Conflict (Feedback & Suggestions)

[dusty geyser]

Oh no you didn't!

[weak kite]

Well yeah i mean arma is the only game I have ever seen that can deliver that epic quality gameplay. Literally any other game on the market can exclude and remove your recruiting AI issue your having. But NO game can do it like arma dose.

Also how is someone surrounding themselves with A.I . cheap that's literally like calling someone cheap because they are surrounding themselves with their buddies. Also the very incentive of what your saying discourages team work. Rather it's A.I. or players. And that is not what arma stands for.

[neon fjord]

If we get a commander… I want the ability to tell ai to passively move supplies around lol

[weak kite]

That is an amazing idea!

[brittle herald]

Arma has always been a sandbox. How about leave it the way it is and don't force others to play the way you want to. Just mod it the way you want it to be. The down side of ai is that they are very expensive performance wise, the more ai you use, the less players you can handle.

[thorny shard]

I hope they make PVE Conflict tho. I love your mod and hope we could get it vanilla with more features mby

[weak kite]

Unfortunately this is true hopefully programmers someday make a breakthrough and expand on the capabilities. I cam imagine now how gaming would forever be changed if we could achieve these new heights......

[dusty geyser]

So here is a problem with the rank system. The new vehicles that we waited so long for are hard to get and use. If you play the game normally (no grind) you might not rank up fast enough to use them, and even if you do, you might not need to. Like, you are now a Captain but your team doesn't need CAS and you are better off doing something else. So what is even the point of having a ranking system and unlockables in our combat simulator? There is no logic here.

[neon fjord]

Andre's Beacon really needs to have some stati supplies. Mayube near military. Such hard place to get supplies to and its very underutilized as part of the map.

[brittle herald]

I think the point is, its a game. I love it for my PVE scenario! But a few others absolutely hate it, I think just cuz they dont want to put in the grind to get the good stuff. And to that I say: to each their own! Good thing server owners can configure that stuff however they want to!

[haughty seal]

CAS is pretty powerful in my experience. You can even rake your back bases to clear out back cappers.

Matter of fact, I say CAS has way more uses then transport helicopters which tend to be used as taxi's and causes teams to become inflexible.

[dusty geyser]

This is a good point. In PvP many games are lost because half the team is grinding for rank instead of doing what needs doing. This leads to short games where nobody has much fun. Also the grinders are riding on the back of players who do what needs doing to avoid defeat (play normally). Once they have their rank they deplete bases that need supply to be defended. I.e you have been defending a purple base for a while, when a grinder spawns there, places a gunship on the pad, is taken out by 1 RPG and leaves you with no supply for respawns or placing a.i. defenders. I rarely make it to a high rank when I focus on defending, capturing and buildings bases. I mean I understand that people want to use the content, and that the game offers little already, but why not have it earlier?

[tough cave]

Restrict the max amount of squads a team can have based on how many people they have so if a team has 16 people they should be limited to a max of 3 squads

[weak kite]

I want warlords to come back! I miss being able to buy AI from the menu! And everyone had thier own AI.

[wise bone]

Nice to have improvements:

• map markers saving even if a player disconnects ( but allow the markers of disconnected player to be deleted by anyone)

• keeping players in their squad if they disconnect and reconnect within time

• prevent vehicles from despawning if within range of a supply structure

(Or add a deployed mode for normal vehicles)

• buildable storage units

[wise bone]

Squad Management

• being able to remove players
• the ability to create fireman's
• allowing the squad to see command markers (move here. Etc)

[bleak flax]

Almost 100 hours in conflict and the worst thing about is laggy supply system. I haven't looked into the code enough to get why but I'm guessing is some kind of performance management that only does queries and checks X times over server frame or something like that. If its just that, just triple that poll rate for a temporary fix, otherwise maybe implement a priority system to poll\simulate\update components that are close to players.

[craggy geyser]

Suggestion for an updated rank system:
Right now it is hard/bothersome for someone who plays often, but only for short sessions to rank up only to have to go offline when unlocking rank-locked items they wanted to play with.

How about combining the current per-session-rank with a persistent starting rank?

