Staff Sergeant
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited


About Filth

  • Rank
    The Sarcastic German
  • Birthday 05/24/1989

Contact Methods

  • Steam

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Wuppertal, Germany

Recent Profile Visitors

1,842 profile views
  1. Training Subjects TBA Mission [Placeholder] The Second Patrol on Altis by myself
  2. Can't say much. Had to leave the game because of technical difficulties. Mission: Was a fairly standard affair, very limited tactical and operational freedom due to the objectives having to be taken in order. Nonetheless, we were free to use terrain as we saw fit. Worth mentioning is that that the AI seemed on top of their game. Very accurate and active. Execution: Same thing applies, can't say too much. Green mountain, I would have liked us to control the terrain more before we went into the objective. Our redeployment by air was followed by mass casualties, I believe because the HLS and approach weren't chosen well: We were very exposed for the entire line of the following objective to shoot at us. After that, texture glitches and FPS drops became so bad that I could no longer play. 3/10 bad day.
  3. Magnified optics narrow your field of view. You get tunnel vision. When looking at a wide field of view, the eye is naturally drawn to movement. That is why, when not using magnified optics or the rangefinder, you will be able to see the enemy before you are dead. With a narrow field of view and tunnel vision, it becomes much more difficult to stay aware of what your team is doing. Another point against magnified optics. When I joined the group I didn't understand a word people were saying. What will make your life easier is listening for key words. TLs will talk to you using your name or the designation of the buddy team you belong to. If you hear your name or your buddy team being called that means you have to react. Meaning: you can't just not react. If you didn't understand what people want from you and need to ask, that's no problem. The important thing is that you pay attention when people adress you, whether you fully understand or not. See above. For anyone who isn't a native speaker of english this is naturally a challenge, language wise. Don't let yourself be intimidated. It's a valuable learning experience for you as a person. Try to play with as many different members as you can. Thanks for explaining your difficulties as an inexperienced member. People don't usually tell us what issues they're having. Don't hesitate to ask for help when you need it.
  4. Training: This session was, as I said, a very sobering experience. And contrary to @Pilgrim I think it is a problem specifically linked to CQB. Our procedures go out the window, regardless of the terrain we chose. The decision making process slows right down, and not in a good way. This issue affects all of us leadership personnel. We must work on CQB more. Immediately, and most importantly, on a squad level. Secondly, as a continuous effort, on an individual and team level. 5/10 Got to get gud. All of us have to do our homework on the subject. Mission: This was built as a challenge for myself: The number of vehicles, and therefor elements, that had to be controlled throughout and the extremely open terrain made this a difficult scenario to control. And we didn't even get to the difficult bits. We completed about 50% of the objectives the mission has in its current state. Personally, I experienced loss of control pretty often. But that is natural in such a scenario. I would have wished for some more initiative, such as @R4IDER provided on several occasions. Ideally, we want a fluent decision making process in which the SQL can trust everyone to make the right calls at the right time. For instance: -Suspicious objects on our route of advance, one that we intend to use as a supply line, need to be approached slowly, in a dismounted fashion, under the security of other elements. Even if your intention is to go around said objects. @SoKkada -VL must keep their assets secure by using defensive measures. Namely pulling back when under fire, deploying smoke for concealment, letting infantry advance ahead of them, performing a Full Dismount when severe damage has been sustained. @Wazowski -Missions like this one will demand that we use two seperate radio channels. One for infantry communication, and one for convoy communication. At most times, both channels will be active at the same time. Every VL/TL therefor is required to be active and responsive on both nets. Equally, vehicle drivers should know their way around long range radios (training to follow) or have a TL relaying for them. That's my nagging done. Everybody was very patient with me, did their jobs as I asked and kept a straight face. In the end, I love this shit. And I love the fact that we have a squad going that can do such things. Very impressed by how, with little to no cover, we can use mobility and firepower to our advantage. Very impressed by how we can pull of such complicated organisational structures and still get our jobs done. If there's no objections I'll update the mission for one of the coming weeks. 8/10 Thanks all for your dedication and patience.
  5. Training Subjects CQB Flow exercise. Focus on Sectors, breaching, team cohesion (and contact reports) Mission - The First Patrol Situation Having just established a small FOB in a failed Island state, AAF forces move out on Patrol for the first time. Currently, it remains unclear if hostile forces will attempt to defend the island. Mission 1. Move to Point Papa. Last night, mortars were fired from this location. Investigate. 2. Move to Point Quebec. If possible, link up with IDAP personnel working in the area. 3. Move to Point Romeo. The local Power Plant is a vital piece of infrastructure. Investigate. 4. Move to Point Sierra. Scout for further enemy presence. Continuous: Ensure MSR Gatz is serviceable. Provide assistance to locals. Adapt to changing mission parameters.
