interesting and tense situation, and no matter how good leader you are, you can't see everything.
And McGregor as the only AT in our team, did the right thing getting ready on it in case we're spotted. If arma allowed you to at least get your launcher ready, without forcing you to crouch position (damn, i really miss ACE), it might have been a completely different story.
If it makes you feel any better, I would totally hold fire even when you give the order ;D
Hey it's fine Gwyn, I'm not worried about people seeing it, I even showed it to my friends when they came over the other day and let them have a good laugh. Not as much as when we watched "let's play... I am Bread" though, that had us completely creased up
Besides, it's very useful to see things from a different perspective and hopefully learn lessons, so I'm grateful that you recorded and uploaded it.
Yes, McGregor was right to get into a firing position there. I take full responsibility for the cock-up.
Re: The Debriefing Thread - doveman - 02-03-2015
(02-03-2015, 01:25 PM)McGregor link Wrote:No Doveman It's embarrassing for me :-\ . I should have taken the shot. Next time I will!Hey, can't blame you for wanting to follow orders but yeah, in a similar situation in future, please ignore me and fire
Re: The Debriefing Thread - McGregor - 02-03-2015
(02-03-2015, 01:42 PM)doveman link Wrote:Hey, can't blame you for wanting to follow orders but yeah, in a similar situation in future, please ignore me and fire
![[Image: emoji4.png]](https://s3.amazonaws.com/tapatalk-emoji/emoji4.png)
I guess we both have learned something. But I don't like you hogging all the blame. Let me have some! At least give me halfÂ
Re: The Debriefing Thread - doveman - 02-03-2015
(02-03-2015, 02:04 PM)McGregor link Wrote:I guess we both have learned something. But I don't like you hogging all the blame. Let me have some! At least give me halfÂOh go on then
Re: The Debriefing Thread - Alwarren - 02-03-2015
(02-03-2015, 03:44 AM)doveman link Wrote:No question, Den did the right thing to return fire there. What I'm worried about is if we start saying that it's up to each player to decide when there's a threat, not necessarily shooting at us or even aware, then there's going to be a lot of conversations along the lines of "what the hell are you doing, I said hold fire", " but I saw a threat", "well, OK then" and it could make it that much harder for leaders to maintain order.
Seeing a thread is not enough. The RoE is pretty logical. You are to follow team leader order UNLESS
- You are in immediate danger because you had hard contact and the opponent is shooting at you.
- Holding fire will put another unit in immediate danger, like the APC being targeted by the missile soldier.
In general, you hold. Seeing an enemy is not a reason to shoot.
Quote:Just saying, I don't think we shouldn't let my useless leading displayed in Gwyn's video change our SOP radically.
You're being too harsh to yourself. Every team leader has his share of split-second decisions to make. Sometimes they are wrong. You had hoped the BTR would pass, it didn't. Mistakes happen. In the end, almost all of us survived.