HETMAN - Artificial Commander

[Rydygier 1309]

At current state the possible bypass would be:

- reduced amount of units,

- usage of custom-made models with custom-made, lightweight danger.fsm (not know about any such unit),

- upgrading CPU,

- perhaps usage reduced number of Leaders (eg two or four instead of eight),

- deactivating some addons (most heavy should be those, that works with every unit on map, means mostly low-level AI enchancers/boosters, but this depending of implementation approach, so hard to tell, can be determined emprically, also enhancements of visuals can be heavy)...

So no cheap&easy solutions, sadly.

From my position the way is better HAC's code optimisiation, but the only current concept for that means total revolution and may prove to be not doable or not so resultful. There is no chance for such time - and work-consuming attempt in near future.

Edited January 4, 2013 by Rydygier

[subroc 4]

Not to blow my own whistle but: http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?137963-EBSS-Epic-Battlefield-System-Scripted-version&highlight=ebss could help to reduce the amount of units on the map at the same time. With this you are able to set a maximum number of units for each HAC commander and spawn more when the commander runs out of units.

Havent tested this with the latest version of HAC but should be compatible. It may conflict with the bigboss scripts if you use the "HAC-auto-place-variable"

[Rydygier 1309]

Succesive spawning when numbers going low to the certain limit (best from limited pool) probably can be nice solution (even for sure, if works in EBSS), if for someone groups spawned from the tin air aren't a problem and when isn't a goal having massive battles, where lots of units fights simultanously. Similar way, if I remeber correctly, is used also by Orcinus in his DAC+HAC project, where, as is stated, DAC is used as a spawner. Note only, that HAC at the given moment will make his decisions basing only on units currently present on map. Also just spawned unit must be one way or another put under HAC control, unless there is only one Leader per side with unlimited control.

[Rifleman 0]

I just wanted to add that I have been really enjoying HAC. Haven't tried all of the features yet, just playing around with it to learn the basics so far.

I have run into the problem where the ai units will not engage each other. Usually when this happens it's not long before the game locks up and I have to use the task manager to close it.

While doing this testing I'm not running any mods/addons. I do have Combined ops + the other official addons (BAF etc..) I am only using stock ARMAII units in the mission on Utes.

The first test mission had about 100 units on each side with a HAC commander for each army, it worked perfect. I then doubled the amount and that's when the crashes started. I tried running the same mission that crashed without HAC and by adding in a bunch of waypoints to get the two armies fighting. It ran just fine with a huge battle in the middle of the airport on Utes. I also made another version and dumped all 400 units right on the airport and ran that with HAC. It ran just fine as well with a huge battle.

My thinking is that when I had all the units right on the airport fighting using HAC that the losses were great enough in the first few minutes that it reduced the numbers of ai down far enough not to clog up the system.

[odyseus 19]

thank you guys i will take a look at it! hey Rydygier i try this on the init RydHQ_Excluded = [vehi01,vehi02,vehi03] to prevent HAC from using this empty vehicles. Did not work! What m I doing wrong? also this seems not do be doing the trick too. :D RydHQ_FirstToFight = [tank01,tank02,tank03];

Edited January 4, 2013 by Odyseus

[Rydygier 1309]

@Rifleman

Hard to tell, what caused clogging in second example, suspicious may be duplication of the units - perhaps was duplicated something, that shouldn't and, only one example, HAC was launched twice or something like that. I can check this mission, if you want.

i try this on the init RydHQ_Excluded = [vehi01,vehi02,vehi03] to prevent HAC from using this empty vehicles.

This config array doesn't work that way. This should contain only names of group leaders, if that groups should be excluded from HAC control, as is described in the manual. This haven't anything to do with empty vehicles and their usage. There isn't an "official" way to avoid using of chosen empty vehicles by groups, when RydHQ_CargoFind is greater than 0, currently the only way is keeping such vehicle far from any group, that could "steal" it (not closer than cargo find value) or removing fuel below 0.2, or increasing damage above 0.8. Perhaps can be added some way to mark empty vehicles as not usable by HAC in future release...

also this seems not do be doing the trick too. RydHQ_FirstToFight = [tank01,tank02,tank03];

This array is for group names, and seems, that these are vehicle names here? Also I'm not sure, what you expect to achieve with that array? Anyway see manual description to know, what this can do, and what wouldn't.

