Warlords

[Jezuro 452]

Yeah ammo trucks have basically unlimited supply, that is something that should be looked at...

[CaptainDawson 93]

@Jezuro, I want to say that I appreciate the attempts to fix the problems in Warlords, and I hope that eventually a solution can be reached. The Anti-Griefing measures seem to be relatively successful so far, albeit with the downside that I have been getting mistakenly banned much more often. Please take a moment to see some examples of why I think the meta needs to be changed. Currently, certain experienced players are taking advantage of certain tactics that in my opinion are very unfair.

 

From my experience with Warlords after the recent update, it is still incredibly unbalanced. Increasing the Rhino/Ammo Truck combo cost to nearly as much as the Nephron and Wipeout does not fix the root of the issue. The issue is certain players abusing spammy techniques and unrealistic tactics which should not be possible in the game. People complain about the "Rhino spam" as if there is no comparative Opfor spamming. There are just as many overpowered and unrealistic OPFOR tactics as there are for Blufor. Allow me to explain my reasoning:

 

I give you 2 examples from a game just yesterday: 

Example #1. A T-140K sits with his ammo truck peeking over a hill far away from the AO, raining 120 and 30mm cannon fire on every thermal signature in Telos, PowerPlant, and Anthrakia. The tank is FAR outside Blufor's territory, beyond Titan locking distance, and if a player gets a lucky hit, he just rolls back 20 meters out of sight, buys a repair truck, then comes right on back. Bringing Slammer tanks against the T-140 in this situation is hopeless, when the Angara can disengage at ANY time to repair all damage in LITERALLY 5 seconds outside the line of fire, while the NATO vehicles are caught in the open and disabled in 1 or 2 hits. Cannot flank him when we are on the narrow part of the island and Opfor dominates the skies. Never mind the fact that 95% of Blufor players will never even see him since he has almost no thermal signature when he is sitting with his engine is off, and he can move behind the hill and hide at any time. It would essentially require a drone to see at that kind of distance, and I did not even find him until I did so. I countered this with a Rhino. In this situation, which happens quite often, what other tactic could I have used to quickly eliminate this single tank which was denying Blufor the ability to capture Anthrakia?

 

Example #2. A SINGLE OPFOR PLAYER flies to the island near AAC, spawns a TIGRIS and AMMO TRUCK, and mows down every plane, vehicle, and player that spawns at AAC. The Tigris in this situation has UNLIMITED OVERWHELMING firepower and complete control over the ONLY airport Blufor has access to for the majority of, if not the ENTIRE game. Players spawning at AAC are lightly armed as they are expecting to only spawn a plane and then leave. The only way the Tigris spammer can be removed under normal circumstances is for Blufor to launch a coordinated assault on him with several players. How do we counter this threat? Teammates at AAC cannot spawn any vehicles, as they can be destroyed out of their parachutes with the Opfor player's titan launcher. I could try to coordinate with my team, who is 75% noobs, 20% actually helping the team but without a microphone, and 5% teamkillers. Or, I can launch another drone, lock onto the camper with a laser, and destroy the player's Tigris with my Rhino. Shortly after I did so, said camper whines in Global about me using the Rhino, despite the fact that just seconds ago, he had been mowing down the players and aircraft spawning at AAC uncontested. Certain Opfor players had been consistently using said spam tactics the whole time I had been grinding to save up 10K to get a Rhino and Truck.

 

Example #3. Last but certainly not least, Opfor has the obvious airpower advantage of having, Molos, Selekano, AND Almyra airbases, while NATO can be denied the use of ALL aircraft by ONE player spamming AAC. Don't forget the fact that the Shikra has more AA missiles than the Blackwasp, or that the Xi-an can utterly demolish any ground force with impunity in the hands of an experienced player. The Rhino is spammy in the hands of a knowledgeable player. But the Rhino is also quite literally the SINGLE defense of Blufor in the face of Opfor spam tactics.

 

My opinion is that a lot of problems would be solved by shortening the game. I rarely see a game completed without stagnating first. The team that is winning often turns into the team with the most players. Now that players are prevented from joining a team with a player advantage with the team balance parameter, the games will likely run even longer.

 

Ultimately, what I think will solve the problem is

1. FORCE players to vary their tactics by moving the Blufor/Opfor bases and reassessing the sector locations and costs,

2. Prevent players from singlehandedly disrupting their entire offensive by spawning tanks/AA far behind enemy lines or camping player/vehicle spawns.

