Changes to QS Tanoa

We are about to begin the next phase of development on the QS Tanoa server.

We have received a couple of requests for changes and we will be looking into implementing the ones that support the purpose of the QS server.

If you have any other suggestions for changes please feel free to post them in this forum within the next week or so, so that they may be included in this development phase.

Couple of suggestions…

ROLES

People taking medic roles and not really being a medic is a recurring issue. The only solution I can think of save policing the server constantly is to add some disadvantage to being a medic and not actually ya know, doing your job. Increased weight on the med kit (the big one for medics) might take up more space and discourage using it when you intend to snipe for instance. More advantages for other roles might be more of a carrot method.

Reduce detect on AT/AA roles. Currently there is no advantage to these roles. Cant think of anything else that would be easy to implement, as it stands your better off going JTAC/SNIPER/MEDIC and just carrying a nuclear silo on your back.

Engineers should be able to fully repair VEH and be able to disarm OPFOR mines. Aside from the boat gimmic which is kinda crap since you lose your tool-kit there is no real reason to play as an engineer. Being able to cut down obstacles like wire and chain link would be cool too but that’s prolly not in the cards as far as server side stuff.

Auto-gunners and machine gunners should be the only guys carrying heavy weapons (LMGs). Aside from a rule stating that I dunno how you could enforce that though without preordained load-outs. The machine gunner should have a higher weight capacity as well, but similarly hard to implement.

AIRCRAFT

I’m not much of a pilot and actually prefer Tanoa for its infantry/ground aspect however its always nice to have a friend in the sky so long as its limited and not too OP as to invalidate infantry play.

Reduce the player count for using the little bird to 10 or 15 if there is a transport pilot available. Tanoa usually runs pretty low on players. 10 on is poping really.

One Helo with a dumb fire rockets and cannons would be just dandy. Prolly the Hellcat. Same sort of limit on it as fixed wing is currently with crashing.

I’ve heard lots of complaints about the drone loadouts, seeing as that’s a pretty niche role that is criminally underused I don’t see any reason not to give em every incentive to make use of it.

As for fixed wing just make it a Wipeout with a decent ATG loadout. Lotta complaints about the lottery system on that. As a result fixed wing is also underused on the server.

VEHICLES

The Trophy system IRL is autonomous. Players having to activate it are at a severe disadvantage to the enemy AI. Reaction time is slower and detection is not always the best. Besides that I’ve never managed to make it work as a player on Tanoa. It works almost every time for AI OPFOR. Getting the right angle to actually hit anything is incredibly difficult especially for smaller squads. Being under fire from multiple sources and missing 6 titans on a MBT due to Trophy blocks is just heartbreaking. That being said the AI do not seem to be limited by Trophy ammo either. I like the idea however IRL Trophys are rare enough, and while this is super future land ARMA III, I doubt some 3rd world military is fielding what is currently highly advanced and expensive safety measures. It either needs to go, friendly VEH Trophy systems need to be on autonomous, it needs to be nerfed to 1 VEH per AO, or a combo of the last two preferably.

AO

More mission variation on main AOs. Dunno how hard this would be to impliment but aside from supply depots not spawning or not getting a defend, AOs are pretty predictable. Usually 3ish sniper teams, few armored vehicles, radio tower, data link, HQ, jammer. The city mission is a great example of switching it up.

Just suggestions though! Some of this stuff is tall order i’m sure just wanted to give some feedback after enjoying the server so much!

ROLES

People taking medic roles and not really being a medic is a recurring issue. The only solution I can think of save policing the server constantly is to add some disadvantage to being a medic and not actually ya know, doing your job. Increased weight on the med kit (the big one for medics) might take up more space and discourage using it when you intend to snipe for instance. More advantages for other roles might be more of a carrot method.

Reduce detect on AT/AA roles. Currently there is no advantage to these roles. Cant think of anything else that would be easy to implement, as it stands your better off going JTAC/SNIPER/MEDIC and just carrying a nuclear silo on your back.

Auto-gunners and machine gunners should be the only guys carrying heavy weapons (LMGs). Aside from a rule stating that I dunno how you could enforce that though without preordained load-outs. The machine gunner should have a higher weight capacity as well, but similarly hard to implement.

The role system was created so that we could limit weapons and other equipment based on each role. We could limit sniper rifles to the sniper role, or limit AA and AT missiles/rockets to those roles. During beta testing this that overwhelmingly rejected. If this is something that the players want, I need to hear from more of you.

