u/Fox_Lover1029

I’m sorry, Bohemia, but your AI just isn’t capable of running logistics. I’ve lost count of how many times I’ve watched AI logi drivers:

>Drive supplies straight into the ocean

>Slam into trees or other vehicles

>Crash into eachother

>Glitch out, stop driving, or abandon the vehicle entirely

The end result is that logistics are now almost entirely handled by players in HQC servers.

Since the 1.6 update, I’ve spent an absurd amount of time playing “truck simulator” instead of actually playing Arma just to keep bases supplied.

The old slow supply trickle was a healthy balance:

>Players still had a reason to manually run supplies

>But bases didn’t completely collapse if the team was too busy to run logistics at the moment

Now every base feels permanently empty unless multiple people dedicate themselves to hauling crates for hours just to keep the match alive.

I think there’s actually a good middle ground to bring back the old supply system that would also keep the new HQC mode relevant:

Bring back passive supply trickle, but tie the rate of supply generation to how many ports your team controls.

This would:

>Keep ports strategically important

>Maintain pressure to defend supply infrastructure

>Reward teams that control more ports

>Prevent matches from devolving into nonstop truck driving simulator gameplay

You’d still need active logistics runs, but the entire match wouldn’t grind to a halt if players wanted to actually fight instead of spending three hours playing Trucker Joe.

Arma is about mil-sim infantry combat. Logistics should support the gameplay, not replace it.

Aggression-Based Matchmaking is a good thing for the game and generally useful, but right now it could really use some fine tuning to address some problems with it.

Problem 1: It doesn’t track who starts fights

If you get ambushed and win, you still get flagged as “aggressive” and pushed into hard lobbies. I've seen and heard so many people who literally choose not to shoot back at enemy raiders because of this. Even if you win, the ABMM will punish you for it.

Problem 2: It can easily be exploited

Aggressive players can:

> Spawn in with free kits

> immediately surrender

> repeat

This lowers their aggression rating so they can go back to friendly lobbies and PvP people who clearly aren't looking for it.

So right now the system punishes players for defending themselves, and allows aggressive players to easily reset thier ABMM score without engaging in passive gameplay.

Simple fixes:

1. Track initiator vs defender

> The player who fires first should be treated differently from the player who is responding.

> Defensive kills should not heavily increase aggression rating.

2. Ignore "non-participation" raids

> Raids where players immediately surrender or do nothing should not reduce aggression.

> Add a minimum participation threshold (time alive, distance traveled, ARC engagement, etc.)

> Lowering your ABMM score only comes from legitimate passive gameplay.

These 2 changes alone would help a lot. I get that PvPvE is baked into the game but these changes would help both ends of the spectrum.

PvE oriented players can defend themselves without penalty, and deal with fewer extract campers.

PvP oriented players will have more fights, and more high-quality competitive engagements.