3. REDUCE costs of Rhino, Ammo, and Repair, but INCREASE the repair/rearm time and LIMIT the number of uses.

[Jezuro 452]

Thanks for the report. I will definitely take the points into consideration.

 

If you have the time, please try other islands as well. Basically all the feedback I'm getting is from Altis. Does Malden or Stratis suffer from similar problems, would you say?

[CaptainDawson 93]

3 hours ago, Jezuro said:

Thanks for the report. I will definitely take the points into consideration.

 

If you have the time, please try other islands as well. Basically all the feedback I'm getting is from Altis. Does Malden or Stratis suffer from similar problems, would you say?

 

I'd love to play them, but I rarely see more than 10 players using Malden or Stratis Warlords. I think that's why all the feedback is on Altis. Possible suggestion: Could you make a 48 or 64 player Malden or even Stratis scenario? That would change things up a bit and bring things back to more intimate PVP instead of long range vehicle use. Rhino, aircraft, and other vehicles would be less spammy in a smaller area of operations with a higher density of players! I believe if we had a 48 or 64 player Malden or Stratis scenario, we would have more players trying them. I think when players log in, they see the server with the highest player count and join it, and that's almost always Altis. Many of the servers including Altis suffer from high player turnover, and in this scenario the smaller maps would seem to be better suited to Arma's great close-in infantry and tactical fighting. I know for a fact that the smaller Warlords maps run MUCH better in terms of framerate. I love Malden, and I think it is the best suited to Warlords. But I cannot find enough players to play with on it 😞 It is just not as fun to play when there are only 5 or 6 players on.

 

If I find one populated I will be sure to try it again and report back!

 

One more thing, we cannot tell the map being used when we look at the server list. We have the player number which helps us make a guess, but if we had the name of the map being used in the Warlords server list, maybe more would like to try an alternate map than Altis. I almost never see a Malden or Stratis Warlords running with players anymore, and until recently, I have been playing Warlords a lot.

 

Edit: currently the only Malden running has only 4 players, while there are 4 Altis scenarios running with many players.

[Anthony Mackiw 0]

What you are advancing are all the problems already solved at BECTI that have been solved in 10 years of development.

 

the warlord is a big step back with all the problems that come with it.

 

The fixed bases are a big mistake, because it creates an imbalance and kills the strategy, it is true that this mission is very arcade.

 

But responds to the new community, which is why BIS to remove the warfare.

 

With the new upgrade i have drop frame !

 

 

Players do not play on other islands .Atlis atlis !!!!

 

[CaptainDawson 93]

Ok, @Jezuro I went and played a Malden Warlords today. It was actually funner and ran more smoothly than many of the Altis scenarios I've played, but as usual, it suffered from a low player count. There were only 2 Blufor and 1 Opfor when I joined. Players began to join both sides, but then a problem started to happen.

 

There is a pretty significant problem with the "Team Balance Parameter": This particular game was fairly even, until some Opfor players started to leave more often than Blufor players. They weren't salty or losing, they just had to leave. The Team Balance Parameter prevented more players from joining Blufor since they now had more players than Opfor. But it DID NOT of course prevent Opfor players from leaving. You see where I'm going with this? The new joining players didn't want to join Opfor because they were now at a significant player disadvantage. They couldn't join Blufor either, so they just left the server! Slowly but surely the total number of players started to decrease. But because no new players would join the server, the player count could only DECREASE. Since there were already not enough players, Blufor began to turn the tide, and before we knew it every single Opfor player had left, and we were left with just 5 Blufor players. Arguably, the balance was even WORSE than if the players had been allowed to join Blufor, because if the server player count increased, perhaps more OPFOR players would have been willing to join in the first place! If the total player number is too low, many players not join no matter what the situation is.

 

Honestly, balancing teams by player numbers can't fully solve the problem. I've seen plenty of Altis servers where Blufor had a more than 10 player advantage and were still LOSING. Why? Because one player using a spammy tactic or exploit (such as the camping tactics I mentioned earlier), that player can become the tactical equivalent to 20 enemy players.

[crs24 33]

Typed this up over a while so it’s a bit long.

 

Biggest issue with trying other islands is as said lack of server population. I wouldn’t mind seeing a full map version of Tanoa on top of the other whole island missions if possible even if it can’t have ai in player slots due to lack of land connections, but it doesn’t matter if no one plays them. Like for things with Malden I can see just from looking at the map and stratis as well somebodies always gonna be closer to an airfield, but there’s only currently one active runway on those 2 maps and theres a couple separate helicopter call in locations.