Engineers should be able to fully repair VEH and be able to disarm OPFOR mines. Aside from the boat gimmic which is kinda crap since you lose your tool-kit there is no real reason to play as an engineer.

The engineer repair was limited to a 70% repair for a couple reasons. One, so that transport pilots would have another task delivering repair facilities to the field and also to encourage the use of FOB’s for repair. The reasoning was that a single vehicle can through off the balance of infantry game play, and if they had to spend a little more time waiting for repair facilities or return to the FOB, this would limit their over powering effect on the AO.

Being able to cut down obstacles like wire and chain link would be cool too but that’s prolly not in the cards as far as server side stuff.

This would require a client-side mod, and requiring players to have that mod to play on the server would potentially prevent new players from joining.

AIRCRAFT

Reduce the player count for using the little bird to 10 or 15 if there is a transport pilot available. Tanoa usually runs pretty low on players. 10 on is poping really.

I do not see how this would change anything, what are you trying to achieve with this change

I’ve heard lots of complaints about the drone loadouts, seeing as that’s a pretty niche role that is criminally underused I don’t see any reason not to give em every incentive to make use of it.

We will be adjusting the UAV loadout some, but with a cooldown on reload.

As for fixed wing just make it a Wipeout with a decent ATG loadout. Lotta complaints about the lottery system on that. As a result fixed wing is also underused on the server.

We will be adjusting the aircraft situation

VEHICLES

The Trophy system IRL is autonomous. Players having to activate it are at a severe disadvantage to the enemy AI. Reaction time is slower and detection is not always the best. Besides that I’ve never managed to make it work as a player on Tanoa. It works almost every time for AI OPFOR. Getting the right angle to actually hit anything is incredibly difficult especially for smaller squads. Being under fire from multiple sources and missing 6 titans on a MBT due to Trophy blocks is just heartbreaking. That being said the AI do not seem to be limited by Trophy ammo either. I like the idea however IRL Trophys are rare enough, and while this is super future land ARMA III, I doubt some 3rd world military is fielding what is currently highly advanced and expensive safety measures. It either needs to go, friendly VEH Trophy systems need to be on autonomous, it needs to be nerfed to 1 VEH per AO, or a combo of the last two preferably.

The Trophy system has been tested numerous times and is 100% autonomous for players and AI. Both players and AI are limited to 3 Trophy missiles (also tested). The is a dead zone for the Trophy system from 140 - 220 degrees. During the beta testing, both players and admin agreed to leave the Trophy system enabled for both players and AI. We can limit the system to AI, player, or both. We can set the number of missiles available but the value is shared by all teams that have the system implemented. Last we can set the dead zone to any value or remove it completely. The current settings are based on feedback during the beta testing, to change those values I will need more feedback.

AO

More mission variation on main AOs. Dunno how hard this would be to impliment but aside from supply depots not spawning or not getting a defend, AOs are pretty predictable. Usually 3ish sniper teams, few armored vehicles, radio tower, data link, HQ, jammer. The city mission is a great example of switching it up.

We will be adding more missions and sub missions. There are currently 84 AO mission locations, with 6 randomly chosen sub-missions in the AO’s and 48 side missions. The number,type and skill of the AI is based on the number of players in the server. This was one of the major requests with the Tanoa server. It is made to be playable with as few as 3 players. As more players join the server spawns more AI and adds more variety in the AO’s.

Thanks for the detailed responses Vile! I hope you don’t take any of this as griping, just givin my two bits. NAK servers are freakin great and I’m stoked that you all are constantly improving them.

A few responses,

Personally I’m all for limiting roles to weapon types but dunno how well that works with mods. I assume the resistance to that was due to smaller groups?

The player requirement limit for Littlebirds would force players to make use of trans pilots with less players on. Since 20 is barely ever reached its nearly a pointless bar.

I must just have absolutely terrible luck with the Trophy system. I’ve never had it deploy on a VEH I am using and I have seen enemy units deploy it almost every time I fire on armor.

If trans pilots are supposed to deal with repairs, whats the point of the engineer? Besides that, it stands to reason that if you are part of a tank crew you should be able to do basic repairs.

I do not mind the suggestions, it is what I asked for. For the Tanoa server specifically, I am trying to implement development cycles so that when we make a change we let that change run long enough to actually measure the benefit of the change and that we are not making changes constantly. The feedback that we received prior to this call for suggestions, will be evaluated and implemented if the change will have a positive effect. Some of the changes are major so I want to get opinions from other players before implementing them. Make sure to encourage players to respond to this topic.

