From Merriam-Webster:

Roger - used especially in radio and signaling to indicate that a message has been received and understood

Wilco - used especially in radio and signaling to indicate that a message received will be complied with

I suppose just saying wilco would imply that you have received and understood the message, but technically roger means that you have received and understood the message and wilco means you will comply with the message. Since both mean different things, it'd be technically correct to say both,

yes, argue with a radio operator over what's correct (inb4 stupid argument about a guy lying to be a radio operator just to post this suggestion)

also, wilco implies the message is understood since it will be complied with. they have the same meaning.

yimi, so your logic is that wilco means, i will comply but i do not understand what im complying with...

i dont even have to be a radio operator to figure that one out

Roger Wilco is proper radio procedure, just never used for the logical sense withi n the word "Wilco":

I will comply (it implies that i have also understood what you said)

But basically, Roger-Wilco means just "i have understood what you said-i will comply"

Correct.

lol ok, seriously, according to US Army regulations and standard procedures, as taught in 31C Radio Operator/Maintiner advanced school in 2000, Roger WILCO is NOT, I say again, NOT proper procedure. Not correct. It is used in movies, but it is, officially, any way you look at it, wrong. Again, Roger is defined as "I understand your transmission". WILCO is defined as "I understand your transmission and will comply." I can probably find the field manual that defines them, if it's really necessary. Or you nutty fellows can just take my word for it. :P

In fact, a quick google produced it: http://library.enlisted.info/field-manuals/series-1/FM24_19/CH5.PDF check page 8.

movies and games :D

+1

From NATO brevity codes manual

ROGER:
22 - ROGER - Indicates the receipt of radio transmission; does not indicate compliance or reaction

WILCO:
39 - WILCO - Will comply with received instructions

Roger only means "i got what you're saying".
Wilco implicitly comprehends "i got what you're saying" because of the logical sense of it, but the word only means "i will do" or "i will comply", nothing else.

so... US Army procedure vs NATO procedure?

Kinda.. i checked the link you posted and i'm not doubting about your informations / knowledge about this being genuine, but also the NATO documentation about is what i wrote (copy pasted).

I'd say that both procedures are correct (?)

Well, they guys currently in game are from UK, so they might be using NATO procedures... Not every game is about US Army or USMC, just saying ;D

@ViiK, that is true, and it's understandable. However, when playing as the US military, it's just not accurate. As the other services included in the game, I can assume it would be fine, but I don't know for sure.

US Army and NATO procedures may be different, but the fact is you still wouldn't hear a US soldier saying "Roger, Wilco."

In the US Army, they hammered into us 3 things NEVER to say over the radio.

1- "Roger, Wilco."

2- "Roger that."

3- "Over and out."

So, while other NATO countries may use those phrases, the US military wouldn't under any circumstance. Especially since bad things happen to the poor souls who say those things during training. Bad things.

I've just recalled a little detail:
actually in the game you play as NATO in the Blufor, so it's logical they use NATO procedure, therefore it's correct to hear roger-wilco as per NATO procedures.

Kid18120, no. Just no. What you also wrote before, while true, isn't accurate. Those aren't NATO procedures you posted, those are responses over radio and what they mean followed by your own interpretation. Roger and Wilco used in conjunction are redundant and not to be used together.

It's clear you have no actual experience in this matter, as opposed to people like me who have served and learned proper radio etiquette by NATO standards.

ROGER AND WILCO ARE NOT TO BE USED TOGETHER. Saying roger means you understand. Saying Wilco means you understand and will comply. Both are interchangeable when receiving orders, but not to be used together.

Is 4 years serving my country's navy airforce counting for learning NATO radio procedure ?

Depends on the country, and depends on the job. Supply clerks don't typically spend much time on the radio.

Is it the US? If so, then apparently not if you've never been trained not to use Roger and Wilco together. Several of my friends served in the Navy, and only one of them ever even used a radio. However, I was in a reconnaissance unit in the US Army. Radio communications, along with several other things, were very big and we had constant training on it. As I've said, it was hammered into us never to use roger and wilco together considering wilco is saying I understand and will comply.

Now, let's look at your claim of since you play as NATO forces, you will somehow adopt a different radio etiquette.

First off, that's not true, nor even feasible if you've been trained one way for years. Whether it's acceptable as NATO communications procedure, someone who has been trained NOT to do it for years isn't going to start saying it that way just because it's acceptable.