In every session, a player could get to Major when playing for long enough, out of the XP earned for that a small percentage goes into a persistent rank.
That way, having played an hour a day for a month or so, a player will start out with the corporal rank, properly reflecting their experience with the gamemode (and hopefully also their responsibility with supply usage :s )

Rank locked items are a godsend for public conflict sessions imo. Even though I barely get to Corporal in a typical playsession, I'm having more fun because I'm not feeling like I'm actively being hindered by people hoovering up critical supplies for defensive buildings and respawns.
It's just that - with probably 150ish hours in conflict I'm quite sure I know where and when AI barracks should be placed, or when I've got a team together which could put an APC to good use. But with the current system, I'm not able to act on my knowledge.

[tiny ether]

Is this supposed to replace the forum and #reforger_feedback ? we have 3 areas to put feedback now.. Show we dupplicate posts ?

[cobalt valve]

A dynamic xp system that increases as the match goes on so people who join late in a match can level up quicker.

Xp awarded increases over time or it has a multiplier added each time your team takes an objective.

[bleak flax]

DELETE "Transport Request"

[fathom cliff]

After a considerable amount of time playing arma reforger. I've come to the conclusion that squads need to be forced and individual squads should be squashed or squad.Leaders should no longer be shown on the map. Squad play is a core dynamic of the game series, and these features take away from that. I've been playing reforger, since the very first day you could two years ago.

[cedar grotto]

Ok, how do you expect squads to actually work together without things like a map tool. Currently i cant even tell what objective my squad leader has assigned. When i join a squad i need to know what the squad is doing, where the squad leader wants me to go and how the squad leader wants me to help. there needs to be wayyy more work done to the squad system before its ready for a change like that

[fathom cliff]

It's called communication. I know it is a hard thing to understand stand, but all the tools are in the game already. The tutorial will guide you through it. Your objective assignment will be highlighted blue when selected by the squad lead.

[cedar grotto]

I can guarantee i run squads with randoms more than you buddy. This is a video game. People dont always want to and arent always willing to talk. They are however willing to to follow UI and XP incentives. You can see this by going to play something like squad, place down a mvoe marker and watch your little blueberries start wondering towards it.

Also the blue objectives are the priority objectives assigned by the game. Ive tested it many times as a squad lead "hey ive assigned objective Utah as my objective, does it look different on your screen?" "No, the same as all the other objectives"

[fathom cliff]

Your right, I only have 138 days played over the past two years in reforger. So I haven't gotten to run in any squads yet, or lead entire teams to victory from the jaws of defeat... however this interaction is pointless as it doesn't address the issues with the current problems I mentioned in my original statement.

[cedar grotto]

Yknow it’s funny because we both agree that the squad system as it exists is an issue. The only difference is that you have an idealised view that if you force people into the same squad they will magically start working together, and I’m saying there needs to be systems and tools in place to make teamwork easier, funner and more incentivised. Especially with so many console players around

[nova stone]

I like in early days where you can't see yourselves or others on the map, The feeling is quite different. but people modded it anyway.

[rose pebble]

People just want the easy button
They don't want to to put in the work of playing their role
They want to be a Sniper when the chance presents its self but also have a lmg to shoot up the latest helicopter that's landing in the field while also having a rpg to take out those tanks that are coming into the town and having a medkits worth of supply's to heal all in the one load out

The map marker should be removed
Arma is a team play based game for those random that dont want to talk they can go find something else like hell let loose or tarkov
And for the people who can't talk unfortunately it's as simple as " if you don't contribute or formulate the unfortunately sit down and follow orders"

[obtuse bronze]

Add ladders and other buildables for conflict

[tired berry]

whenever official servers reset, it should select a random date of late summer so we experience different moon phase and day/night length

[tough cave]

the reason night is so short is because at night time the time acceleration goes up to like 25x its one of the worst changes the devs have made they need to revert that to always be 4x

[rose pebble]

Yea well people don't like the game being difficult and they just want either a cheat button or the easy button

[brittle herald]

*most people. I'm one of those who makes a difficult scenario and people report bugs because they think it should be easier. LOL

[delicate thicket]

Give custom server owners the ability to choose if rank restrictions are applied or not.

[delicate thicket]

For 70-80% of players in a conflict game on a default server, not one geared towards milsim or owned by a clan pushing teamwork, their only incentive to do anything is XP.