If you have a suggestion, do not worry too much about how it might be implemented. If there is something that just can not be done I will let you know. In the past, I have resisted some of the changes because they would change the core code of the mission. We are working with code that was developed outside of NAK, at some point, we need to decide if we are going to branch off of that core code or to keep our version close enough to the core so that if there are updates we can implement those updates.

Personally I’m all for limiting roles to weapon types but dunno how well that works with mods. I assume the resistance to that was due to smaller groups?

This is one of the changes to the core code that we have done. The core code supports vanilla Arma only. It was a lot of work, to begin with, to deal with supporting mods, we loaded every approved mod and classify each weapon. Most of this has been done already. The concern is when a mod is updated, we need to look for new weapons and classify them. This also requires assistance from players to help identify weapons that are classified incorrectly. If we were to limit weapons based on role, I would need to hear from more players.

I must just have absolutely terrible luck with the Trophy system. I’ve never had it deploy on a VEH I am using and I have seen enemy units deploy it almost every time I fire on armor.

Next time you are on poke me and we can test it again.

If trans pilots are supposed to deal with repairs, whats the point of the engineer? Besides that, it stands to reason that if you are part of a tank crew you should be able to do basic repairs.

The engineer can repair a vehicle to 70%, emulating the limited resources that they could carry on the vehicle. To get a vehicle to 100% they need to use a repair facility, either delivered by a transport pilot, at the FOB or base. Originally there were roles for drivers and crew, which could also do repairs to the 70% level, but they were removed. These could be added back to leave the engineer roles for ground players. During beta testing changing roles was a new process and players did not want to have to change roles to operate a vehicle.

Some small suggestions:

1. Change of lighting around the arsenals and/or the option to use NVG’s and thermals in the arsenal.

Description: Lighting during nighttime is bad at the arsenals, non-existant at the FOB’s as the arsenal is inside a heavy bunker. Ideally I would like to have the same lamps or another form of adequate lighting around the arsenals.

Semi-related, NVG’s and thermals do not work whilst in the arsenal which could be subbed in as a secondary form to improve the visibility.

Objective of Change: The reason these suggestions would be beneficial is it would mean a massive improvement to actually being able to see what you are selecting. Also checking if your loadout has thermals and/or NVG’s is really nice. If its too much work/complicated to improve the lighting, NVG’s could be subbed in to soften the pain.

2. Addition of the NAK PAD to Tanoa.

Description: Implementing the NAK PAD as it is currently known on Altis to Tanoa, with the same system behind it. Ideally the crates that get dropped in would also be made heavier/ less affected by the wind/trees.

Objective of Change: Addition of the NAK PAD would be a (small) reward for consistently playing players, with revives especially being a huge bonus due to the travel time it takes when a player dies. Also being able to call in a resupply (though at a big cost) in a HQ defend would be a big game changer.


3. Making the FOB teleporter two way.

Description: Currently, if a player shift clicks on the map whilst being at the bluefor base, he/she is able to teleport to the FOB (if its activated). It would be possible with this change to teleport from the FOB back to base (only if the FOB is activated). The teleport would be inside the H-barriers to prevent unlucky teleports in front of friendly verhicles or onto a Helicopter landing pad.

Objective of Change: The change would be a quality of life upgrade imho. Its dissapointing to teleport to an FOB thats empty and has no means of “getting out there” to fight. Players are already able to immediately get back to base, but have to respawn to do so.

I’ll start off by saying I agree with restricting the roles more. As in LMG’s only usable by Machine gunners, Heavy AT only usable by Heavy AT, etc, etc. The only caveat is that no weapon system should be restricted to a role until and unless that role has a tangible benefit to playing (Like more weight capacity for a machine gunner or less chance of being spotted using launchers for AT/AA roles), this makes it so that restricting weapons to a role isn’t punishing players, but rather pushing players into roles that maximize their capabilities (why just go rifleman if you plan on carrying a heavy AT launcher for instance).

I also support the 2 way teleport for FOBs and the addition of some Nakpad functionality.

Also, it is my experience that in vehicles with Trophy systems, I am absolutely not getting autonomous and reliable deployment of countermeasures 100% of the time. Often the second guided missile to be sent my way is able to hit my vehicle unmolested (although it may be coincidental, it tends to be top down attack vectored flight paths that are bypassing the Trophy system). It is entirely possible my anecdotal recollection is flawed, and to that end it may be helpful to add some sort of text popup on screen that flashes when Trophy is activated (Like ‘Trophy Charge Depleted’ or ‘Trophy System Deployed’ in red text in the middle of the screen momentarily when the system activates).


