HETMAN - Artificial Commander

[Rydygier 1309]

All right, thanks for the feedback. Thanks to it I found a reason. Entirely my fault. Do not know how I managed that, but in the newest package instead of well tested 1.45 pbo was added some very old HAC pbo version (with some problems with topics.bikb apparently typo in its name, thus error). I just reuploaded HAC in proper set and refreshed direct links. Both contained versions just checked and tested and working fine. Armaholic mirror updated as well thanks to Foxhound... Anyway, this is about pbo version. Script version in the same package was proper and should work.

Edited October 15, 2013 by Rydygier

[ConstantinePC 10]

It's working perfectly now :)

This mod is really amazing, thanks a lot.

[monyetswa 1]

Just curious if anyone has made any more missions using this mod. I've been playing my halfassed test missions for days already, using this mod is amazing.

[euly 0]

Hey everyone. I'm planning on buying Rydygier a copy of ArmA 3 on Steam. If you are interested in contributing to show your support for HAC, please PM me asap.

[Rydygier 1309]

Thank you very much for this initiative. Really appreciated. Eventually I would purchase it on my own, but no idea, when exactly I'll have enough money for that purpose, rather not very soon, so this indeed may seriously speed things up towards HAC for A3. I currently got access to the not limited net connection for several months, I think.

[Rydygier 1309]

I have Arma 3, all seems OK for now. So, thanks again, and now is time to prepare Hetman for A3. When ready to release, thread in A3 section will be created. After that I'll think, if/how new A3 features should enrich/change/improve Hetman.

[katipo66 94]

That really is great news, look forward to it along with any other interesting scripts you might cook up in A3 :)

[smallhill 0]

That's great news indeed. :)

[delta99 34]

Great to here.

[meltedping 0]

Rydygier let us pay for youre copy. its you have done so much for us, and I will help you with patches. pls

[Rydygier 1309]

That way this was done. I did not pay a penny, it is a gift from someone (some?). I said this before, and I say this again - this community is amazing. :) As long, as I'm in my "Winter Palace" I have not limited internet, so I can handle patches.

After first day I have generally functional Hetman under A3. Not much, some did this before, but it is good start and after all creating proper unit category set is time consuming part. First secondary issues fixed, other awaits. Probably biggest changes are required for artillery handling - wholly new stuff here in A3. I'm also thinking about nice distinctive name for A3 Hetman by modifying suffix according to la_Vieille's suggestion: Hetman - Artificial Leader = HAL.

[euly 0]

Rydygier, you might consider only working on the script version and not an addon version. This could save time and effort, especially if you manage to implement multiplayer capability.

[Rydygier 1309]

True. That's my plane in fact. First to do one, script version fully operational, then think about addon or perhaps also module version (similar to addon, but not need CBA, instead must be placed module logic object on the map) based on first. For testing MP compatibility, when done, I'll need to find tool similar to the A2's TA2DST, I suppose, there should be version for A3 somewhere, So I could launch dedi and play on same PC client side.

[monyetswa 1]

Sounds promising so far. Make sure you link us as soon as you start the A3 thread.

[Rydygier 1309]

I will.

Today sorted out smoke usage, flares usage, chute ammo drops and fixed more problems with debug markers and one other issue. 40mm flares however will be turned off, at least for now. For shooting 40mm smoke and flares is used "fire" script command. Apparently it works differently/is malfunctioning under A3. Instead of aim up and shoot soldier does strange thing, so grenade land at his feet like thrown away from the pocket. It is even better for smoke (still not realistic at all), but definitelly not for flares. Tried one alternative, but failed. Perhaps this will be fixed... No big deal IMHO. By default, If I'm not mistaken, there is no any unit equipped with 40mm flare grenade. It is also rarely used - only in defensive mode during night when enemy detected.

Known "todo" things for porting stage:

- kbTell phrases aren't working - only text (minor);

- artillery (major);

- MP (major);

- check, if day/night is detected properly (minor).

Most probably much more things will pop up...

[Infyra 10]

I have been enjoying the addon a lot the last week! I have one question regarding Big Boss mode, it seems rather unstable.

I can get it to work if I load the demo mission, but if I make any changes like a bigger battlefield, adding units etc, the Big Bosses will not wake up anymore and it will be just a regular fight with 8 leaders, any ideas? Is it a feature that you find works if you put all the requested items from the manual on the battlefield?

[Rydygier 1309]

but if I make any changes like a bigger battlefield, adding units etc, the Big Bosses will not wake up anymore and it will be just a regular fight with 8 leaders, any ideas?

This must be about something more. Changing battlefield size nor additional units shouldn't have such effect. BB is well tested under various settings and circumstancies. No ideas atm - lack of data. I could check example of such not working properly mission for you, if you upload it.

[Infyra 10]

I think I found the problem, it needs the init.sqf in the same folder right? I just changed the demo and saved it under a different name, seems it didn't put the init file in there. I will experiment a bit more !