 

Some of these issues on altis like the t140 camping I think only pop up noticeably with an increased max view distance, the rhino doesn’t differ with view distance. One of the first games I played after the update there was SAMs everywhere. The rhino was the only thing I saw outright spamming fire except for the SAMs, and opfor couldn’t reliably kill them because ground was at stalemate and neither team was able to fly for long. This was also when I first discovered after not knowing for years somehow that the titan at needs manual guidance past 2km. That day I also whacked nearly every blufor aircraft that took off for a while with a Rhea in pyrgos, also fired a tank from there at the center objectives since the 4km view distance spans that far. I don’t think anyone I recognize from this forum was on the same servers I was on at the time.

In my opinion higher view distance isn’t bad but it changed the game more than just the SAMs alone would of since it impacts the SPAAGs and everything else as well.

I wanna see how this turns out more before saying that it should stay or go.

 

With the aac camper, Did anyone on blufor try spawning in the sector next door like therisa, after getting either optional thermal camo and a titan or Vorona in the arsenal for 1k cp, or just a launcher crate somewhere out of view for 300cp, and follow the tracers or gunfire to manually guide a missile to his face? Or shoot the ammo truck that’s gotta be right next to him? A rhino should not be the considered the only answer to that problem, and most of the camping is equally possible on both teams, the impact tends to be the distraction it causes from the frontline. The slammer is just as durable as the t140 minus the 30mm, and the cheetah is more durable than a Tigris to spam with service trucks, and I recently discovered how the kajman could beat the rhino in missile spam with its no reload delay, so long as you can lock a lase without data link and hover with an ammo truck you just walk the missiles on each target after firing like 20 in a few seconds. The biggest issue I think blufor has on altis as mentioned by others already when player quality isn’t the issue, which is something that’s universal as I’ve also said before, is probably the geography like with AAC being uniquely vulnerable and being often the only rear airfield for blufor compared to opfors other airfields. But I’m not sure where that could be fixed without some other issue. And nerfing or buffing things or redistributing the sector placement can’t fix the ignorance or stupidity of some people you might end up playing with unfortunately.

 

The reason the rhino is singled out in my opinion is it’s the only ground asset on either team with both guided BVR and artillery-esque capability, you can’t shoot it out of the sky, it also has data link which is what I think let’s it perfectly see the laser designation a darter makes within 8km of its position no matter where it or the darter are positioned before it fires. The kajman and other vehicles with such capability are not only aircraft, but their laser guided munition require being able to actually see the laser from where it’s at to target it unless it’s able to LOAL due to data link not being enabled by default on most other non aa vehicles. I still sorta think that the atgm only should be removed from the rhino in warlords and just wait and see for a bit since I don’t want to see removing things entirely like the rhino or the darters, but I assume if removing just the rhinos atgm is an issue from I suspect a mission editing standpoint, removing only the darters data link as an option is also an issue and may not change anything as I think the rhinos missiles might also be LOAL capable.

Gonna have to see where things go I guess.

 

On rearming I think, and don’t take this as fact without checking, the speed a individual bomb or rocket or bullet rearms depends on how high the cost value it has is on whatever list the ammo/service system uses, and the supply value of the ammo crate or vehicle thats used to determine how much it can rearm only dictates how many bombs you can get, not how fast the numbers add up till you get a bomb. The small vehicle ammo crate can’t put a single bomb after rearming everything else on a empty jet, yet an ammo truck has nigh infinite numbers of bombs in supply, yet they both rearm until they run out or forever at the same speed. This is why a single bomb takes 5-10 seconds to rearm, yet nearly every missile on the jet can be reloaded in a couple seconds before a single bomb is replaced. One costs a higher value and isn’t replaced until it hits that threshold, and a crate and a truck both seem to take the same amount of time to get to that value regardless of how much supply there is in said crate or truck. There might be some setting for how fast all the numbers add up, but it would probably still need balancing on individual munitions.

 

It used to be that in Arma 3 the service and ammo trucks supply value was changed from arma 2, from the nigh infinite supply in a2 and now currently in a3. 

