Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

MHQ's

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • MHQ's

    Thought I would throw this one out there! Ever since we could "spawn" from MHQ's I have disliked the idea. I dont quite understand why, when everything else is geared to be as much of a combat sim as possible, why we have this magical "Star Trek" form of transport!

    Personally I would like to see TG ban the use of MHQ's and instead rely on Helo's and Parajumping?

    Anyone else have thoughts on this??
    BlackDog1




    "What we do in life... echoes in eternity!"

  • #2
    Re: MHQ's

    We do this and all thats gonna happen is someone is gonna take the helos for a ride on their own and leave it at some stupid position where it's off no use to anyone else. They may not happen all the time but I would prefer to keep the helos at base and use them in a support role like they are designed for. Speaking of magical things you think respawn isn't about magical as well, we have the MHQ's to make things a little easier on people getting back into action, noone wants to travel across half the map to get to a fight that is just ending. MHQs may not be the most realistic thing out there but there the best we got for now.

    My name: Adept a skilled or proficient person Abyss a deep, immeasurable space, gulf, or cavity
    So I'm a very skilled deep hole :D

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: MHQ's

      I am not a fan of most respawn missions to begin with. But that being said, the mobile respawn on Domination is not that bad, all things considered. What I have noticed is it allows for players to join while the game is in progress and get to the front quickly. This allows for more gaming time as well as what Adept covered above. With most missions, you will see vehicles scattered everywhere across the map with no hope of recovery unless you dedicate hours to it. That is not fun and I will ban people if I catch it, but it does happen.

      The mobile respawn also allows for a central command position as well. When people leave the main base, people have this natural tendency to scatter. With a mobile CP, there tends to be less free lancing going on. Mainly because there is no excuse to be with your team from the second you join the sever.

      As for Halo jumping, when I need a laugh I grab some popcorn and watch these bodies hurl towards the ground at terminal velocity and burn in!! The art of para jumping is difficult and it does not always work as planned. It scatters people around, it kills them and causes frustration.

      Don't get wrapped up in the idea of teleporting and think of the CP more as the "starting point". It is simply where you should start at. I donít think the option for using it more than once in the length of your life should be allowed, but the script creator made it that way, soÖ
      "The chief foundations of all states, new as well as old or composite, are good laws and good arms; and as there cannot be good laws where the state is not well armed, it follows that where they are well armed they have good laws." -Machiavelli

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: MHQ's

        C's got a good point about getting people up to speed while the game is in progress. I think this is a key element for a persistent mission like Domination.

        Even though I'm loving it every night there's no rule that says we have to play Domination every time we fire up ARMA. The other TG server has many many cool coop and player vs. player missions loaded up. Server admin can select many server side options to optimize the mission, including setting the server to hard core mode or disabling respawns if so desired. The level of player and gameplay has really been good these last two or three weeks since I've returned and I can certainly see the current group of ARMA regulars undertaking coop missions in a manner that will reward all of us. Just give a shout out to the group during one of our upcoming Domination sessions and see who wants to do it. I'll join you in a heartbeat. I love small unit no respawn coop action.
        sigpic
        |TG-1st|Grunt
        ARMA Admin (retired)
        Pathfinder-Spartan 5

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: MHQ's

          (Sorry not gonna read all the posts due to time)

          Personally just think their should be a way to either transport everyone or a group of people by parachuting into a location near target or just blackhawk everyone in.. I hate seeing no one using teamwork and just working on the problem as singles instead of a unit.
          "A Veteran is someone who , at one point in their life, wrote a blank check made payable to
          'The United states of America' for an amount of 'upto and including my life'. That is honor, and there are way to many people in this country who no longer understand it."-Author Unknown

          "I got kicked out of barnes and noble once for moving all the bibles into the fiction section" -Any.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: MHQ's

            Originally posted by TheBigC View Post
            As for Halo jumping, when I need a laugh I grab some popcorn and watch these bodies hurl towards the ground at terminal velocity and burn in!! The art of para jumping is difficult and it does not always work as planned. It scatters people around, it kills them and causes frustration.
            I've gotten the hang of parajumping. :P Just deploy your parachute at the right altitude if you don't want to have your parachute disappear on you just 50 feet above the ground, or end up becoming a smoking crater without any parachute deployment.