[odyseus 19]

Alright Rydydier, after a few test to maybe get it to work on multiplayer here are some issues i ran in to. I will tell you so that it maybe help you on your try to make in multiplayer friendly. So i did what you recomended and i exported it to multiplayer mission, I have 2 RydHQ

and RydHQB. Try runing it like that with a friend on opening a multi-player game online from my PC. Well he kept on crashing. Them i try to put us on the RydHQ_Excluded list. That did not work neither. Still was crashing. So i decided to try it using all 2 computers on my home. I open a server with one computer and got in game, my friend came over my house and was using my second computer. Game did NOT crash. aWW ONE MORE THING I ALSO TRY IT WITHOUT RydHQ WHICH IS BLUEFOR AND OUR SIDE AND IT THERE WERE NO CRASHING.

can some one post a example of this fix i saw it previously i m not 10% sure in which init and how should it look other than by this if (!isDedicated) exitwith {};

Please if someone could be nice enough to post a quick example, and should it go on the init of my mission or init of HAC?

I hope this can help you!

Edited January 5, 2013 by Odyseus

[sixt 26]

Goodmorning.

For playing with hac on a server, you have to use the script version.

Ryd has a fine instruction on how to use the script version.

When you have followed the instructions, you open the file RydHQInit.sqf in your mission folder with notepad, and on top of the script you write this: "if (!isServer) exitWith {};" without the qoutes. And then you are ready to go. It is really cool to use this when u play agaisnt the comp with your friends., i use it all the time.

Hope it helped.

Sixt

PS. i can send you a RydHQInit.sqf with the line written into it if you want?

---------- Post added at 09:29 AM ---------- Previous post was at 09:22 AM ----------

there are some limits though when playing on a server.

If you play with hac leader on your own side, you won't get any orders, and some of the debug messages doesn't work either. And if you are playing with bigboss you have to use the RydBB_MC function (see the hac manueal) or else it won't work.

---------- Post added at 09:32 AM ---------- Previous post was at 09:29 AM ----------

To Rydigier:

how does the RydHQ_SupportDecoy, RydHQ_IdleDecoy and the RydHQ_RestDecoy work??

and if i change the configs belonging to the different functions, how does it effect gmeplay??

Sixt

[Rydygier 1309]

how does the RydHQ_SupportDecoy, RydHQ_IdleDecoy and the RydHQ_RestDecoy work??

Well, these are useful, when mission maker see, that HAC by itself is gathering idle/support/resting groups in not desired place, also if mission maker prepared special place on the map, some base or something, where want to gather such groups instead of default, dynamic places chosen by HAC. For example - We are preparing the mission and we have placed nice custom base, where we have ammo boxes, field hospitals etc and we want, so HAC will use this for combat ineffective units. So we can place for "A" Leader a trigger named RydHQ_RestDecoy at the center of the base, with both dimensions of the same value that covers roughly whole or desired part of the base. Now we only must to decide, if all resting groups will choose this location for sure, or with some percentage chance. If only a chance - we can use RydHQ_RDChance config init variable to set desired chance, eg 75, so statistically 3 of each 4 resting groups will go to the base, and 1 of 4 will go, where HAC will choose. Last thing is decision, if knowledge about near enemy presence should "close" this place for resting groups (make decoy inactive), or rather they should go there regardless of enemy presence. If you set RydHQ_RestDecoy trigger as rectangle, enemy presence will make this location forbidden (unless HAC on his own will choose this area too...), if ellipse - enemy presence is not important, and decoy will work regardless.

Same way is for support decoy (so we can make same base also gathering point for not needed at the moment support vehicles - with time should gradually to gather there), and for idle decoy, so idle decoy is similar to the secondary objectives, but customizable (chance for choosing/enemy presence/area).