In older a3 an ammo truck was just like the crates are now with limited supply, but they often barely rearmed anything before turning useless. Then people complained about that (and I hated it as well) and it was changed to be back like it was in A2 and now A3 which is how it is now with nigh infinite amounts of supply in the service and ammo trucks and large supply crates, with the small vehicle supply crates still being limited. The problem isn’t the amount of supply in my opinion, you can still fire dozens of missiles faster than should be possible from a small supply crate it just runs out rather quickly after a few salvos, the time to rearm the individual larger munitions simply needs to be increased. Unlimited supply isn’t endless rapid firing if it takes more time to rearm than it does to fire it, hell you can fire the SAMs right now faster than the ammo truck can restock them if you fire nonstop,but you only need to wait a few seconds for it to catch up. The problem with this solution if I’m remembering right, is unlike just nerfing the vehicle supply value, slowing the rearm times themselves probably requires an Arma 3 change not just a warlords one since the individual munition values probably all need to be changed.

And I’d also hope if this was done it wouldn’t take forever to rearm, just something like the LG bombs now in that it’s simply long enough that constantly firing all missiles and such has a delay in replacing them all before you can fire them all again. Basically rapid firing with some pause would still be possible. But no idea if this is at all possible to do.

[CaptainDawson 93]

3 hours ago, crs24 said:

Some of these issues on altis like the t140 camping I think only pop up noticeably with an increased max view distance, the rhino doesn’t differ with view distance. One of the first games I played after the update there was SAMs everywhere. The rhino was the only thing I saw outright spamming fire except for the SAMs, and opfor couldn’t reliably kill them because ground was at stalemate and neither team was able to fly for long.

 

Not true, using the Rhino does differ with the increased view distance. Just as the T-140 can see farther, now the drone can see farther as well!

 

3 hours ago, crs24 said:

With the aac camper, Did anyone on blufor try spawning in the sector next door like therisa, after getting either optional thermal camo and a titan or Vorona in the arsenal for 1k cp, or just a launcher crate somewhere out of view for 300cp, and follow the tracers or gunfire to manually guide a missile to his face? Or shoot the ammo truck that’s gotta be right next to him? A rhino should not be the considered the only answer to that problem, and most of the camping is equally possible on both teams, the impact tends to be the distraction it causes from the frontline. The slammer is just as durable as the t140 minus the 30mm, and the cheetah is more durable than a Tigris to spam with service trucks, and I recently discovered how the kajman could beat the rhino in missile spam with its no reload delay, so long as you can lock a lase without data link and hover with an ammo truck you just walk the missiles on each target after firing like 20 in a few seconds. The biggest issue I think blufor has on altis as mentioned by others already when player quality isn’t the issue, which is something that’s universal as I’ve also said before, is probably the geography like with AAC being uniquely vulnerable and being often the only rear airfield for blufor compared to opfors other airfields. But I’m not sure where that could be fixed without some other issue. And nerfing or buffing things or redistributing the sector placement can’t fix the ignorance or stupidity of some people you might end up playing with unfortunately.

 

No, they did not try spawning in the next sector, because driving a slow vehicle over a few kilometers requires patience that noob players do not have. The players are expecting to spawn at AAC without being mowed down instantly. Anything a player on the ground does can be countered by the spammer on the island. The Rhino is the only realistic solution because 90% of the time Blufor players refuse to coordinate in any way. You have to understand, this is nearly always an every man for himself battle. A single Blufor player hoping to spawn a jet is not going to go through all those steps to kill the Tigris just so that his AI jet can be immediately killed on landing by a Shikra.

 

3 hours ago, crs24 said:

The reason the rhino is singled out in my opinion is it’s the only ground asset on either team with both guided BVR and artillery-esque capability, you can’t shoot it out of the sky, it also has data link which is what I think let’s it perfectly see the laser designation a darter makes within 8km of its position no matter where it or the darter are positioned before it fires. The kajman and other vehicles with such capability are not only aircraft, but their laser guided munition require being able to actually see the laser from where it’s at to target it unless it’s able to LOAL due to data link not being enabled by default on most other non aa vehicles. I still sorta think that the atgm only should be removed from the rhino in warlords and just wait and see for a bit since I don’t want to see removing things entirely like the rhino or the darters, but I assume if removing just the rhinos atgm is an issue from I suspect a mission editing standpoint, removing only the darters data link as an option is also an issue and may not change anything as I think the rhinos missiles might also be LOAL capable.

Gonna have to see where things go I guess.

 

It's not LOAL as far as I know, and I've been using the Rhino for quite a while. I'm not arguing with the fact that the Rhino is OP. I'm saying that it's a necessary counter to the current Opfor-dominated meta. In case you haven't noticed, the Rhino hasn't been able to prevent Opfor from winning the vast majority of all Altis Warlords matches. Remember, Opfor has APC launched ATGMs, and Blufor doesn't. Opfor has better faster tanks, better CAS heli, better aircraft, etc. I agree the Rhino should be limited in it's reload, but not fully remove its ATGMs.

