Re: Standard Operating Procedures on TG ArmA Server (1 and 2)

**beita** · 09-11-2008, 07:07 PM

I agree with these new "rules".

I have lead quite a few missions, and the missions that are the hardest to lead are the ones where people get sloppy and careless with comms.

It has gotten to the point where I am desperately trying to find a way to COMPLETELY DISABLE all radio comms for non-squad leaders. Sadly, it isn't possible with the current scripting commands.

If you want an organized game, keep off side channel unless you are a leader. Simple as that. Side channel talks to EVERYONE on your side, so that fireteam that is trying to clear a house that some enemy were spotted in is hearing you rave on about how you are about to shoot some guy with an RPG on his back unless he says he is friendly.

This is absolutely VITAL in a TvT enviroment. Humans aren't the same as AI. They can see and hear properly. So, when your ENTIRE team is basically stricken deaf because of someone overusing Side channel .. you are putting the ENTIRE team at a severe disadvantage.

Go to almost EXTREME lengths to avoid using Side channel. If you want to talk to someone in Alpha Squad ... RUN OVER to them, and talk on direct. Especially if there is a firefight going on.

If the comms cannot be sorted soon .. I am going to do a dramatic and detrimental redesign of how players are grouped. It is not acceptable right now. It would be impossible to coordinate a Platoon in a TvT mission. We have been playing with ONE section and some support and we can barely keep it together when NOT under fire.

After saying that, I think the comms have been getting steadily better over the past 4 months. It is simply VERY noticeable in TvT because it demands a much higher level of coordination. A single person on improper comms can ruin an attack.

ArmA is not a very pub friendly game. It requires a LOT of organization and cohesion. Because of this, it can be a very rewarding experience when things DO work. But also very frustrating when they don't.

Keep this in mind next time you play.

**Long Bow** · 09-12-2008, 10:11 AM

Beita your spot on about comms. They are probably the number one problem right now. If someon goes off lone wolfing on a mission, the rest can still work on the misssion just fine (all be it, annoyed). If you have a single player who only wants to talk on side channel in two squad set up, the whole team suffers.

no respawn missions. I'm feeling the persistent missions currently on vogue on TG are really dumbing down the game and I usually just quit when Dom pops up. I'd rather have a short/medium length mission with no respawns or limited revives where everyone has to work towards the same objective and not care about logistics or half an hour boat/truck rides. In fact, TG server seemed to be the most popular back when it was running almost exclusively no-respawn coops and TvTs (along with Urban Engagements, which I also dislike). The short-length missions also have the benefit of (at least slightly) renewing leadership and roles on each reassign and resetting current battle status & objectives for everyone.

I have to say that this is off the mark. Yes Domination is not a great teamwork mission. No arguments from me there. It can be played that way but has so many built in options to aid non-teamwork that it's difficult to police. However Beita has made a few new missisions that we have played of late that do in fact have respawn. No, you can't die and para drop in on your sqaud, it usually takes a good 10-30 minutes to get back with your squad. One night it took me an hour to join up with my squad. So a well designed respawn mission can play very well with a true value to your life well allowing join in progress.

**Davies** · 09-12-2008, 12:39 PM

I think it's definetly worth making death have strong consequences, such as having to trudge back to the action or even wait for a bus like delivery service from a truck or helicopter. However being out of the game completely is a consequence far too dire.

Many people, if killed will simply dissconnect rather sit around for an hour or so waiting for the mission to end. Whilst people want a realistic game, they also want to enjoy themselves. Plus, people disconnecting is bad for the server is it not? Desync, right?

In fact, having revives that involve several people being returned to battlefield at the same time by a chopper is similar to reinforcements. Real life military operations (at least large scale ones) always have guys waiting to be dropped off when needed don't they? I'm sure you've all seen We Were Soldiers; a near constant stream of soldiers was delivered by helicopters. in fact defending LZs for much needed reinfrocment could become part of the gameplay.