Second, you play as NATO in the sense that when watching Saving Private Ryan, you're watching the Allies fight. While technically true, you're only watching one country. They don;t jumble up their units all together, they all have different sectors and wouldn't likely work together on a large scale. Therefore, radio communications from the US Army would be going to the US Army, not other NATO forces. The other NATO forces you play as are Special Operations units, not other assisting armies. So, I stress, while hearing other countries say roger wilco, it may be correct, it would never be correct to hear the US Army say it. It would be like saying it's accurate to have an American say "lorry" instead of "car" because "lorry" is used in other English speaking countries. It may be used correctly, but NOT accurately.

-end rant-

Last thing, just to be clear, the reason why you are not to use redundant words over the radio is because every second you're on the line is another second a wounded serviceman can't get a MedEvac. THAT is why those three phrases were hammered into us as something you don't say.

No need to rant. Won't be helpfull for anyone.
Let's keep this discussion constructive and helpfull for everyone.

Anyway, no, it's not the US.
I'm Italian and i've been trained to like "you have to say Roger and Wilco together" but i've never been told to NOT use them together.
I personally never do that because of the implicit meaning of "i will comply" that comprehends "i've also got what you just said".

That said, i don't recall, in the game, the US Army.
As far as i know (please correct me since you can have more knowledge about this particular aspect than me) US Army wears ACU uniforms while in the game we have Multicam uniforms

EDIT AFTER READING YOUR SECOND COMMENT:
Yes i am perfectly aware of that, hence the meaning of "Brevity Code"

in the game it's also about 20 years in the future. US uniforms change every 10-15 years or so.

TYPO: and i've been trained to like "you have to say Roger and Wilco together" but i've never been told to NOT use them together.

SHOULD BE:

and i've NOT been trained to like "you have to say Roger and Wilco together" but i've never been told to NOT use them together.

Well, you play as a soldier in NATO, I haven't seen any specifics that you play as US NATO. So you can be a guy from UK, Australia or even New Zealand. I bet they have THEIR rules. As well as guys from other countries. Like guys from Bundeswehr would speak german and this nuance would be completely irrelevant.

English language used for voice over dosn't impply that we are playing as native from english speaking country.

I wasn't actually ranting, I just put that at the end as a joke since I basically wrote an essay.

The US Army is actually in the midst of phasing out the worthless ACUs for MultiCams as they have been proven more effective to anyone with a pair of eyes. MultiCams have been issued to soldiers deploying to Afghanistan for the last couple years, and soon you won't see ACUs anywhere.

The way the US Army trained us was that since Wilco implies you understood, hence why you're complying with the order, not to say Roger along with it as a means to keep all non critical radio chatter to a minimum. The US considers that to be an extremely important thing, hence why we were forbidden from using it even though it's not incorrect.

While the Alpha has not explicitly stated it is the US Army, there's actually a picture listing all playable units in Arma 3 (though it may or may not have changed). Those units are:
---US---
US Army's 7th Infantry Division

DEVGRU (Seal Team Six as they're more commonly, yet incorrectly known)

SFOD-D (Delta Force, the US Army's rip off of the SAS)

5th Special Forces Group (Green Berets)

---UK---
SAS

---Germany---
KSK

---Poland---
GROM

---Italy---
Il Nono

We are basically saying the same thing, but in 2 different ways :D

Youth:
"The way the US Army trained us was that since Wilco implies you understood, hence why you're complying with the order, not to say Roger along with it as a means to keep all non critical radio chatter to a minimum. The US considers that to be an extremely important thing, hence why we were forbidden from using it even though it's not incorrect."

Me:
"I'm Italian and i've not been trained to do like "you have to say Roger and Wilco together" but i've never been told to NOT use them together.
I personally never do that because of the implicit meaning of "i will comply" that comprehends "i've also got what you just said"."

In other words, i'm saying that i haven't been trained to say roger and wilco together but never been told to not do it neither.

Anyway, this issue has my upvote since my first comment because i also hate to hear "Roger, Wilco" :P

Haha, no I got that, but my argument was, as was the original posts argument, that it's inaccurate for the US Army to say it. That's why earlier I was saying other NATO countries, sure, but you wouldn't hear it in the US Army. It's obviously not a huge issue, but more of a tweak for accuracy's sake.

as I said, nails on chalkboards. :)

@Youth That's a fan made image.

British Military Forces do not say "WILCO". I have never heard it said and it's completely unnecessary.