On to my personal recommendations:

Vehicles and Vehicle availability:

Given the fact that Tanoa is not an open terrain like Altis, the use of armored vehicles is even more important to protect against ambushes and flanking maneuvers. All the Hunters and Striders in the vehicle pool should at least have an HMG. Without such, they will always be ignored in favor of armed, but less armored light vehicles.

Similarly, all Armored Vehicles (tanks/MGS etc.) should be variants with RCWS’s (barring vehicles with no such variant like the AMV-7 Marshall). So the MGS and Slammer should both be the UP versions (which also makes sense given the terrain of Tanoa and the increase in close quarters engagements would mean any actual army would be using such upgrades on their vehicles, like the TUSK for the Abrams).

Vehicle spawns should also be made more static. If the Rhino MGS is destroyed, it shouldn’t be possible for an AMV-7 to spawn in its place in the vehicle pool.

There are a handful of islands that are not connected to the mainland in any way, and therefore whenever the server population is low (which it often is), it is very unlikely for there to be a transport pilot to ferry armored vehicles to them. Because the server doesn’t adjust enemy numbers based on server pop, the availability of Armored vehicles to act as a force multiplier is even more important during low pop times, which is also when it is hardest to move that armor to those islands. It would be nice if there was some way to get armor to those islands when a transport pilot isn’t available. Maybe that would be the ability to teleport at least APCs/IFVs to them, or perhaps an increase in the speed of amphibious vehicles in water (driving an AMV-7 multiple kilometers to an Island at 11 Km/h is excruciating.

Alternatively the server could be adjusted to avoid spawning primary AO’s on Islands with no connection to the mainland when the server population is below a certain number. Or FOB’s could have the ability to spawn a single AMV-7 (with an extended respawn timer to avoid unbalancing an AO) if another module was flown in by a pilot.

Lastly on the topic of Armor, remove the requirement for multiple people to be present to flip a heavy vehicle. The vast majority of times a heavy vehicle like a Tank will find itself flipped is due to funky Arma physics (for example, today I ran into a tree in a Slammer and rather than knock down the tree, it caused the Slammer to flip backwards). Players shouldn’t be punished by the server for Arma having physics issues. Going out of your way to drive Armor to a distant AO during low pop hours, and ending up flipped far away from any other players means you have to abandon the vehicle and lose all the time you just spent, or waste another players time having them travel to you. I don’t see any real benefit to such restrictions.

Something for consideration would involve boats. Tanoa seems to have a lot more AO’s where minigun speedboats could participate than on Altis. However, they are not available from the vast majority of boat spawns meaning that to bring an minigun speedboat to an AO requires a very long transit. Additionally, those boat spawns are often out of the way without the ability to teleport to them. Perhaps beef up a few boat spawns with additional boats, and add a mechanic that allows teleportation to those boat spawns if a pilot delivers a module to the location (similar to FOB functionality).


An issue that occurs on both the Altis and Tanoa server is that of UAV use. While I understand and agree with the restrictions implemented to limit access to UCAV and UGVs etc. it is at times unfortunate that this leads to infantry being generally unable to carry and deploy small drones like quadcopters, a capability that would absolutely be universal by 2035. Is it at all possible to enable UAV console use but restrict which UAV’s can be controlled? If not, I understand and agree with the continued restriction of UAV access.


That is all I can think of right now. I realize that most of my post is focused on vehicles, but that just happens to be the stuff that I have noticed to have room for improvement during my time on Tanoa. The infantry gameplay is very solid and enjoyable itself, but during times when the pop is low, trying to take on a primary AO with only infantry is borderline masochism, and my experience in those situations has informed my suggestions for changes in the way vehicles are handled on the server.

Thanks for all the hard work you and others are doing to provide such fun experiences and unique servers. I look forward to seeing the continuing improvements to come!

Also, it is my experience that in vehicles with Trophy systems, I am absolutely not getting autonomous and reliable deployment of countermeasures 100% of the time. Often the second guided missile to be sent my way is able to hit my vehicle unmolested (although it may be coincidental, it tends to be top down attack vectored flight paths that are bypassing the Trophy system).

The reload time on the trophy system is about 20 seconds, so a second round will often make it through.

Because the server doesn’t adjust enemy numbers based on server pop,

Yes it does as stated in my original post.
“The number,type and skill of the AI is based on the number of players in the server. This was one of the major requests with the Tanoa server. It is made to be playable with as few as 3 players. As more players join the server spawns more AI and adds more variety in the AO’s.”

