SenorTactician

@IgiturI'll give it a look, thanks!

There has been an element of Arma 3 that I have always admired and sought to master, but have been blocked by the interminable problems that have plagued it. High Command, a unique feature that brings out the best of Arma's combined-arms large scale warfare setting is almost unusable, be it through it's finicky interface or the inability for the AI to use the features that are said to be there. Heck, you can't even have the AI dismount from the vehicles they were just transported in, and there isn't even a showcase or tutorial, as there was in Arma 2 and it's OA. One could dismiss this as a feature not in demand by the community, but you'd be wrong. At the time of writing, Dynamic Combat Ops, a mission which puts you in command of a platoon and uses the many facets of high command to allow the player to coordinate said platoon, is one of the most popular scenarios on the steam workshop with close to 30,000 downloads at present. Introducing a patch that would simply fix some of the flaws of High Command, like it's general inoperability, would be welcomed by many, and perhaps introduce a new shift in the way arma could be played in some communities. Not having this feature functioning as it should flies in the face of arma's purported ability to replicate large scale warfare (even in singleplayer), and has already been remedied by some modders, can the devs not do the same?

There has been an element of Arma 3 that I have always admired and sought to master, but have been blocked by the interminable problems that have plagued it. High Command, a unique feature that brings out the best of Arma's combined-arms large scale warfare setting is almost unusable, be it through it's finicky interface or the inability for the AI to use the features that are said to be there. Heck, you can't even have the AI dismount from the vehicles they were just transported in, and there isn't even a showcase or tutorial, as there was in Arma 2 and it's OA. One could dismiss this as a feature not in demand by the community, but you'd be wrong. At the time of writing, Dynamic Combat Ops, a mission which puts you in command of a platoon and uses the many facets of high command to allow the player to coordinate said platoon, is one of the most popular scenarios on the steam workshop with close to 30,000 downloads at present. Introducing a patch that would simply fix some of the flaws of High Command, like it's general inoperability, would be welcomed by many, and perhaps introduce a new shift in the way arma could be played in some communities. Not having this feature functioning as it should flies in the face of arma's purported ability to replicate large scale warfare (even in singleplayer), and has already been remedied by some modders, can the devs not do the same?

To be honest, I wouldn't mind seeing Kerry again either, though.

For those who didn't play that game, here's the transcript below.

That's a fine opinion as well, although the APEX campaign runs against your statement in some forms. It could always be an organic reconnaissance element with the 24th Regiment on Altis, sort of like the FORECON team in Arma 2.

Well then this could be a positive first for it.

You might be right, but perhaps the game could be approached from an objective perspective in which the only culture acknowledged in character interaction would be those of the current Iranian military, as has been done from the NATO perspective (did you hear too many cultural references during the East Wind campaign?), and as such, cultural insensitivity could be avoided. Arma has also been known not to conform to traditional gaming industry standards, so this could be yet another innovation they'd add. You're probably right, but I only made this thread to draw attention to a gap that the devs or modders could potentially explore in the future. As much as I am happy with the Arma 3 modding community, the scenarios they make are, more often than not, not comparable to those of BI.

Through both official campaigns we have only been able to look through the eyes of NATO personnel, be it with Ben Kerry or the CTRG team in Apex. Perhaps being able to play from a different perspective could bring some new life into Arma 3 single-player, and create for a more interesting story when combined with the knowledge gained from the two NATO campaigns. A perfect solution for this would be to introduce a CSAT campaign in which the player could act as one of the elite Viper Teams recently introduced in Apex, secretly deployed during the process of the Adapt campaign to counter the FIA insurgency or alternatively covertly operating in Tanoa. An element that's been missing from Arma 2 would be the greater freedom in terms of Open-World movement, so perhaps reviving elements from Arma 2's "Harvest Red" campaign would make for an interesting style of play. The Independent and OPFOR factions have really been under-represented in terms of single player content, and this would undoubtedly bring some more attention to them, and would fill the void for those who were disappointed with the Apex campaigns solo-gameplay. Of course, this may not be the best idea considering the devs workloads with respect to the DLC releases, but just something to consider.

For the faction dilemna, you could the Peshmerga in both Indpendent and OpFor, or missionmakers could use the new ALiVE Orbat Maker to easily convert faction sides.

This important to anyone?

Is this client side only, or will the entire server need this?

Will we be seeing any more OMON patterns, like we see in the BTR series? Be great for mission making! :) Edit: The newly formed national guard could be put in with the Russian Forces now, with some of those Ministry of the Interior troops. And on a somewhat different note, could where could one find documentation concerning the decals for Platoon and Army units on the vehicles.

@Keeway, Thanks for the quick response! Can't wait to see this mod expand! :)

Just wondering, how will Project OPFOR interact with GREF, as I do indeed like using it, but the duplicate factions are somewhat discouraging, and my preference would be that I would use the GREF factions as opposed to the P-OPFOR factions, but still keep those of the additional factions (i.e. Sahrani, Takistan, etc.)