A similar custom regards the Naval "Aye, Aye Sir" e.g "Yes I understand, Yes I will Carry it out, Sir".

Will Comply or WILCO implies that Obedience is optional, it isn't it's intrinsic. It's called Orders and Chain of Command, Obedience is not something you would give, it's obligatory.

"Callsign 2 this is Callsign 1, Go here, do this, over" "Callsign 1 this is Callsign 2, Roger Out".

WILCO is completely unneccessary, as is the OSCAR-MIKE nonsense.

NATO Definition of WILCO is exactly what it states it does not explicitly designate the way in which the instructions are sent e.g Any Medium not explicitly Radio transmissions.

WILCO:
39 - WILCO - Will comply with received instructions

You can receive Instructions by Data-link (e.g Link 16, Link 22) by say secure data link, encrypted transmission of Signals or by any other form of Signal. You could say, transmit or respond WILCO in response to any of these methods by verbal, text or any other approved means. It makes sense but it's unneccessary and increases any transmission time, improving chance of DF and floods the Net with needless verbosity and white noise.

Fundamentally ABC applies, Accuracy Brevity Clarity, if you want unnecessary "Verbage/ Verbosity" then expect Enemy Direction Finding/ EW kit to pin-point you quickly and Jam you or better yet give you a Salvo of Artillery on your position.

Good RT is about Professionalism and therefore survival on the battlefield, no um's, err's or colloquial speech and definitely nothing that is surplus to the requirements.

Sheesh good job you guys weren't all in the same squad/outfit/team or whatever. Using the radio would be like some hellish monty python sketch where they all said the same thing for an hour only to agree to disagree then explode, not from enemy fire but the confusion of the situation where no one actually disagreed on the main point.

I'll shut up and upvote now

BOOM!

i also noticed that some ai member say "bingo fuel" for "understood".
Isn't that an expression from pilots to say "out of fuel for further attacks"?
Inf should not say that then.

I don't get it.

"Roger" means message has been received

"WILCO" means Will Comply

So even though the US Military doesn't like using this, this is still a correct way to transmit "I received the message and we will carrying out the orders."
So I guess the way the US does things now is just law and the rest of us should follow along? I think the big point behind ARMA is the fact that there are a number of countries involved in the war so a variety of acknowledgement verbatim is perfectly acceptable in my opinion. That and I think arguing over how to say yes is a typical semantics argument and regardless of just saying "Roger" or "Wilco" or "Roger WILCO" accomplishes the same thing and we should just move on with our lives.

You are completely wrong. Playing the Semantics Card because you don't know how to be precise, in Military Life an attitude like that gets people killed.

A- Accuracy
B- Brevity
C- Clarity

Proper RT procedure is never broken by professionals, because unnecessary transmissions in terms of length (e.g brevity) lead to Direction Finding pin-pointing your position. You never say more than is required, and you are clear, direct and precise in what you say on a Radio Net. There is no "Um's" "Ers" "Can you repeat that please?" or any kind of TX in Plain unless you GO GREEN (Encrypted).

NATO RT procedures are clear and unambiguous, the problem in recent years is that PRR (Personal Role Radios) have come into play with limited range and Direction Finding against these is almost pointless as you need to be within 1km (e.g On top of them). This has meant that slack Radio Procedure has not been jumped on, whereas on Command Nets (e.g more powerful Radio's with longer Ranges) Strict RT procedure is key.

As an Officer turned Civilian I find that the "Semantics Excuse" is often used by people who have an incomplete understanding of a complex subject matter and over simplify it or don't understand the concept of Caveats, whether this be IT Systems, Legal matters, How an automobile works or High level mathematics.

If ARMA is a Simulation, which I believe it is, good RT is a minimum.

Incorrect? We are speaking about one extra word that will take an extra breath to state, and you figure this is going to tie up extra radio traffic?

I'm a Firefighter/EMT by profession, and while our worlds are separated by the job, and we may not be as up tight as the military is on radio comms (apparently), we still believe and enforce a system of clear and concise radio communications. So please, don't attack my knowledge into the matter. In no situation have I been in (let alone other firefighters I know), weather time is of the absolute essence, a mayday or SOME form of a life threatening situation has saying "Roger WILCO" ever, EVER put my life, or the lives of other firefighters and civilians in harms way, nor come close!

I agree with you that comms need to be clear and concise, but we are talking an extra bloody syllable here and it truly is semantics because look at different countries all over the world and how they say "yes" to a transmission. Look up a few posts and see how the individual from the British forces stated they acknowledge a transmission. Just because that's how you were taught DOES NOT mean it is the word of law for the rest of the world.