They will do it to get closer to the gear/weapon they want to unlock. That's why many games you have speed capturing at the start where nobody places radio towers down so they don't miss the next objective and chance to get XP.

As much as people like to deny this issue in other games it's an issue that's occurring in most active milsim games.

[cedar grotto]

Yes exactly. Many of the issues in the game are nothing but incentive issues. People will do exactly what they are incentivised to do.

Incredibly frustrating to see BI make twitter posts about “remember to build radio towers when you capture bases” so obviously they are aware of the issue, they just don’t want to fix it for some reason.

[brittle herald]

Maybe they don't know how to fix it, maybe you can give them suggestions on how to do so?

[delicate thicket]

I think the big issue is BI is worried about overstepping.

[weak kite]

Can we get a lower rank requirement for mortar fragmentation shells?

[kindred umbra]

Yes

[weak kite]

Thank goodness 🙏 😅

[dense carbon]

blud aint no dev

[weak kite]

Oh, we still need it regardless.

[dense carbon]

yep

rank3 would be cool

since it unlocks all mortar related stuff

[weak kite]

Right thats what I was thinking technically mortars are treated as low tech in real life also so...........

[potent knoll]

Rank and supplies are largely used as balancing tools, not as direct implementations of real life restrictions.

[wispy walrus]

Mortar in early game is super oppressive

I'm kinda happy it's behind captain

[dense carbon]

so you never see them

i can count on 1 hand how often i have head mortar impacts

bc its way to ez to spot them aswell

rank 4 would be fair

atv captain no one uses them bc a heli is much more effective and more fun/easier to use

[potent knoll]

Not everything needs to be equally represented in gameplay.

[dense carbon]

have you ever used a mortar?

[dense carbon]

but it should be represented

everyone approaches mortars as if they are OP

you need a 3 man team and let that happen on an offical server with random lmao

[wispy walrus]

What do you need a 3 man team for on a mortar, just measure out some angles beforehand, and then start blasting.

[wispy walrus]

It's absolutely possible to keep lobbing shells at maximum pace as a solo player. In the time the animation is playing you can open the inventory, select a new shell from the ammo box / a nearby vehicle trunk, close inventory, and the previous shell hasn't even left the tube yet.

If you have a second screen and are a little rat, you could even have the mortar calculator up and not have to measure out every target, which obviously saves a lot of time, but I consider it dirty play (just like using AI for low effort blasts).

[umbral nebula]

Can we get FIA convoys/vehicle patrols? Like it's cool that they'll patrol through towns and fields, but it seems odd they'd just abandon their vehicles all over and not utilize them. It'd add to immersion to see an FIA convoy coming and going from say Sawmill to go resupply their FOB at Morton Valley. It'd be a good way to utilize the armed UAZ with the mounted UK-59.

[carmine jewel]

I Love this idea, It would be great to have more things to look out for on the roads.

[dense carbon]

Yes pls

[candid totem]

I really would like to see how many hours the person has played and how many matches they've won displayed. Perhaps we'll get that when we get career rank.

This has all been somewhat corrected by the new experimental if you haven't tried it yet.

[tranquil thicket]

I think Lt. would be a good balance point so it cant be spammed but is viable obtained

[wispy walrus]

Or, at Sgt., but the ammo is based on MSAR, and gets exempt from MSAR at captain

[tranquil thicket]

Whats MSAR?

[wispy walrus]

The maximum supply cost your loadout may cost, starts at 65 for private and goes up to 300 for major.

Certain items don't count towards this budget

[potent knoll]

MSAR feedback should probably go in #1400465304240521357

[nova stone]

Resupplying/Recharging LR radio as spawn point need to be streamline I think. Now you have to deploy the radio for it to be able to recharge. I wish you can recharge it in backpack form, without deploying.

[potent knoll]

Agreed. Though it was also said that the radio/how you can stick together with your group may be getting reworked.

[mellow kettle]

Radio backpacks recharge now?

[nova stone]

In stable it share whatever supplies it has around it. If no supplies, the radio internally have 100 supplies. In experimental, I think it needed to be refill. It does not share nearby supplies.

[obtuse bronze]

Is it intended? as the command vehicle doesnt also recognise its own supplies and both of these were issues after 1.3

[green dew]

Everything aloud hiden and under camouflage nets. Allow our own placements of all HQs.