 

Today I had a Shikra player find and kill my hidden Rhino 3 times in a row. The Rhino is very counterable, the Shikra is not. Once Opfor has air superiority, Blufor has no chance of using any kind of plane or tank. Remove the Rhino's ATGMs and you make an unbalanced game even more unbalanced.

[Beagle 684]

I noticed that all gear and uniforms for Global Mobilization shows up in warlords whan you have that DLC enabled. I guess that leads to issues for players without the DLC....and the player appears in underwear with no gear to them, right?

[crs24 33]

@CaptainDawson

Therisa is right next to the aac, it’s less than 1km away, within running distance even, so it shouldn’t even require a vehicle that will just get picked up on the tigris’s radar.

 

Did nobody try to use the new SAMs against shikras in those games, cause they were everywhere on both teams when I last played, although I’m not sure how many actually ever had a working radar, which even a cheetah/tigris gives a Sam targeting, with no radar they just scare people. Last time I was opfor I was shooting down every jet I saw when I had a Sam set up, I kept wondering why no one tried to kill me more directly as they could see where I had it positioned from center airbase when the views set to 4Km. And when there wasn’t jets bombing the rhinos due to the enemy SAMs I saw about 3 of them up at once at one point through the radars, but I think only one knew how to use them for their ATGMs.

[Beagle 684]

50 minutes ago, crs24 said:

@CaptainDawson

Therisa is right next to the aac, it’s less than 1km away, within running distance even, so it shouldn’t even require a vehicle that will just get picked up on the tigris’s radar.

 

Did nobody try to use the new SAMs against shikras in those games, cause they were everywhere on both teams when I last played, although I’m not sure how many actually ever had a working radar, which even a cheetah/tigris gives a Sam targeting, with no radar they just scare people. Last time I was opfor I was shooting down every jet I saw when I had a Sam set up, I kept wondering why no one tried to kill me more directly as they could see where I had it positioned from center airbase when the views set to 4Km. And when there wasn’t jets bombing the rhinos due to the enemy SAMs I saw about 3 of them up at once at one point through the radars, but I think only one knew how to use them for their ATGMs.

The SAM radars are currently broken. The radar is only active when is playe is connected via drone remote. That kind of gameplay is not attractive to most.,

[crs24 33]

You can also use a cheetah’s or Tigris’s radar to give target info to the SAMs the same way as the static radar. I also would flip to the static radar on and quickly switch to and fire the Sam before the target disappeared from the radar screen, but having a manned cheetah/Tigris with its radar on does work. I wonder if an option could be added to the uav terminal in Arma 3 to switch active radar on and off like the lights.

[AlexRUS 4]

Spoiler

I tired to get STATUS_STACK_BUFFER_OVERRUN error on Warlord mission. Usually it happens when I in any aircraft vehicle. I've sent bug report to BIS, but after last update I've got same shit. I'm very angry. 🙂

[CaptainDawson 93]

22 hours ago, crs24 said:

You can also use a cheetah’s or Tigris’s radar to give target info to the SAMs the same way as the static radar. I also would flip to the static radar on and quickly switch to and fire the Sam before the target disappeared from the radar screen, but having a manned cheetah/Tigris with its radar on does work. I wonder if an option could be added to the uav terminal in Arma 3 to switch active radar on and off like the lights.

 

See, I didn't even know that, and I've played Warlords for quite a while. Just like half of the players who use Rhinos don't even know how to use the ATGMs. We are dealing with a majority of players who are clueless because there are no instructions to tell them how to do these things. "Hold 'I' to open Command Menu" is not sufficient to explain the entire gamemode to a new player. I would know: I have hundreds of hours in Warlords, usually top player on my team on the kill board, and I still don't know how to do some things. So the players who are experienced, like me in a Rhino or you in a Shikra, just run roughshot over the other players. The battle is won or lost by a few experienced players on each team who are using spammy tactics to grind down the enemy's noobs. You realize we still have a large number of players sitting in the spawn because they don't know how to teleport.