Look, the bottom line is that in the US military, and likely most other english speaking militaries, saying Roger WILCO *is* improper. At best it will be ignored, at worst disciplinary action is taken against the offender. Most commonly the person just sounds stupid when they say it. Having characters in game say Roger WILCO is like having a private piloting a jet, or mistakenly using ten code instead of normal radio communications, or saying baker instead of bravo, or having an m107 weigh 5 lbs, or making a sniper rifle with a suppressor whisper quiet, or inventing infantry hand signals that have no basis in reality, or calling female officers "Sir", or any of the other silly mistakes that can be made. It's hollywodization, and does not reflect how the military, and more importantly war, really is. It matters only in so much as we desire accuracy and authenticity, but in those regards it DOES matter. It's immersion breaking for those of us who know better, and causes misperceptions for those who don't. It ought to be fixed. It won't kill anyone if it isn't, but it will look bad in terms of attention to detail.

And I have to say that the issue of whether it SHOULD be improper or not, whether it actually causes any harm in real life or not, is totally irrelevant. It's a matter of accurately portraying reality, and in reality, it's improper. Doesn't matter that it can be argued that it's a dumb rule.

Keragon, I think it's pretty clear (though interpretations may vary) that in the Infantry Showcase, you're playing as Americans. It's also said with an American accent. This is just incorrect. It's not a game-breaking thing, but one for accuracy.

Saying Roger and Wilco together is redundant as it is since you're not going to comply to orders if you didn't receive them. Saying Wilco implies you received the orders that you are complying to.

You may have been an EMT, I was in the Army. I'm sure we do a lot of things differently for the sake of keeping the net clear. Such as during a long transmission, you're supposed to say "break" to open up the net for a second if anyone needs an immediate transmission to get through. You have to keep in mind that a lot of people are going to be on the same net. Especially at Battalion level and up. That's where "brevity" comes in. Saying Wilco alone may not impede any other traffic, but it's better to keep the net clear all the same.

Fact remains, for the US at least, we are told from the get-go to NEVER say Roger Wilco along with several other common Hollywood phrases. So the problem here lies in American forces saying it. Any other NATO forces may say it, I don't know. In the US military, however, it's a violation of radio etiquette and would not be said.

Like Traxus said, it's about accuracy.

Most other English speaking countries don't consider this blasphemy though, which is why I don't really know why this is such a big issue to people. I do not think this needs to be changed, and our focus should be on more important issues.

I think it's a faulty assumption that its "not considered blasphemy" by the uk and Australian militarys. Lets solicit the opinion of some actual combat vets from those countries rather than making assumptions based on no military experience.

At any rate, a British or Australian soldier or even small detachment would never use such phrases when communicating on an American commo net. You don't violate the rules of the house you're visiting.

To fix this, pretty much all you'd have to do is trim the audio file to remove "WILCO", and update the subtitles to remove "WILCO".

You wouldn't even have to record new dialogue.

@Keragon

The British Military RT follows US , because they both follow NATO RT. The purpose of NATO RT is that everyone in NATO follows it, it was implemented for Standardization. This doesn't mean every country says the same thing, but it does mean they say it in the same way. In the UK Military it is rare for "WILCO" to be used. "ROGER" is used. I can count on one hand the amount of times I've heard WILCO on a British RT net, it's not wrong, its rare. This is a completely different issue to the Correct SYNTAX. There are plenty of examples of ATP (Allied Tactical Publications) that have rare phrases that are rarely used but are still technically correct.

ROGER WILCO - Is complete Blasphemy, As an EX-RSO (Regimental Signals Officer) you would have my size 9 firmly placed in your rectum with a fair degree of force if you talked like this on the Net. Though I would probably be beaten to it by the Sergeant Major who would tear you an alternative rear passage.

It is exactly the same, with "ROGER OVER AND OUT" the correct Syntax is "ROGER OUT". This is basic stuff, if you cannot get a simple radio Procedure Correct 100% of the time, then am I really going to allow you to control Battalion Level Fire-Missions in a frought, tense, confusing and chaotic environment? Honestly no I am not.

Comparing being an EMT with being in the Military is an insult to both Honourable professions, they are completely different any similarities are shallow and superficial (such as we both Wear Uniform, and use Radios etc etc). I wouldn't tell you, a Medical Professional your job, and I would respect your position of authority and Knowledge. Please do the same to those of us who have served.