[weak kite]

See thats not a dirty play. Thats war and now I know you are just opinionated.

[fathom cliff]

It takes 3 guys to pack and move them on experimental.

[wispy walrus]

Only on foot

You could load all parts in the trunk of a vehicle, as well as the ammunition.

[umbral nebula]

That's currently in experimental under commander conflict. It'll come to stable in a couple months

[tranquil thicket]

(Currently) It takes far too long to make even Sgt

Especially in more "Established" games with no FIA bases there

[potent knoll]

Also in experimental, you rank up way faster. Just being near your group leader gives constant XP.

[obtuse bronze]

Only if you succeed in doing something. If you take a while to cap a purple base then it can take as long as 1.4

[potent knoll]

Even if you do nothing but sit next to your group leader, you are still ranking up faster than late game 1.4. To the extent that the devs are thinking of nerfing XP gain.

[tranquil thicket]

Brilliant change

[tranquil thicket]

Nah please I hope they dont cause (atleast personally) I enjoy playing with the cool toys

[umbral nebula]

we need the SMAW for the US I mean the army literally used it in 1989

like it's a little ridiculous that the USSR gets a reloadable rocket launcher and is receiving yet another rocket launcher in 1.5 and the US is stuck with only the LAW

[obtuse bronze]

The soviets got a tube launcher probably for balancing

[carmine jewel]

Reloadable rocket launchers are heavy, plus if you want one just kill an FIA roadblock.

[umbral nebula]

you're missing the point here. The point is the commies have one in their arsenal the US should have one too. On top of that the commies are getting two new warheads for the RPG in 1.5.

[carmine jewel]

The new warheads aren't that great

[umbral nebula]

redundant

[obsidian island]

Picatinny rail for M249 SAW for ranged optics.

[carmine jewel]

Now that would be nice

[obsidian island]

I figure if the Soviets get them for both the RPK and PKM, the M249 should. I don't mind the M60 keeping to iron sights.

[obtuse bronze]

in vanilla there is no difference with the warheads, in vanilla rpgs are very inaccurate after range and you can just easily steal rpg-7.

[obtuse bronze]

????

there is no scope from that time that would go on a m249

and the m249 didnt use that rail at that time

and offtopic for this channel

[umbral nebula]

bullshit, the FIA can hail marry those things accurately like 800M out

[obtuse bronze]

Thats ai not real players

Forgot to mention that im talking about 1.5

there is dispersion now for rpg

[potent knoll]

The US Army did not use the SMAW in 1989. They only borrowed some during Desert Storm (which was later).

[cedar grotto]

They are getting a disposable so that the reloadable can be nerfed. In the new update reloadables are rare and disposables are common. Or would you rather the Soviet have ONLY reloadable rocket launchers

[carmine jewel]

Well, right now they don't seem that rare, don't know if its a bug but I haven't run into an FIA squad without one.

[cedar grotto]

Oh yea the FIA are still bad, but soviet players have them way less often

[potent knoll]

FIA still have them less frequently in 1.5.

[umbral nebula]

THEY UTILIZED THEM DURING OPERATION JUST CAUSE

can we get the ability to decomission FIA vans in conflict? it's annoying you cant

[bleak flax]

I'd love to be able to save FIA gloves

[potent knoll]

The Marines did. Do you have evidence that the US Army did?

I'd also say that this is off topic here. Perhaps post proof in #reforger_discussion.

[umbral nebula]

Well, first and foremost my uncle was involved with the operation, secondly; google it.

[potent knoll]

I continued the conversation here, where it is more on topic: #reforger_discussion message

[umbral nebula]

When it pertains towards balancing of a game type specifically Conflict; it is most definitely on topic.

[potent knoll]

I disagree, but okay. If a moderator wants us to move it elsewhere, they can let us know.

[umbral nebula]

Don’t try to justify your opinion, my criticism while pertaining towards Reforger as a whole is strictly adhering to conflict feedback under this subsection of the Discord in the topic of balanced team weaponry.