  6. Editing: Nothing more that deserves mentioning really. Again, a lot going on. This mission stuck to the high standard its predecessors had set. Execution: Momentum was the name of the game. As @Luke points out, the pace was fairly slow at the start but increased steadily. Alpha was a fantastic team. A lot of experience and dedication from @UnknownEngineer, @ThecMaster, @Skeliton and @Lt.Chris. That made my job as a TL as easy and enjoyable as it hasn't been in a long time. We had a very low casualty count and, thanks to the long leash @R4IDER held us on, were free to keep up the violence of action throughout. We were understrength almost for the entire thing, sometimes running as only two people. Nonetheless, I think we pulled our weight and made our mark on this mission as a whole. Proud. I hear other teams did not have quite such a smooth experience and would like to read more about that here @SoKkada. Squad leadership was top notch as well. Would have liked R4IDER a little closer to the action at times, but I understand he was busy most of the time. With that said, performance and cohesion really were excellent. Numerous times could the teams act in mutual support and perform manoeuvers that complemented each other well. As we went we picked up more and more momentum. Even though we were 30min late, we managed to finish the mission with a mad dash for our final objective. Really fun stuff. I like to play it safe when I lead, but stuff like this gets the adrenaline flowing. Very good for morale. Nice to see. 9/10 Campaign: This campaign stands out as one of the most memorable in a long time. It set the bar very high. It was extremely ambitious, but managed to live up to those ambitions almost all of the time. A novelty in my personal experience was how air power was employed. This was some large scale stuff which luckily could be felt on the ground as well, thus enhancing the infantry experience significantly. Rarely do we see such interest in realism in our missions. By this I mean the selection of ground, objectives, kits, enemy composition, weather, etc. The list goes on really. My personal highlights were the night bits with terrible weather. I was completely immersed in that experience, even though it wasn't exactly our most successful mission of the tour. Also worth mentioning are the numerous CQB bits with heavily defended objectives. 9/10
  7. Feedback, please!
  8. Updated and bumped.
  9. Training Subjects Repetition of recent topics including Formations, Manoeuvers and CQB. CQB Focus -High/Low and behaviour on corners -Cross and breach Preparatory Reading (optional) Mission by @Chroma with lots of AT and a Tank crew.
  10. Personally, I'm strongly against counting kills. Always have been. As a squad leader and NCO it's no measure of success to me how many enemies we take down. I'm only interested in accomplishing objectives. From an operational point of view, you can only accomplish objectives when you stay alive. Competition is in essence a fairly healthy, defining thing. Do yourself a favour and focus on how many times you die, 0 being the optimal number. Keeping your head down, avoiding injuries and death is as much a skill that needs to be trained and practiced as shooting or tossing frag grenades. So if we're counting something on the main page, imo it should be deaths instead of kills.
  11. A welcome surprise. Editing: I did not expect this mission to be as engaging as it ended up being. There was a distinct concept about it that was followed consistently throughout the mission. The strengths of the map were utilised to the fullest. Its weaknesses avoided as much as possible. For me as a SqL it was something resembling a relaxing mission. But that was down to editing and execution both. Considering how many casualties we took, I guess it was a very challenging mission in spite of how relatively easy my own job was. Overall: Decently made. Few complaints though. First the HVT. We have no means of safely recovering somebody from a moving vehicle. For that reason, the mission to recover the Artillery Officer was pointless. Our only safe bet was kill instead of capture, and people made that call. That's fair enough in my opinion. The OPORD was a bit lacking. No assets for AAC, our means of insert, etc. And it's Chedaki btw. Chernarus. Chernogorsk. Details like that are worth putting some more effort into, considering the OPORD pops up on our front page. Doesn't look good. Execution: With the added assistance and support from a grown AAC, this mission was easy from my perspective. It all becomes so much more streamlined and focused when there is only one level of stuff to think about as a Sql. I have high hopes for this. With more pilots we can do more fancy stuff, bigger, more complex missions. Liked all my teams @PARKER @SoKkada @Pilgrim - good comms, good formation work and good reaction to contact. Top notch. I saw an individual lack of discipline at some points, most of which I believe was based on loss of leadership. Nonetheless, even teams that lost their FTL remained firmly in the action, even managing to keep cohesion in moving squad formations. The one thing that didn't work was keeping ourselves from getting killed. Almost every contact we took caused T4s. Often TLs. Not sure what the reason for that was, so if anybody can go into it that'd be great. If you have anything else that didn't work, please let me know. Had a lot of fun overall, only minor faults with this. Well worth the time. 8/10