Other NATO Forces do what they like (Hence the general apathy for certain countries who go through the motions but don't seem to grasp the Fundamentals of Military Professionalism ), and there is a reason why the US & UK are close. It is because we are Combat Ready and Orientated Forces, other NATO Countries have no where near the Standard of the US & UK.

@mwnciboo

The entire point of this is that we have civilians playing this game, easily over 90%. I'm not really understanding what the draw is for those in the military to play a simulator and then shortly after tear it apart for inaccuracies on the smallest of details such as how somebody replies to a radio message. The fact that saying "Roger WILCO" results in such a reaction shows perhaps the system is just a little up tight but... That's my personal opinion.

This would be the same as me playing FIRE RESCUE and then after going on the game forums and tearing it apart 80 different ways to Sunday because everything about that game is horrifically wrong. Even the proper Fire and EMS simulators are STILL wrong beyond all measure but I don't go after little details like how the nozzle-man responds to my commands. I just feel we are focusing entirely on small little issues and should focus on bigger things for now, and this really is peanuts.

Sorry, but if you're going to simulate being in the military then you gotta be anal like the military. Otherwise it's not a simulation, it's a game.

In the military we take a LOT of pride in what we do and how we do it. Military service is about following orders, and when the order is to use prescribed radio procedures, if you can't manage to do it then you flat out aren't worthy to wear the uniform. In combat you have to be able to rely upon the men and women around you to perform as they were trained. It is a big deal because lax discipline and inability to follow orders, a laxidasical attitude, those are things that get people killed.

Following orders and procedure is a HUGE deal. If that isn't reflected in the attention to detail given to the game, then you might as well go play battlefield.

The pin and spoon not coming off the grenade when you throw it is a small detail. Roger WILCO is not, for all the reasons already explained above.

Basically, if it' a big deal to us, it should be treated as a big deal by people who want to pretend to BE us.

Okay I want to clarify a couple of things here that I missed earlier. I never once told any of you how to do your jobs, I was only stating my profession and because of it I know proper radio protocol as well. It may not be as stringent as Military protocol but I still know how to use a radio correctly and concisely. So attacks on me about not knowing radio protocol are un-justified.

Secondly, nobody in this game is trying to pretend to be "you" by any means. Playing a game, which I think all of you are forgetting, simulator or not, is entirely different from the real thing. If people wanted to "pretend" to be you, they would state such and act as such, however playing a game that has a military basis is not conclusive enough to state openly that we are all trying to be the cool dudes.

This is the one thing I hate the most about mil-sim games, either as a game or in a real form such as airsoft or paintball and I've seen it time and time again. The "pro's" come in and start tearing everyone a new one about how stuff is done like its a huge deal and talking down to people and then wonder why they ended up out on their ass and why nobody liked them. This isn't the military, it's a simulator, and you cannot make it as strict as the military because none of us are getting paid, in fact we are spending our own time to play the game. So please for the brevity of the rest of us, stop trying so hard.

Who said anything about you? The issue isn't whether you should be allowed to say Roger WILCO, it's whether BI should fix it in their game. THEY do get paid. Frankly, I'm totally cool with you saying Roger WILCO in vent, or TS, or VON. But the game needs to consistently be held to the high level of fidelity that BI has always achieve.

As for the goofballs who go tacticool in paintball or airsoft, that stuff is just silly. Airsoft is as close to real combat as kendo is to real sword combat. People who take tactics too seriously in that context deserve derision.

The difference is that in ArmA 3, BI is presenting an image of the military which they claim to be, and which everyone assumes to be very close to reality. Missing something like Roger WILCO is like having leprechauns, or elves and orcs for that matter, suddenly go running across the screen shooting at you. (Actually, that would probably be a pretty awesome mod xD)

It breaks immersion because it is grossly inaccurate. Maybe a better example might be having a man carriable minigun in the game, a la the TF 2 Heavy. Those of us who know something about the military and combat, and I definitely include you in there, we KNOW that it doesn't belong. Same thing with Roger WILCO, it's just less well known outside of the military. It's no less wrong though.

@ TraxusIV

You'd missed some earlier posts, I was speaking in general to what was said before, sorry for the confusion.

It's not like I don't see the point here I'm just tired of this same debate I hear all the time from some in the service. I just personally don't care what they say to be entirely honest, I just have a problem with how the issue is presented and how much we knit pick at things like this.