[odyseus 19]

cool can this be mobile?

[Rydygier 1309]

This must be a trigger, but yes, trigger can be moved via script, eg:

RydHQ_RestDecoy setPos (getPos SomeDude);

, or even attached to the vehicle, so will move with it, eg by putting this into some vehicle (unit) init field:

RydHQ_RestDecoy attachTo [this];

BTW this way you can make mobile any trigger, eg used by HAC objective triggers (BB does that via script to change current strategic objective for the controlled Leader - by placing there all four Leader's objective triggers combined with "reset" of RydHQ_NObj to 1, that makes first objective trigger "current" for that Leader again).

Edited January 5, 2013 by Rydygier

[sixt 26]

cool, thanks for the answer

[THEBLITZ6794 10]

are there any notable missions for this mod?

[Rydygier 1309]

I'm not awared about anything finished&polished. Some guys here told, that they are working on something. Also there are plans for new HAC in MSO as AI opponent. Seems, that most of users utilizes HAC as dynamic mission generator for quick set scenarios and such, in kind of "just throw me into battle!" or "give me a war!". It is possible, that I will myself someday create something, have not so exploited idea or two (do not know, how others, but I have enough being a TL of super-elite-spec-commando-seal-delta-rangers-rambo-world saviors, despite, that have a little time for playing at all :) ), but not so soon will get time for that (not mention, that missions, that I made never was too popular. Too weird or too demanding as for addons, I guess, or simply boring, so do not expect too much from my direction. :) )

Edited January 5, 2013 by Rydygier

[jiltedjock 10]

are there any notable missions for this mod?

To be honest I don't think there is the need - the whole point of the mod is to create a dynamic situation. It is literally a case of put down groups (or generate them with DAC or similar), put down appropriate objectives, name the leaders, start the scripts

[THEBLITZ6794 10]

To be honest I don't think there is the need - the whole point of the mod is to create a dynamic situation. It is literally a case of put down groups (or generate them with DAC or similar), put down appropriate objectives, name the leaders, start the scripts

Yes but if it could be adapted to a somewhat more scripted (I know, bear with me) mission, it could really revolutionize Arma 2 missions, since the ai would actually push/fight back in a coordinated fashion. Notably defensive or warfare missions (current warfare ai sucks but if hetman could be adapted to warfare, you could see some results).

[Rydygier 1309]

but if hetman could be adapted to warfare, you could see some results

Agree. I think, that when I'll have nothing more to do with HAC itself (ha ha, good joke) will try to create such advanced implementation. I hoped, that someone already more familiar with warfare scripting will be interested, as this really can be improvement here, but till now not a sign. Most advanced project, that probably will use Hetman as AI opponent is mentioned MSO (kind of MP gameplay, do not know much about it, as I'm SP-only, but seems to be noticeable more ambitious than any other known to me).

BTW a year and half ago I knew absolutelly nothing about scripting, barely knew how to use addons made by the others... I decided to learn it in similar situation - when I saw lack of some things, that in my opinion definitelly should be made. So - you can wait for the others or... be patient and persisitent enough to learn all this scripting stuff (finding such motivation is important and not easy, as for me this was frustration combined with boredom). Beginning is the worst, if you are not a programmer already, as you haven't any foothold, I started with messing with some truly simply code. But if you endure that stage, rest is a question of systematic progress. I know, this looks difficult, and perhaps not for all, but scripting is such a rewarding occupation, that you can see some day, that you do not want to play anymore, waste of time, when you can spare it for more scripting. :)

[jiltedjock 10]

Yes but if it could be adapted to a somewhat more scripted (I know, bear with me) mission, it could really revolutionize Arma 2 missions, since the ai would actually push/fight back in a coordinated fashion. Notably defensive or warfare missions (current warfare ai sucks but if hetman could be adapted to warfare, you could see some results).

Well you could, for example, play around with triggers to turn HAC on or off depending on circumstances in the mission.