And balanced gameplay

[potent knoll]

Okay. And part of your argument is that the SMAW was used by the US Army in 1989. Since you won't continue the conversation where I think it is more relevant, I'll share what I wrote here:

If we look at this article, it says: https://www.forecastinternational.com/archive/disp_pdf.cfm?DACH_RECNO=1049

During Operation Just Cause in Panama (1989), the U.S. Army's need for a lightweight weapon to defeat bunkers, fortifications, and other built-up defensive structures became apparent. Although the U.S. Army senior staff subsequently identified a need for such a weapon, the Army had to resort to borrowing 125 Mk 150 Shoulder-Launched Multipurpose Assault Weapons (SMAW) from the U.S. Marine Corps during Operation Desert Storm (1991).

So the SMAW was only borrowed during Desert Storm, because they hadn't yet filled the need that was identified after Just Cause. The US Army had not yet borrowed the SMAW in '89.

[umbral nebula]

Regardless it was utilized in 1989 during Operation Just Cause (December 1989) AND Operation Desert Shield/Storm (August 1990) my uncle was involved in both are you calling him a liar? He was with the 10th mountain FYI.

His unit was a participant in both engagements.

[potent knoll]

I am saying that I trust data published by a major market forecasting company for the US Army over your recollection of your uncle's recollection of what the US Army may have borrowed in small numbers 36 years ago.

I'm happy to see more solid data that suggests the SMAW was used then.

[bleak flax]

Its an Armaverse anyway, so anything can happen

[potent knoll]

Yup. It would be fine if they decided to add it anyway. However, historical accuracy was one of the arguments for adding the SMAW, and in Reforger they mostly stick to things that could have been used by appropriate units IRL.

Even more relevant: they told us two launchers were getting added, and now both are in 1.5. They don't plan to add more launchers to Reforger, and they have always been okay with asymmetrical capabilities between the US and Soviets.

Soviets get RPG-7 and a bunch of warheads for it (though only the default is really worth using right now), the option of scopes on more weapons, API rounds for the SVD, fully automatic service rifles, better supply storage/transport capability with many vehicles, etc.

US gets generally better explosives (HEDP 40mm can kill any vehicle in the game, way more potent mines and C4), way better scopes and suppressors, generally more accurate weapons, M60 with AP rounds, more agile/better armed light vehicles and helicopters, the best armored and armed vehicle in the game (with the ability to reliability kill at max view distance), more storage in personal equipment, etc.

[carmine jewel]

What do you mean my more potent mines?

[potent knoll]

US AT mines have more explosive, the explosive is more potent, and has better fragmentation. It is potentially deadly from further away as a result, and you are more likely to get hurt beyond that.

[carmine jewel]

Aren't Soviets more?

Oh AT, my bad

Their AP mines are much better.

[potent knoll]

Either AP mine is likely to kill you if you step on it and is unlikely to hurt anyone else. But yes, that's part of the asymmetric balance between the factions.

[inner bronze]

It'd be bit sad if the us never got a reloadable heavy at weapon of some kind. The dragons technically in timeframe but that's never happening lol. A recoiless rifle of some kind could be interesting and in timeframe.

[inner bronze]

Just curious about how long this took you and about how long your average session is.

[tranquil thicket]

I tend to play for atleast 3 hrs and it takes me generally atleast 2 to make it, and even thats with Delivering full supply trucks and also building functions

[inner bronze]

Oof I was expecting that ratio but not those times.

[inner bronze]

What were your grind times like in 1.4?

[tranquil thicket]

Thats for the current update, I cant play EXP yet

Cause I am on Console

[inner bronze]

Ah ok, that explains it

It's a lot better in 1.5

[weak kite]

The commander in conflict should be able to delete AI teams around the world and manage them more better. There has to be a way to clean them up when they are stuck or lost in water. Etc.

Please fix.

[potent knoll]

Should probably instead share this in #1400465304240521357.

[weak kite]

I will but I don't know where that is.

Can you @ me in that channel so I can find faster?

[weak kite]

My voice alone probably isn't enough for them to actually consider this.

We must all agree and speak this to the devs as a community.

[potent knoll]

Can't you just click it in my message?

[inner bronze]

Tbh this is an issue with post channels
a lot of people don't really use them and are confused by them.