**Vic** · 09-12-2008, 12:45 PM

Long Bow, as I said, I'm very casual and I haven't played it often enough (neither Dom, nor Evo or Urban Engagements), so this might be a matter of personal perception, but I found all of these to become more often than not simple target practice simulators (and in the case of Dom, AT sniping). I have all the appreciation in the world for beta's or Blackdog's or other mission makers' efforts and I actually openly support one of their concepts involving limited revives done by a medic as an awesome compromise from the unforgiving no-respawn.

My point is, I'd rather take a failure as it is, enjoy the awesome spectator mode and try something new from scratch instead of keeping on retrying to conquer the enemy territory, respawn after respawn. And those 10-30 minutes of traveling might be once again a deterrent in the gameplay enjoyment, since sometimes everyone will simply hold until the respawn-ees arrive, other times they'll go on and perhaps die before reinforcements get there. (Disclaimer: I'm making assumptions in the above statement, I'm obviously not aware of the way it was actually implemented, but if it's just a long walk, I'd rather spectate)

**beita** · 09-12-2008, 01:04 PM

No respawn indeed is more realistic, but there is a simple reason why I don't use it for a majority of my missions.

It doesn't work well in TvT.

When there is no respawn, TvT tends to turn into a "match" instead of a "battle". You know EXACTLY how many enemy are left. You shoot one .. thats 18 left. Two get killed by a grenade, thats 16 left.

Not to mention team cohesion is hard enough to keep, start killing off your leaders for good (yes, leaders are USUALLY the first to die) and it will devolve into a snipe-fest or camp-fest. Pretty much every time we play a no respawn TvT, this is exactly what happens. It is not a good environment for teamwork.

I agree that most missions with respawn implement it poorly.

With a respawn system where it can take between 5-30 minutes to get back into the fight (depending on team cohesion and player skill) you will not have problems with players not valuing their lives due to respawn.

**AMosely** · 09-12-2008, 01:23 PM

I'm laughing reading all of this complaining about comms because last night hardly anyone was even using comms. I'm all for keeping things quiet during missions and once fireteams or groups are established, but standing around the airbase the only way to get things organized is to broadcast the comms. Even taking this approach (which I did, by default, last night) I still found at least two small groups of people running off in the field without ANY communication on a group channel - and it wasn't just new guys. One particularly perky self-assigned team went ahead and hit the objective without any group/team/side chat. Great - so if the comms aren't working the way you want them to, just do your own thing.

I'm fine with the disorganization the comes with a pub server and helping new players get aquainted to the structure, but when I see veteran players bucking the system like I did last night it really ticks me off. Either participate (use the comms) or step up and lead. Forming a clique of two or three guys and using direct comms, not communicating to anyone is not SOP and it's not cool.

**tHa_KhAn** · 09-12-2008, 01:42 PM

I personally enjoy the persistent open missions like Evolution, Warfare, and domination. Domination feels more like a string of coops than the others, but I do agree the issue with them in an open server environment creates team nightmares with noobs and pubbies. These missions require discipline and IMHO are much more immersing than any other missions because of not needing loading breaks and the fact that there are other battles or movement occurring on the server at the same time as the current obj. With Evo and Warfare there is also the freedom to choose objectives(requires discipline though).

Every so often a thread like this creeps up and there is not a blanket solution. We could follow other group models and use a much more strict and structured mission playing schedule or we can get people stepping up and at least reporting in detail to the admins what happens on a daily basis. There is nothing that can be done for those folks that randomly join once, but if there are individuals that consistently bring down the level of play we want to know.

**MrPerea** · 09-12-2008, 02:23 PM

There was a breakdown last night again while playing domination.

I led a squad of about 6 or 7 guys all looking for team play on a side mission, as we were approaching to get a view of the enemy tanks, someone went solo into the town from the other side and died. Thus making all the AI go into alert, then all hell broke loose.