It would be nice if there was some way to get armor to those islands when a transport pilot isn’t available. Maybe that would be the ability to teleport at least APCs/IFVs to them.

There is a variety of vehicles at the FOB once vehicle spawn is activated. The FOB is 90% of the time on the same island and within 4 km of the AO. The drive time from FOB to AO is more than reasonable.

An issue that occurs on both the Altis and Tanoa server is that of UAV use. While I understand and agree with the restrictions implemented to limit access to UCAV and UGVs etc. it is at times unfortunate that this leads to infantry being generally unable to carry and deploy small drones like quadcopters, a capability that would absolutely be universal by 2035. Is it at all possible to enable UAV console use but restrict which UAV’s can be controlled? If not, I understand and agree with the continued restriction of UAV access

.
This is just not practical in a multiplayer environment that uses dynamic groups, which is a core feature of most multiplayer servers. Allowing multiple UAV operators, with dynamic groups, would mean anyone in your group could take control of your UAV. Then we have the issue of server FPS and players spawning too many remote-controlled devices. Even if we limit all players to 1 remote-controlled device of each type, that would be up to 360 new vehicles on the server. The time that it would take to develop a solution is not worth the player hours we would get in return.

Lastly on the topic of Armor, remove the requirement for multiple people to be present to flip a heavy vehicle.

I will look into this, I though a single play could flip any vehicle.

As for vehicle types we will look into adding some more,

Vehicle spawns should also be made more static. If the Rhino MGS is destroyed, it shouldn’t be possible for an AMV-7 to spawn in its place in the vehicle pool.

This is needed to offer a variety of vehicles while keeping the number of total vehicles down, which greatly affects server FPS.

  1. Change of lighting around the arsenals and/or the option to use NVG’s and thermals in the arsenal.

Yep

  1. Addition of the NAK PAD to Tanoa.

Not likely this round

  1. Making the FOB teleporter two way.

Yep, but I will be implementing the use of the spawn resupply to TP. So TP’ing will take up a spawn resource and more resources will need to be delivered once they run out.

Ongoing change history - I will be updating this as I make changes but they will not go live until all changes are complete.

Added 6 new side mission
Removed multiple players required to flip vehicles over 10000 lbs
Added vehicle spawner (Armor,Support and Car). (Bluefor, Indipendent and some civilian vehicles)
Added boat spawner(Bluefor, Indipendent and civilian vehicles)
Added CAS spawner - Plane or Helicopter, Increased CAS vehicle limit to 5
Added dynamic loadout
Added lights at Arsenals
Changed Trophy System - vehicle active protection to players only - @Apex_cfg\parameters.sqf line 79
— More To come —

Thanks for the feedback on my suggestions.

I agree that FOB’s tend to cover most situations, and the few they don’t is acceptable. It did remind me of one thing I have noticed though. Not necessarily a problem, but a situation I though was worth noting regarding FOBs. Not everyone (myself included) is a good enough pilot to ferry modules to an FOB (a requirement to enable vehicles at an FOB), and even if you can handle a littlebird, the small attempt I have made at airlifting on Tanoa with its physics based sling system has showed me that it takes even more skill than just flying.

Because of this, unless and until a transport pilot capable player joins the server and decides to take the time to stock up an FOB, the FOB’s are often not actually providing vehicles or any other service for large amounts of time. I am not sure there really is any good solution to this that doesn’t degrade the whole point of stocking FOBs. I was wondering though whether it was possible (or if it can be made possible) for modules to be driven to an FOB on a HEMMT flatbed or through some other method, so that in the absence of pilots, someone could service at least the mainland connected FOBs?

Thanks for the other fixes, and have a happy holidays!

I am testing a version of Tanoa that has two addition bridges added which will allow a player to get to any island, that has an AO or FOB, via driving.

Needs more testing but it looks ok. Any opinions?

https://i.imgur.com/ialwuzm.png
https://i.imgur.com/zTBoyUS.png
https://i.imgur.com/c9AyaWq.jpg



Bridges are neat, however I do remember cases the the AI have major issues crossing bridges. Just something to look out for.

Damn, I really need to start playing on Tanoa more often. What you guys created there is really sweet.

The AI would not need to cross the bridges and there is only one AO that is close to the end of one of the bridges. If the AI tries to cross I will add code to prevent it.

Those Bridges look pretty good to me. Would it require a separate Workshop download?

Nope, No mod required.