  12. Training: I feel like I dropped the ball a bit on preparing Parker for this training. Also, all the written SOP I had planned are coming along more slowly than I hoped. @PARKER suffered the consequences. But I'll repeat myself here: I liked the training a lot. Apart from some minor errors all of the procedures were explained correctly and sensibly. I also enjoyed the discussion that ensued after the bounding excercise, where @unionjak pointed out some of the shortcomings of the procedure with regards to an overstrength squad and shitty ground. That's just what SOP are about. Coming up with a standard way of doing things, and then applying it, flexibly (!), to a given situation. All teams did a good job during the excercises though. I promise to coordinate with Parker more closely in future trainings, making sure beforehand that we're all on the same page. Less grief. Mission: Was enjoyable from my perspective as SqL. It was once again very basic, no fancy bits. I think though that ground was well selected, offering interesting challenges. Challenge was added with good enemy placements. Heavy weapons in overwatching positions, flanking teams etc. Good. Working with all the team leaders @unionjak @Wazowski @Pilgrim was very enjoyable. Teams reacted very well and completed their objectives in good time frames. also I believe that our formation work was very cool. My highlight was pushing across open ground from the firing range. I felt like here, teams were most focused and responsive. We managed to get good momentum going, which we maintained until we reached a safer position. Points to improve: Comms. I know that you guys are all very busy leading your teams and that's a good thing. But you can't expect your squad leaders to call three, four times until you respond. Orders are important, more important than team business at that time. So don't hesitate asking your team members to quiet down until you have received an important message. No other complaints on a squad level. Much fun. Thanks all, very GG. 8/10
  13. Fixed @PARKER
  14. Editing: More of what we've recently become used to. A high quality mission with a good ammount of challenge. Decent mix of moving patrols, counter attacks and stationary guards. As @Pilgrim points out above, this was as random as war gets. One stray bullet out of nowhere easily caused T4s. In spite of the changed enemy weaponry. But that's just the way it is I think, always have to have a bit of luck to come through alive. However it must be pointed out that the AI behaved weirdly. Within, say, 200m, they were extremely deadly. Anything above, they were cannon fodder. One further thing that deserves mention was the abandoned town we moved through. I enjoyed the concept of that. Had a very eerie mood to it that apparently made people very nervous, hence the blue on blue. Execution: This was excellent on a squad level. I think we're getting somewhere. Overall cohesion and organisation were very much improved. The use of squad formations and maneuvers was fluent. Sensible. Right tools were selected for the right job. Good comms. Good coop between the fire teams, autonomously. I particularly enjoyed our awareness of keeping out of each other's way, while still maintaining close mutual support. Both Bravo and Charlie seemed to perform very well from my point of view, in spite of having to reorganise Bravo team (thanks @unionjak!) It'd be great if we could make this our new baseline performance. Alpha did not fare quite as well. We took a significant number of random casualties which I believe can not be blamed on individual performance. As I point out above, enemy behaviour and capabilities were somewhat random. Sometimes they dropped like flies. Sometimes we did. Additionally, Alpha was overstrength for the latter half of the Op, so that's always difficult to manage. At several points, I would have wished for a bit more calm and focus within the team. I'm particularly unhappy with people's behaviour around corners: Stacking four people on the edge of a rock formation, all of them standing up, peeking past each other's heads. Not only does it look ridiculous, it's also an extremely inefficient use of manpower, cover and sectors. Worst case: You shoot your buddy in the head. Best case: You get flanked and destroyed. With those complaints off my chest, I can say that Alpha behaved admirably in many situations as well. You guys paid attention when it really mattered, allowing us to keep good cohesion in difficult situations. Further commendations are in order for excellent contact reports and reaction to contact. While leading the team wasn't easy at times, it was a lot of fun and I think bottom line, we did really well. Thanks! Lastly, Air support seemed much more immediate in this operation than in the previous ones. Maybe this is caused by changes in editing, too. Was good seeing high value targets blow up just before we crested in front of them. Gave the impression of really smooth, well planned out organisation. @Blu. is a very welcome addition to the Corps - this will go a long way in enabling the entire group to cooperate more smoothly and efficiently in the future. 8/10 One day, some day, we'll take Stanley.
  15. Training The most noteworthy point is the difficulties I'm having with creating live fire excercises. Zeus is a piece of shit that creates more problems that it solves usually, so in the future I will have to look into scripted solutions. My sincere apologies to all players who were harmed. Mission Was a boat load of fun. @SoKkada is making progress with Squad Leadership, doesn't require much help really. Comms are very much improved and he has an idea of what he wants to happen. We'll put more practice into standard manoeuvers and formations among the NCOs to facilitate the process. @Wazowski tried TL for the first time and made quite the impression. Pretty rough around the edges, and sometimes much too nervous and exciteable. But apart from that, he shined with good comms, initiative and tactical understanding. A lot of potential here and I'd like to see more. In a squad medic slot, I was free to move between the teams as I saw fit. This was an unusal perspective for me, being able to freely observe and participate. My favourite team to hang out with though was Wazowksi's Charlie team. They got into a lot of trouble, both organisationally and tactically, but had a good time nonetheless. 8/10 overall, time well spent with a very enjoyable mission.

About us

We enjoy playing ArmA3 in a tactical and professional way and ensuring at the same time a high level of fun is kept within the game. We use tactics and procedures from various armies and modify them to suit our own needs. This allows us to operate in the ArmA 3 platform effectively.

Social Network

Add us on social networks