I had brought a newcomer into the server last night. He was looking forward to joining me in the tactical game play. He would have been a great member, but he left due the way the server was being played.

I asked him why he left, he said it was Pure Chaos. He said watching people trying to lead was the equivalent of watching people trying to herd cats.

**Sector_15504** · 09-12-2008, 02:26 PM

my standard belief is that if you dont like the gameplay that the server is enforcing, go find another server, thats why I play here. A few things i may have been mean to new players or pubbers showing up, but i like to play here because of the way the server is run and how people play together, comms and such....

but sometimes there is no way around comms.... I am no role model (sometimes i forget what channel im on) but the biggest cause of the problem ive come across (with me being the problem) is that i am not in the squad, im a medic or engineer in a different squad and I see something that is a direct threat to the whole team, i dont have the time to run over to the other squad putting my life in jeopardy to alert you guys of an incoming piece of Armour. In that case, i feel it is necessary for me to alert that squad via side channel because it is for THEIR life more then mine. If i was in their squad, i would of course use group channel....

another example: TvT on Corazol Chokepoint, I was an engineer in the PL squad, not the main squad and I was defending a house (after i blatantly ignored command order, sorry again beta for that, dont know why i did that) and I saw an RPG on someone's back without seeing their camo or body. I could not use group to talk to the squad, and IF it was OpFor, he was in the cap zone and in threat to the team defending the zone, So i had to, okay maybe i went a bit over the top, but i.....yelled.... over Side Channel to see if it was friendly or hostile. I was about to breach the room and shoot whoever it was when they came back over comms and said, "It's me!". Understandingly, beta was not too happy and i was cursed at yet again, and said next time use side chat. But i felt it was needed to alert the whole team that there was possibly a hostile, and if I didnt react then and there, someone could have died, and result in less people defending an already heavily attacked area while enemy around us.

To wrap it up, im sorry if im annoying over side channel sometimes, i only use it when im SL, FTL, or PL.... but when i am in another squad, and i need to find something out NOW (A.K.A. enemy with an RPG on their back or is it friendly who picked one up?) or alert another squad of danger close to them, I find it necessary to use side comms as a squad member to alert people not in my squad, or another squad i am not in ***ONLY IN EMERGENCY SITUATIONS*** (most of the time, random crap i keep in side chat..)

Yet, even using only that, it can cause clutter on side channel, but sometimes it is needed for the welfare of the team because i wont have time to type out, "Hey, does anyone have an RPG on their back in the house on the 2nd story? Speak up or your going to die."

But overall i agree, side is only for leaders...

/my 2 cents on side channel use

**Jeepo** · 09-12-2008, 02:28 PM

Originally Posted by Mr Perea

There was a breakdown last night again while playing domination.

I led a squad of about 6 or 7 guys all looking for team play on a side mission, as we were approaching to get a view of the enemy tanks, someone went solo into the town from the other side and died. Thus making all the AI go into alert, then all hell broke loose.

I had brought a newcomer into the server last night. He was looking forward to joining me in the tactical game play. He would have been a great member, but he left due the way the server was being played.

I asked him why he left, he said it was Pure Chaos. He said watching people trying to lead was the equivalent of watching people trying to herd cats.

Next time mate, get his name and his player id and do not hesitate to jump on TS or send any of the Admins a PM. However, the best way to deal with it is i the contact an admin sub forum that goes out to all admins, and someone will get to you quickly. The only was we can stop this behaviour is with the help of you guys. I am always logged into TG, so when i get a PM it pops up on my phone, and i can deal with it then and there. What server was he on? And what time?

**tHa_KhAn** · 09-12-2008, 03:45 PM

Originally Posted by Jeepo_SAS

Next time mate, get his name and his player id and do not hesitate to jump on TS or send any of the Admins a PM. However, the best way to deal with it is i the contact an admin sub forum that goes out to all admins, and someone will get to you quickly. The only was we can stop this behaviour is with the help of you guys. I am always logged into TG, so when i get a PM it pops up on my phone, and i can deal with it then and there. What server was he on? And what time?