            Honestly, sometimes it's really fun to do parajumps because you can land in the middle of a hostile city and still be able to evade getting killed on sight.
            Hey guys, this is a public service announcement from NKato. I am Deaf, so when the helo goes down, you're best off typing "AAAAAAAAIIIEEEEE!!!" instead of attempting to scream it. Thanks!

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: MHQ's

              small unit no respawn coop action > all.


              But to stay on topic im not either too fond of the MHQs...id rather always have some sort of air transport taxiing between base and the frontline...in a more realistic manner...plus you know you might have to wait before reinforcement gets there...making you think twice about switching your cover or running to another point.



              -- I always wanted TG to be different than anyone else out there. We need to be unique in what we offer and how we play, if not we are simply competing with everyone else. --
              The BigC

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: MHQ's

                I think what I meant was with regards to Domination. We are using MHQ's less and less, as all of us Parajump pretty well now.

                I am not sure I fully agree Adept, as the Parajump at base is a perfectly quick way to jump to where everyone else is and following on from the point about using the MHQ as a "rally" point, that is no different to people spawning at our base! Also, the UH60's are predominantly meant to be used to fly troops in and out of Hot zones, with the occasional vehicle lift as required like the wreck helo.

                I believe having everyone jumping onto a drop zone clearly marked on the map, provides a good challenge. Personally I think the MHQ as Xmaster says, encourages people to be a little more reckless as hey presto in 10 seconds you are pretty much exactly in the same spot.

                I have not seen anyone really leaving the helo's around the island, and besides they respawn anyway, or someone jumps to that location and collects it.

                I guess my pont is this, when there are parajump flags and infil/evac helo's flying taxi service, people have plenty of choice to:
                A: Ride the helo to the war zone or
                B: Check the map, arm up with gear and jump into the action.

                Also having to call in an ammo crate or again having a Blackhawk coming into a hot zone to drop ammo, gives people a team coordination whereby teamwork states when and where and ammo crate shoul be ordered. With the MHQ you often end up with an Ammo crate fest!

                Having to wait for an ammo crate or air support I believe is a nice element to the game that really isnt any different to the real world (Remembers sitting in the freezing rain on a Welsh mountainside for 3 hours for an ammo drop, only to have the idiot noob RAF pilot in the Puma drop the ammo box off about 5 clicks from our position and he wondered why we were not at the LZ waving him in!! Muppet!)

                So, personally I still dont really see why we need them.
                BlackDog1




                "What we do in life... echoes in eternity!"

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: MHQ's

                  @Grunt:
                  I tottaly agree with you.

                  I would love to play some nice coop missions and TvT, besides domination.

                  I think there is a fine group gathering for that, and maybe it would make people start building more missions of their own (for example giving i try to the new beta's mission and improve it).

                  @Blackdog:

                  I share your view also, i like to be heli inserted and start the action that way.

                  This would even make people use more of the veichles we capture, having a armored division playing side by side with the infantary would be great. This is why i think, that having smaller groups (5 people for example) would improve that kind of gameplay.

                  We could even have a group of pilots, that after the insertions would give air support and stay in that role if they agree. I really like to play missions that give emphasis to the roles you pick up in the begin.
                  sigpic

                  PR BF2 Alias: NewOrder_JoyDivision

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: MHQ's

                    I also would join in Grunt with the missions you suggest. If only to be able to play with a sound mod on server 1 :)


                    Now to the main topic: I have a mixed feeling on the topic. I look at it two ways.

                    First with the mobile HQ you have to actually have someone physically drive the vehicle to the front line. Pick a good spot all the while being aware of any air assets that may engage you. This also means the team is relying on each other to bring the HQ in safely and it takes some time to do well.

                    The para drop option requires no team work, anyone can drop where they please with no regard for their team. If it had a wave spawn option that would eliminate some of this.

                    ____________________________

                    Now the flip side: Once the mobile HQ is in place it is a safe, quick, easy way to spawn. You have the option for unlimited equipment and supplies all at the front line. Once in place the team work required is gone. It is a quick stream of troops pouring out.

                    With the para option you have allot to calculate. You need to know where the team is dropping or your on your own (it lacks the centralised MHQ scenario). You have the risk of opening to late/soon, dropping over water or into a bad spot. If you drop to close to the action your dead or under fire. Equipment load out is more important as you have to rely on a lengthy delay to aquire more or different equipment/ammo. It allows you to get back into the action quickly but has many variables that come with it.