[HoneyBadger 10]

Hey, just wanted to say great work. I really enjoy the dynamic nature of HAC.. lots of fun :D. I'm wondering if its possible for me to move the RydHQ_Obj1 trigger whilst playing the mission? For example I could place another trigger 'radio alpha' and then on mapclick it will move the RydHQ_Obj1 trigger to the location I click?

thanks

[Rydygier 1309]

Sure, objectives can be moved. For your way this may be useful. Also check this post.

[HoneyBadger 10]

Sure, objectives can be moved. For your way this may be useful. Also check this post.

I can't quite figure out what to put in the radio alpha triggers activation field. The wiki isn't very easy to understand for noobs like myself. Where am I going wrong?

onMapSingleClick "RydHQ_Obj1 move _pos; onMapSingleClick ''; true;"

something alone these lines?

Ok I figured it out now, trial and error :D

onMapSingleClick {RydHQ_Obj1 setpos _pos; onMapSingleClick {}; true;};

did the trick.

cheers.

Edited January 10, 2013 by HoneyBadger
Figured it out

[THEBLITZ6794 10]

I have another suggestion/idea. Perhaps the player could be substituted for "big boss" and have control over the leaders. This would enable the player to command up to about battalion level units with effectiveness (I cant imagine using HC for that many units).

[Rydygier 1309]

This would enable the player to command up to about battalion level units with effectiveness

Yes, but this would be something different, not HAC. Hetman is Artificial Commander and for sure is not prepared in any way to provide efficient commanding possibility for human, we talk here about totally different code.

Of course you can have some kind of limited control by, as BB does, moving objectives over the map and reseting NObj parameter if needed (RydHQ_NObj = 1 means, that first become current, 5 - all taken. RydHQB_NObj for B Leader and so on). This was mentioned two times lately, you can check. I'm rather not planning to add such thing into HAC. When HAC would be ready, then perhaps I will think about auxiliary, external code that will make this possible and easy with HAC. Should be rather simple, as you can see one of easiest way on the top of this page.

I agree about HC.

To have simpliest command over all groups of yours side, is enough to put on map HC - commander module. Things going worse, when you need chain of command. Do not know, if something was fixed last year, but when I checked this earlier, chain of command constructed with vanilla Arma modules was malfunctioning even during simple movement order. Picture:

http://img846.imageshack.us/img846/1262/arma2hc.jpg

(ignore Polish comments, this was for another forum)

Soldiers inside red box after movement order issued to the whole formation by me did nothing until rest (TLs and SLs) will reach their destination, then they "catch up", but as tight crowd around their leaders... Seems, like for leaders' movement was used doMove command. After that experiment I did not use it anymore, so do not know, if anything was changed.

Also you can check this:

forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?123232-High-Command-Extensions

Edited January 12, 2013 by Rydygier

[THEBLITZ6794 10]

Big boss just moves objectives around though right? Im saying have the subleaders under a human use HAC

[Rydygier 1309]

Big boss just moves objectives around though right?

Not so "just", and not only, but this is simplified main basis of the way, how he controls his sub-Leaders - places at chosen position all four Leader's objectives and makes for this Leader current first of this objectives. So, as mentioned, in similar way with some scripting (eg as on the top of this page) instead of BB you can have up to 8 Leaders, each with own "taskforce" and for each of them manually change position of their objectives, eg with eight repeatable radio channels, for each onMapSingleClick that changes position of objectives for chosen Leader resets its NObj, and cleans itself eg (not tested) for A leader such thing may go to the trigger's act field, where activation is by radio channel alpha, and is set as repeatable:

onMapSingleClick "RydHQ_Obj1 setPos _pos;RydHQ_Obj2 setPos _pos;RydHQ_Obj3 setPos _pos;RydHQ_Obj4 setPos _pos;RyHQ_NObj = 1;onMapSingleClick ''";

Of course can be added also marker, and even some nice dummy radio chatter each time radio channel is activated.

But of course this will not override HAC's way of acting, so do not expect 100%, exact and swift obedience in re-positioning his forces there. This only sets to him a goal, that he will try to reach with own subordinates in own manner (but this way chain of command usually is working, isn't).

Edited January 12, 2013 by Rydygier