Also, don't be afraid to get us out of other channels. Sometimes I'm in the 12th or BF2 channel and I have no problems pausing to address the issue.

**ironpants** · 09-12-2008, 05:11 PM

Excellent points fuzzhead. Comms SOP must be enforced, and that takes a communal effort on everyone's part.

I like the squad assignment SOP - we should try it!

Lonewolfing becomes a problem when there is no clear command structure and when comms SOP are not followed. Even in missions that otherwise facilitate lonewolfing (domination), it can be avoided by enforcing both
a) Squad assignment SOP, so chain of command keeps control of everyone and
b) Comms SOP.

As you point out, good tvt missions are impossible without these - but I've only seen it get ugly chaotic on server 1; most recently the corazol chokepoint(?) game where we had a commander but no squad or fireteam leaders. It was a disorganized gaggle of infantry randomly spreading through town. Surprise, we lost.

**fuzzhead** · 09-12-2008, 06:48 PM

Originally Posted by Long Bow

Good post and hopefully the newer players here can gain something from it?

Thanks for the positive feedback so far, but this thread wasnt just meant as a helpful reminder to new players or veterans. The objective of this thread was hoping to initiate a discussion so at the end result, SOP's on TG can be adopted, changed and added to. I'm not an admin (or even supporting member at TG) but I enjoy the community and want to bring up issues that I feel need to be addressed, which I have not seen being openly talked about on these forums.

I feel right now, there simply is no common SOP's being followed on the TG ArmA server. That means Standard Operating Procedures. Procedures that would be followed every time you log in to the TG ArmA server. Procedures seem to vary widely on which admins are present, who is the current platoon leader at the time, and what mission is being played. Although I think things should be fairly flexible (players dont always want to be very serious all the time) I feel that when a mission IS being played in a serious manner, some kind of standard is kept. I dont see that happening right now.

So thats why I brought this up. If its the consensus by the admins/players that TG does not need so tight SOP's, then perhaps consider renaming them simply to "guidelines that should be followed occasionally". I hope thats not the case though and I think alot of players would really enjoy a more organized server (esp in areas of mission assignment / comms / chain of command).

I'd really like to hear thoughts from Grunt, Blackdog, Gogeta, Bamboo, and any of the other regular admins and player leadership of this community about the new SOP proposals I made in the first post.

As well I would like to hear their opinions on the current state of SOP's being followed right now on the TG server. I'm a relative new comer to this community so maybe my view point is completely off base.

**fuzzhead** · 09-13-2008, 03:19 AM

some other things to consider as SOP's:

Join In Progress Players - Filling Squads SOP

When joining a mission that is already in progress, please choose the team with less players on it. Do not all stack onto one team.

When selecting a role to play, please fill the needed roles first. Do not just take whatever kit you feel best at, fill up the squads that have squad leaders in them. Do not start your own squad unless the other squads have sufficient members in them.

For Example: If Alpha squad has 7 members, Bravo squad has 4 members and Javelin team has 1 member, joining the javelin team would make sense since they would need a hand since they only got 1 guy.

Dead Player Communication SOP

When a player dies, they should not give any information away to live players. If a player dies on a respawn mission, he should not say "Im Dead". He should wait until someone tries to contact him before announcing that he is back at mainbase. He should NOT divulge information about the enemy positions to players that are still inside the combat area, this would be considered cheating IMO. Once back at the HQ (spawn zone) you should be free to talk about enemy positions etc to anyone that is back at HQ with you, but do NOT talk to players still inside the combat zone about enemy positions after you died.

**jex** · 09-13-2008, 06:42 AM

In domination we should start using the join group option and make sure we start working in fireteams. We used it last night successfully.

Agreed about dead men not talking.

Thread Tools

Display