                    ____________________________

                    Overall I think the option of both is a bit much. I feel that it gives us to many options and removes some of the tension in ArmA. I would like it if we had one or the other in place for Domination. That way you can still jump in and play but you don't have it as easy as we do now. I don't want to turn Domination into a lengthy affair as I don't think the mid week puby games should be that way. They are a "quick-fix" of ArmA I think (quick in ArmA is relative of course :row__593: Good topic and I will be happy no matter what changes with the spawns. :)

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: MHQ's

                      In Evo we didn't have mobile respawn points and had to rely on chopper pilots. Trouble there is that when there's only a few of you on, that's not very practical. Paradrops aren't much removed from the mobile spawn - all that is different is a fall out the sky - we're still teleporting across the map.

                      Personally I hate respawns of any kind (including revive scripts) as a mission shouldn't be so ridiculously hard to require them. Domination is a completely unrealistic situation because you don't send 6 guys to take on 4 or 5 squads plus 10 pieces of armour. Unrealistic situations call for unrealistic measures. I would prefer a helo insert but for reasons stated above it's not vert practical so the Paradrop or MHQ works instead.

                      Additional: What would be good is that if the towns could be scaled to the player count. So instead of ridiculous odds, something a little more realistic could be acheived. That way we may not even need respawns.
                      Jex.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: MHQ's

                        Good point Jex, total realism doesn't work in game. You have to balance out things sometimes to deal with what the game offers.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: MHQ's

                          Originally posted by Blackdog1-22 Reg.SAS View Post
                          I dont quite understand why, when everything else is geared to be as much of a combat sim as possible, why we have this magical "Star Trek" form of transport!
                          Versus clicking a spot on the map and being magically teleported 600 meters in the air?

                          It is a sim. Think of the MHQ as simulating a Forward Operations Base and plan to use it accordingly.

                          At the end of the day, no one is forcing people to use it. Everyone can HALO to their heart's content.

                          Originally posted by Grunt 70 View Post
                          C's got a good point about getting people up to speed while the game is in progress. I think this is a key element for a persistent mission like Domination.

                          Even though I'm loving it every night there's no rule that says we have to play Domination every time we fire up ARMA. The other TG server has many many cool coop and player vs. player missions loaded up. Server admin can select many server side options to optimize the mission, including setting the server to hard core mode or disabling respawns if so desired. The level of player and gameplay has really been good these last two or three weeks since I've returned and I can certainly see the current group of ARMA regulars undertaking coop missions in a manner that will reward all of us. Just give a shout out to the group during one of our upcoming Domination sessions and see who wants to do it. I'll join you in a heartbeat. I love small unit no respawn coop action.
                          QFT.

                          Originally posted by Long Bow View Post
                          Overall I think the option of both is a bit much. I feel that it gives us to many options and removes some of the tension in ArmA. I would like it if we had one or the other in place for Domination. That way you can still jump in and play but you don't have it as easy as we do now. I don't want to turn Domination into a lengthy affair as I don't think the mid week puby games should be that way. They are a "quick-fix" of ArmA I think (quick in ArmA is relative of course :row__593: Good topic and I will be happy no matter what changes with the spawns. :)
                          What removes tension in ArmA is respawns period. Removing the MHQ, may slow down peoples "deaths/hour" but won't improve the general gameplay. Domination is what it is.

                          In the end, what's the fuss? If there are 9 people on the server (this is the passworded server too), all supposedly coordinating with each other and playing the TG way, all the leader has to do is set the plan to HALO if that's what's desired, or plan to insert an MHQ. Insisting that people rally at a point after they respawn in order to group up to avoid the conga-line-o-death is also a good way to avoid people throwing themselves into the meat grinder

                          It's not like there are 50 pubbies on the server pouring out of the back of the two MHQ's running rampant on the map.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: MHQ's

                            (Remembers sitting in the freezing rain on a Welsh mountainside for 3 hours for an ammo drop, only to have the idiot noob RAF pilot in the Puma drop the ammo box off about 5 clicks from our position and he wondered why we were not at the LZ waving him in!! Muppet!)
                            Hey! Sounds like the ArmA AI pilots ...


                            I used to be in the "always have respawn" camp, but after trying out various missions (and making some), I am now firmly in the "no respawn" camp. I totally agree that if the mission requires you to respawn, you are expecting too much from the players.