 

 

[crs24 33]

I think the briefing tab on the map in warlords should have a number of those basic warlords specific tips that pop up constantly always listed there, like hold I inventory isn’t listed there but it pops up when you join, but someone might not notice apparently from how many ask, and Fast traveling and such isn’t obvious to many it seems. Some things about arma 3 itself aren’t obvious but there are some things your able to figure out if you read the field manual entries and other things, like with the rhino and darter you can see some of these things with it saying the rhino has Laser guided ATGM + the darter has a laser designator Which = profit, or certain things have data link by default, but arma is complex for new and old players. Then there’s some people I see who seem to have and others literally have said they’ve (literally or figuratively) never played arma 3 before playing on a warlords or any server. The boot camp campaign exists for a reason.

Basically my thoughts when I’m online and a new guy is asking everyone things not mission related and that are very very basic questions about things the bootcamp teaches, often when I’m getting shot at, are sorta like this:

please please please people the boot camp and other scenarios exist for this play them once dammit so you don’t need to keep asking how to get in a car or how to pick up a gun or aim down sights or switch firemodes or stand up and why do I have to keep typing out how to do these things when there’s a nice training mission for you to play to teach that I’ll still tell you how but come on wouldn’t it be more fun to play online when you have a basic idea of how to do ANYTHING?!

Ok rant over, skill and knowledge always varies, but it’s bad when new people don’t even try learning the very basics thats listed right there on the main menu before playing online sometimes. I don’t mind helping people learn but the most basic things like knowing what the key to aim is should really be something you already know from the bootcamp or the keybindings at least.

[pr9inichek 133]

@Jezuro please check next video:

 

1) https://youtu.be/Sjukb_5VmbY

2) https://youtu.be/pPrd74AQmhQ

3) https://youtu.be/140-tbB64zc

4) https://youtu.be/rif2JpT-VRQ

 

 

What is about implemented https://community.bistudio.com/wiki/Arma_3_Respawn for select spawnpoint?

In my opinion this would make the game easier and more accessible for new players 🙂

 

And what's about change reward system, 25 CP for kill jet it's too small 😞 In my opinion the game should end in 3 - 6 hours

[Jezuro 452]

None of those videos are available @pr9inichek.

[pr9inichek 133]

3 hours ago, Jezuro said:

None of those videos are available @pr9inichek.

Sorry for this

 

Now, switch Private to Public

 

Some videos:

5) 

 

 

6)

 

 

 

What's about to add back point of airfield (near Aristi) but stay only heli spawn point?

Tweaked: A sector with an unusable airstrip was removed from the Whole Altis scenario

 

[Jezuro 452]

Those "strange spawns" happen when you join to a server with AI enabled. You're taking control of a previously active AI Warlord.

[crs24 33]

Disabling the ai player by clicking the player symbol on the slot your going in before joining might remove the chance of ‘strange spawns’ happening if it bugs you, but hey free tank there.

[pr9inichek 133]

Tweaked: A sector with an unusable airstrip was removed from the Whole Altis scenario

NATO can use small airstrip on North:

 

 

[crs24 33]

I think the reason that airfield north of abdera was removed as a sector wasn’t because players couldn’t use it, but because planes purchased there which have to land under ai control wouldn’t land there and landed at almyra aka the salt flats instead, which is far east of abdera and by opfors base which often left free enemy planes for opfor to take since that north airfield was usually controlled by blufor.

[crs24 33]

A idea I had after the recent posts on the camping and operating far behind the enemy frontline and thinking how other Cti worked, there could be a new optional server parameter to change airdrops to remove or limit the ability to airdrop things on a players location and change it to airdropping on or around friendly sectors only, as this currently isn’t an option even in the editor modules unless you just jack up the price of your location drops so its unaffordable. Airdrops would be the same as they are now by default and sector airdrops would stay the same always, but there’d be an option to limit or disable airdrops on a players location either to within a set distance from a friendly sector or only in a friendly sector.

 

Basically there’d be a server parameter for airdropping on your location where there’s the default setting of you can airdrop on your location anywhere, one disables airdropping on your location entirely and the other settings are it requires you be within a set distance of a friendly sector to airdrop on your location.

[mo1ok 1]

Done with warlords after today.  Even though it was my favorite arma mode, the teamkilling is simply out of control and makes actually playing the game impossible. The last four sessions have had a major, prolonged teamkilling issue (i.e. someone teamkilling for 20+ minutes, with everyone unable to get enough votes to kick or resolve the issue).  It needs to be resolved ASAP, or this game mode is dead in the water.

[Jezuro 452]

@mo1ok So for 20 minutes you were unable to get half of your own team to kick the guy?