Comrades in Arms Discussion Board

I feel like making stealth missions again sometimes for really small amount of players. I'm just wondering what's a good number mainly for stealth mission. My ideal number goes between 2 or 4.

With 2 people missions, there are sniper/spotter missions, secret agents trying to assassinate someone, steal cache, sabotage etc through the darkness. Plus its also easier to micromanage to synchronize a shot. (I wish I played splinter cell, I did got double agent for free off some promotion, but I heard DA was meh and Chaos Theory was the best).

With 4 people missions, there's your typical old fashion cliche 4 man spec ops team. I guess even though I despise GRAW 2, I can look at some of the missions for example or go with a Hidden & Dangerous style. For that I can think of steal item, sabotage, etc, probably same thing as the 2 man missions but with 4 instead. Maybe more entry approaches from 2 sides instead, I don't know.

Then, 6 people. All I can really think of is, its harder to micromanage everyone to be stealthy as numbers increase. I can only think of stealth kill people in a town for this until detection.

I'm just brainstorming some ideas but before I do that, I think I'll make an 8 player coop with 2 teams of 4 on each side of the train tunnel infiltrating the tunnel with a downed train to steal some cache with nuclear launch codes or something like that.

The more the merrier. If you want to keep the advantages of playing in small teams and also the advantages of bigger teams, then no problem- split the force into multiple teams.
I never played a mission with three pairs, each pair starting in a different location. Could be great!

In any case,  missions with several teams that start in different positions (sometimes with different tasks) are ususally great for this reason only, because the communication between the teams, and hearing the other teams' work (distant gunfire) and worrying about them and coming to help when needed add A LOT to the atmosphere.

"Then, 6 people. All I can really think of is, its harder to micromanage everyone to be stealthy as numbers increase. "

That is the challenge of all missions. Commanders have to remember to give their soldiers room to practice tactical initiative.

When you create missions based around spec ops and stealth try to remember in reality, those men and women dont "really" get micromanaged. That is partially why things like that work. People know what they are supposed to do and they have trained for years to be good at it.

Also remember that "arma" probably has more to be at fault with detection that what the players actually do.

As for the number of players, as you have probably noticed in my missions there are rarely single groups of soldiers. I personally don't like that. While it doesnt "really" restrict the commanders options as he can split anytime he wants, Ive noticed that certain things.

There is quite a bit of psychology involved in mission making. 

1. If the group is singular chances are, the commander will keep the group together, thus limiting tactical options.

2. If the groups are split (and distant) the commander employs  tactics closer to a platoon level  rather than a squad level, which I personally love seeing.

3. If groups are split and close the command still employs above tactics but also has the ability to say to the splinter groups "form up on my left flank" thus travelling as a "platoon" element.

I am somewhat exaggerating the platoon element as those numbers are too large.

I thoroughly agree with Variable. My main problem is getting tasks and events to work properly amongst the groups, I also appears that people get "confused?" when they realise they aren't immediately working on the same objective.


e.g. a mission I have in the design stage (currently updating others so this will be on hold for a while)

1 ah64 (Pilot, Gunner)
1 Tactical Air Control Party (  Forward Air Controller , a SNCO FAC and  a pair of signallers/drivers/security.)
1 Special forces team ( Officer, weapons sgt, weapons sgt, weapons sgt)
10 players in all

Spec ops team infiltrates and locates anti air assets, TACP infiltrates different route and lazes assets for ah64, ah64 blows shit up from range as getting closer means they will get shot down.  If spec ops gets alarm raised tacp will have to coordinate with ah64 to support the spec ops team. At the same time aa assets will try relocating.  TACP will have to communicate with ah64 or it will get shot down.

To work around the arma limitations on stealth. There will have to be synchronous silent take down of small groups or alarms will be raised/ complete avoidance of units.
Another main problem is what the pilots will do whilst the ground pounders fuck around but thats for a different thread.

I don't think you should limit the amount of players too much. If you have a 2/3 man team, and one dies, you're pretty much ineffective. But a few small teams are usually great. 3 teams of 4 or 3 teams of 5 are perfect imo.


I'm looking forward to some more stealth missions. We usually screw up and ring some alarm, but with a bit more dedication it can create a really good tense atmosphere.

I guess in that case, I'd make multiple team stealth missions and a 2 player smaller version to go along with it (for the people who are part of no groups and only have 1 buddy to play ARMA with or have another computer that can run it and play LAN <which I would do if my friend isn't busy or finally came home from Europe trip when I find some time or when he finds time>)