Lyric

17 minutes ago, InfamousNova said:

no the AI will be dumber because the low server FPS

What the AI difficulty set at currently? Because even with decent server FPS they seem pretty brain dead.

51 minutes ago, BloodFloodBros said:

I recently watched a PsySin video and was introduced to a BattleRoyale game mode. I was wondering if Straya should start one. They would need a player base to launch the sever though.. Who would be down for that? @Pezza @Connor @DJ_JoozBrorg Lets get this started!

I'd be keen to play, though I doubt there'd be a big enough player base for this with PUBG and other similar games around.

3 hours ago, CrPeregrine said:

Increasing the number of AI that are in the 'clear X' radius, especially in buildings and other places- such as churches and outlying sheds. this is coming from a side mission that myself and a group of others did that had -to me- a higher than normal count of AI stationed in the buildings, making the experience of clearing the town a lot more enjoyable and tense as we didn't know what to expect

I agree, the amount of AI inside building should be increased, not only because it's more entertaining and challenging; but because it would increase the amount of AI that Ironside doesn't wipe out. Meaning more kills and entertainment for infantry players.

3 hours ago, Ishmael said:

The AI scales with how many players are on the server doesn't it? I'm not 100% sure. 

 I'm pretty sure that you're correct in assuming that. 

3 hours ago, Ishmael said:

Battles in towns can be really good it just depends on the AO, it would be cool tho seeing strong points in towns, squad of EI inside of a main building of a town, windows blocked, sandbags, IEDs along roads, ect.  

I think IEDs would be a great implementation, it would create a more hostile feeling environment and actually give engineers a job.  

-

I would like to suggest more fortified AI positions (not only in towns) as in randomly placed bunkers/entrenchments (maybe with a static HMG or something) manned by one squad. Having these dotted around would increase the amount of 'mini objectives' for the players to clear etc.

1 hour ago, Dogofwar said:

Seal team operations and use of more of those lovely boats what else could anyone want

Maybe places to land and to bring their big boy tanks.

I think it would be a great idea, I love fighting and flying during the night. 

On 11/1/2017 at 2:04 AM, M9' said:

it can also be a pain as it is more difficult to discern friend from foe. 

Though I personally disagree with this statement, I've introduced enough people to Arma 3 that it's clear this may become a major issue for new players. 

Disregarding the newer players and frame-rate issues, it's simply a matter of personal preference and honestly most people prefer the day.

27 minutes ago, Chow Muhammad said:

only if the server was FP

The amount of people that would get triggered would be insane. 

So much pre-firing o.o

2 minutes ago, InfamousNova said:

we removed the CSAT clothing because there was a high amount of teamkilling

I believe he's suggesting you switch the player team to CSAT and the AI to NATO.

1 hour ago, Ishmael said:

I don't know how many would like this idea but it's just that an idea, switching sides from a NATO invasion/liberation however you look at it, into a CSAT force. 

It's main point of interest for me would be the other weapon systems we could use, from the cars and light armour to the already used T-100/Kumas, CAS aswell switching from NATO jets to CSAT, just could be used to play around with the other half of the game alittle more often.  

As it is currently the only aspects of CSAT we can't use is the uniforms. From time to time we get CSAT vehicles from side mission rewards (And as CAS/AA). For the amount of work the admins would have to do, I think it's fine how it is.

But it's an interesting suggestion none the less.

As someone who plays as a pilot 98% of the time I'm online, I agree with this idea. Using the same flight pattern for the entire AO gets rather boring (especially on the longer flights) having a FOB to go to instead would help this situation. 

It'll be generally good for the FOB to get some more attention as I believe it's a highly underrated aspect of I&A.

1 minute ago, nclem said:

Staff use other programs to communicate, some aren't in teamspeak but can still be reached and take action if you need it. 

Support team members also have access to these programs and can get staff onto teamspeak if required. 

True in some cases, I'm not saying it's a bad approach to the situation at all. Just reporting it in the forums seems easier and more fluid to me.  

2 minutes ago, nclem said:

Failing that, a support team member in helpdesk can also contact higher up staff to try and deal with the issue.

 

@Fitz What's your take on the matter?

The issue with that statement is; if there's not admin on currently for I&A, a support team member can't do much until someone with admin permissions on I&A is on Teamspeak. Which contradicts the point of this post; how to deal with an issue if no admins are online.

I've noticed this too, though I find the easiest way to deal with this is recording the incident (Or take screenshots) and submitting a ban report through the support page.(https://strayagaming.com.au/support/)

As far as I can tell it's usually dealt within 24 hours.