                            I also understand WHY (I think) most players prefer a respawn situation. I'm sure EVERYONE who has played one of the SimHQ missions will agree, dying at the beginning just plain sucks. Or, anyone who has played some of the no respawn TvT's .. waiting for the last 2 players to kill each other by hiding in bushes sucks even more.

                            Some properly designed missions would greatly relieve the boredom of dying .. for example a simple solution: if 2/3rds of the players have died ... game over.

                            Another problem is the inherent lethality of the game. Ever try to seriously play in some ground armour? It's a 50/50 chance that you are going to die on contact with the enemy, you either get lucky and hit them first, or you don't. So, if you mix the two (armour and infantry), you are going to get some boredom as the infantry will play more cautiously because they aren't in a tank.

                            I personally like revive, it allows for a reasonably realistic situation but still keeps the players interested, anything more "hardcore" and the public at large will get bored very quickly.


                            I'm not complaining with this but ... it is kind of hard to learn how to make missions when no one plays them ... the last 3 weeks has been straight domination. 3 months ago, when I was trying my hand at a TvT mission, it was played a grand total of 4 times and there was very little constructive criticism .. just "needs more choppers" or "i dont like waiting when i die".

                            I am perfectly willing to design and test missions .. but I can't do that myself.

                            If the community here truly wants to play realistic, achievable, no respawn COOP (or TvT), then we need to start playing them! I currently have NO idea how many AI I should put up against the players ... too few and it becomes too simplistic and easy, too many and people get frustrated.

                            I would very much prefer making only no respawn missions ... not only are they easier to make, they are more easily made realistic and they force the player into a position where they have a fear for their virtual lives, so things like suppression and artillery or tanks have a serious effect on their "morale".

                            I dislike missions like Evolution or Domination simply because everything is so simple ... get a sniper rifle, get a javelin, go to nearest high ground, shoot at anything until you are dead, then do it all over again. You CAN use tactics and "force" yourself to limit your equipment or means of transportation .. but that RARELY happens and you can't expect it to, if it is there, players will use it.

                            I've seen the phrase "small unit coop" thrown around in this thread a few times but ... what do you actually mean by this? Destroying convoys? Special forces behind enemy lines stuff? Small infantry engagements?

                            I find it hard to think up simple to design, balanced, repeatable and fun scenarios for less than 20 players. If ANYONE has any ideas on that, POST THEM. The hardest part of mission making (for me) is to make the idea behind the mission.


                            Well ... that's my rant for today ... it's too damn hot. :)
                            Last edited by beita; 07-17-2008, 04:59 PM. Reason: Bad grammar ..

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: MHQ's

                              Originally posted by beita View Post
                              Another problem is the inherent lethality of the game. Ever try to seriously play in some ground armour? It's a 50/50 chance that you are going to die on contact with the enemy, you either get lucky and hit them first, or you don't. So, if you mix the two (armour and infantry), you are going to get some boredom as the infantry will play more cautiously because they aren't in a tank.........

                              I'm not complaining with this but ... it is kind of hard to learn how to make missions when no one plays them ... the last 3 weeks has been straight domination. 3 months ago, when I was trying my hand at a TvT mission, it was played a grand total of 4 times and there was very little constructive criticism .. just "needs more choppers" or "i dont like waiting when i die".
                              Being a sim, it's not totally unreasonable to play cautiously and protect your assets. Sure, there are some pretty goofy game elements, but generally good tactics/operational procedures will win out. Most of the time when you get wiped out in ArmA it's because squads get sloppy, not maintaining 360 degree security, or just moving too fast to begin with.

                              You can always force a side to be not so cautious through mission design. i.e. diffuse the bomb, capture a leader before they depart a location, race to a crash site to retrieve intelligence, rescue hostages before they are executed, etc.

                              BTW, we were going to give your mission a try last night, but couldn't cause it's not pbo'd (sry, no mission editor on our dedicated server).

                              I've seen the phrase "small unit coop" thrown around in this thread a few times but ... what do you actually mean by this? Destroying convoys? Special forces behind enemy lines stuff? Small infantry engagements?
                              Stuff like this is fun.

                              Comment

                              Connect

                              Collapse

                              TeamSpeak 3 Server

                              Collapse

                              Advertisement

                              Collapse

                              Twitter Feed

                              Collapse

                              Working...
                              X