[inner bronze]

Man yesterday I had a pretty fun firefight against the ai in St. Pierre.
There's so many its crazy.
But random 1 -2 ai you encounter in the woods feel very annoying
you have to drive nearby
get out
find em etc etc
its a bit of a slog
It feels like that ai budget would be better spent towards more ai in towns / city
or those ai assualts
It'd be interesting if they were more frequent towards the winning side
as a sort of a eurogame style stabilization mechanism

[brittle herald]

I don't agree, I think that should be the role of the game master, not the commander.

Game master already has permissions for that as well

[weak kite]

But we aren't talking about game master. See im not sure if you understood my point. In Conflict mode AI get recruited by people put into a helicopter and flown out into the ocean and lands in the water. Now how are you going to spawn the next team of AI at your base? We'll you can't because your not playing in game master mode. Do you see the issue with the capacity problem here? Surely this had to make sense to you.

[weak kite]

I didn't realize i could click on that link you typed. Thank you.

[weak kite]

Ok here is an actual example. Say a few trolls want to exploit this issue. So they think its funny or a good idea to take all the Spawned AI and lead them into the water derecruit them leave them there and find more and repeat. This has actually happened a few times. We need the commander in conflict to be a responsible person and fix the problem. Just like a game master does. Now let me be clear. Obviously im NOT saying give the commander a whole menu of options like game master has. Just a simple way to despawn AI logistic teams or other fire teams when people abuse them or they just get lost somewhere in the forest because the AI got stuck driving on a rock. All these things really happen and we need a solution.

[brittle herald]

That makes a little more sense! I thought you wanted commanders to be able to delete fia ai, which is why I said absolutely not. If anything they should only be able to dismiss or discharge friendly ai only.

[potent knoll]

This stuff is specific to HQC Conflict, and so should probably be in #1400465304240521357.

[inner bronze]

Ok

I ended up adding some extra points

[tiny escarp]

Oh we've considered this long time ago. I have it in a backlog for one of our programmers but it is not a trivial change - it requires some rework for the AI groups as they don't really talk with map system.

[candid totem]

It shouldn't be too hard, considering you already have squads represented on the map, you already have commands issued to the map, you already have commands issued to the map issued to the AI/group, you already have AI joining groups (hidden like).

So all you need now is AI groups showing up on the map. When clicked on the map icon, it selects all the members of that group, issue the same command from the GM menu to kill (remove), kill (remove) command issued to all those AI.

It wouldn't be perfect, but it doesn't seem too terribly hard from my outside view. You've already got most of the code written.

[potent knoll]

I have it in a backlog for one of our programmers but it is not a trivial change - it requires some rework for the AI groups as they don't really talk with map system.

[obsidian island]

Gain xp for turning in dead friendlys papers to deny the enemy Intel.

[warm axle]

sometimes things that looks easy really arent

[candid totem]

@potent knoll I can read 🙂
@obsidian island Indeed, but I'm a software dev of 15+ years and almost all of that has been working in existing systems - taking what you can do, and rearranging it into new features - that said, I don't have access to the code base, but as I posted, it's already "proven", but perhaps it wouldn't be clean, or its bug ridden or hack and slash (non-elegant) - still, it looks very much do-able.

[tiny escarp]

Generally piling hacks onto hacks is a bad idea. It is not that it is impossible to do - I'd very much like for it to exist. But we need someone to rework the systems, and with how few people we currently have - there is nobody we can sacrifice to work on this right now. So it's a "hopefully in the future" kind of thing.

[candid totem]

True true,. You'd know better. You can see the code base. Have fun coding 😀

[wise bone]

Allow players to hear the squad chat while in the spawn menu

(This would help with squad cohesion, giving the group/leader the ability to communicate where the dead players should spawn,etc)

[wise bone]

Let deployed radios within X meters of a captured base feed off the bases supplies for spawns.

Example, deployed radio within 150m of base is linked to the supplies, giving defense squads an alternate spawn point.

If the base is contested then it can use the radio's supplies instead.

Also, give us the ability to load the radio backpack with supplies without needing to deploy it first

[tame carbon]

Radio will work different in the new update, so it doesn't matter what you say now

[wise bone]

How does it work in the new one?

[tame carbon]

No supplies, with respawns.

Iam all for, don't make the game easier but this was a good choice.

[wise bone]

Unlimited spawns? Or ticket based?

[cedar grotto]

3 tickets, one ticket regenerates every 10 minutes while radio is deployed

[wise bone]

Not bad