I'm pretty well done with the conversation on this topic so I'm just going to ignore future posts from here on out because I really don't believe much else is going to be said that will be conducive to the idea.

Some people shouldn't be allowed to report "issues"...

Also: "Roger Wilco: A phrase from two-way radio. It combines "Roger" (meaning "Received") and "Wilco" (meaning "will comply"). The letter R had been phonetic alphabet shorthand for "Received", and over the radio it became "Roger". In the military, Roger and Wilco are used exclusively. Basically it means I hear you and will comply with your wishes or command."

This issue was processed by our team and will be looked into. We thank you for your feedback.

@MulleDK19 I find it rather funny that you just quoted UrbanDictionary.com as a means, apparently (correct me if I'm wrong), to try to argue that a veteran radio operator's explanation of what ROGER Wilco means, and when it is appropriate to use it, supported, mind you, by links to genuine US Army field manuals, is somehow not correct.

It made me giggle. :)

@TraxusIV: Then please, do explain why every other source than you say differently.

Wikipedia for example says that roger means "I understand what you said" and Wilco means "Will comply", while it says that YOUR explanation of Wilco is only used in aviation.

I don't understand why there are vote downs on this and why there is such a huge discussion about the issue. The FACT is, it is improper radio etiquette to say "Roger Wilco." You say "Roger," OR you say "Wilco," you don't say both. Just like "over and out," it's something movies do but is completely wrong...

This isn't "nit picking" people. This game is trying to present itself as a realistic depiction of war and the military. It's the same as a game or a movie about nurses and doctors where they use the wrong terminology or suggest the wrong medicine or instrument to fix a problem...

Seriously, this discussion is stupid. The game got it wrong, this tester reported it AS HE SHOULD. The End...

@ExploitedYouth

Hey, regarding the ACU's, they DO work for mountainous (no snow) terrain, but that's about it. So you are right, about 80% of the time they are useless. They are too gray for the forest, and too green for the desert, lol.

MulleDK19

All I have to say is, there's a difference between needing to go online and look in urban dictionary and Wikipedia to look up info and someone who knows because it was actually part of their job...

@MulleDK19:

Easy, the information on wikipedia is wrong. Wikipedia is an excellent source of general information, and it generally gets things generally correct. It even has some truely excellent articles on various Mathematics topics. But it also is rampant with errors, inconsistencies, and misleading explanations. That's the nature of being open and editable by anyone.

So it really comes down to this: Either I, and everyone who has sounded off in agreement with me, most of them claiming to have been radio operators in the military (either by training or by job function), are a bunch of liars, and we forged those Army field manuals linked above, or else the sources such as movies, wikipedia, and Urban Dictionary, are wrong.

Believe what you like.

@DemonMustang

"NURSE! Quick, hand me the neural defibrotomulizer, STAT! I need to reduce suction on the cranial bicameral thoracic mitochondria, or the patient my go into bifarptric destabilization!"

Come on Traxus, movies cannot be wrong. Now I'm going to put a pillow in front of my firearm to silence it while shooting a car's gas tank to make it explode. Over and out... ;-)

@Traxus

LOL, but come on, over 90% of the people are not doctors, so it's ok to have all of those incorrect terminologies in a movie or game about what happens in a hospital right??? ;-)

I am the most advanced Radio operator in my local cadet group in the UK, and if there is one thing I hate about people on the radio it is improper radio procedure. It should be because it is a NATO game for BLUFOR:
OK, OUT/OVER
Rodger, OUT/OVER
Or if the player does not understand:
SAY AGAIN (NOT REPEAT, THAT MEANS YOU WANT ANOTHER ART STRIKE)

Did this get fixed already? I haven't been playing much recently, so I haven't been able to keep tabs on our AI Grunts' radio procedures.

@Traxus

I've stopped playing the game. There's not much that we've brought up here that have been fixed or even addressed. We still have inaccurate ammo capacities for some weapons, no bullet-in-chamber accounting, suppressors that decrease muzzle velocity and energy like they do in movies (but not in real life), inaccurate reload animations, hammers staying forward on single-action weapons, and many other weird things that shouldn't happen in a game advertising "realism." I've given up on trying to report issues here...

Anyone who has been in the US Military will agreed with the OP. Anyone who does not agree is misinformed.

"Roger WILCO" is REDUNDANT

/thread

"Roger WILCO" samples were replaced by more variants of other confirmation commands.

Mass-close of resolved tickets not updated in last two weeks.