[Rydygier 1309]

Right. When you save mission under another name, all files except mission.sqm must be manually copied from the folder of original mission to the newly saved folder. Unfortunatelly Arma doesn't do that for us.

[euly 0]

Another feature on the A3 list should be helicopter transports. In A2, HAC was logistically restricted by its limited ability to move troops around. A lot of my missions that played for 8+ hours often ended in stalemates because both sides were unwilling to risk losing their last units. I know this was a pain for you Rydygier, but maybe you can design a feature that gives groups a preferred method of transport. For example, group 1 will only use a truck if no helicopters are available.

[Rydygier 1309]

Well, aerial and land cargo transport can be expanded with such priotirizing feature, so chosen at init groups will get not preferred transportation only, if preferred is not available. When porting will be done, means on stage two (expanding&improving). Currently it looks like follows:

1. Group receives movement order;

2. Is checked, if group has any own vehicle. If no:

3. Is checked, if destination is further than 1000 meters. If so:

4. HAC looks for cargo for that group taking into account several simple and complex factors including distance between vehicle and group. Truck may be sent, if is at most 1500 meters away, aerial unit when <= 4500. At this stage is good moment for such prioritizing.

both sides were unwilling to risk losing their last units.

It is wrong? Honestly exactly that I would expect from bled out forces, that lost offensive ability due to losses and/or morale drop.

Edited October 22, 2013 by Rydygier

[sixt 26]

Hey Rydygier, looking forward to your A3 version :-)

I have some questions about your A2 version, about some of the configs. Hope its okay though you are working on the A3 version.

About the RydHQ_ExcludedG config variable and other config variables where you can put specific groups. Is it the name of the leader of the groups that should be in the array or is the group name? im alittle confused reading your manuel :-)

Attack_reserve config variable is another thing, i don't understand to set up, is there some examples? Basicly i want the AI to use less reserves and more units for the initial attack if you understand?

Thanks

Robert (Sixt)

[euly 0]

Alright, look. I hope we can get the opinions from other people reading this thread here because this is a frustration point with how HAC mobilizes infantry. With troop movement, its slow, really slow, so slow to the point where if you're using a large island, you could take a nap before the action starts. Early on, before I started placing units in strategic places on the map, I would try to have them deployed from a base. For example, I would place everything in a base, like 10 groups of infantry, 3 APCs, 3 trucks, and 6 helicopters (6, because many would either crash or be shot down). At the start of the game, it was all too common to have 7 infantry groups immediately set out on foot, while two groups boarded trucks, and one group boarded a helicopter. What was HAC thinking? It had 5 more helicopters at its disposal. Those choppers should be acting like taxi drivers working for tips.

If the first waypoint for a group is closer than 1000 meters, it seems logical for them to use a truck or walk, but for a truck to go off road is risky, and likely to become disabled after hitting rocks and trees. A group walking, in safe behavior, takes a long time for them to get anywhere. Maybe when HAC first initializes, it could work on mobilizing troops using helicopters, then revert back to standard behavior after troops have reached their first distant waypoints. For trucks, it would be good if they would primarily use roads and unload troops near their closest waypoint that aligned to the road, rather than trying to deliver them in the woods or in rocky terrain that could permanently disable the truck. As of right now, a low fence can take out a truck's tire.

If a group has a vehicle attached, it is almost always a death sentence for at least one member of that group. Motorized and mechanized infantry just do not work very well in ArmA. The crew tend to act like they are riding a bull at the rodeo when they are in formation and someone is always ran over.

As for the stalemate because of bled out forces, I don't know. It seems something else needs to happen other than the forces going into idle mode. Maybe the remaining units could pull back and fortify a strategic location, such as a town or a military compound. Those military watch towers on the map could work, if they could find one. Any better ideas?

[Rydygier 1309]

Is it the name of the leader of the groups that should be in the array or is the group name?

Group name always in such cases with only one exception, as stated in description, for RydHQ_Excluded (without "G").

Attack_reserve config variable is another thing, i don't understand to set up, is there some examples? Basicly i want the AI to use less reserves and more units for the initial attack

How many groups are used for attack depends on several factors. By default per each known enemy group may be sent up to 3 infantry groups, two armored and one aerial plus two snipers if available. But there is interesting config variable:

RydxHQ_MARatio = [-1,-1,-1,-1] – shared by all Leaders. By default HAC will send against each enemy group up to three infantry/soft, two armored, one air and two sniper groups. Each number in this array is corresponding to one of that kinds of forces in same order. Setting any of that numbers with not negative value will replace for that kind described default allocation with alternative one: total number of non-reserve and not busy groups of that kind will be multiplied by set corresponding value. Result rounded up means maximal number of groups of given kind, that HAC will try to send against one enemy group. So for example, if there are 6 infantry groups and 8 armored groups not set as reserve and currently idle, for [0.15,0.5,-1,-1] against next spotted enemy group in that cycle HAC will send up to 6 * 0.15 = 1 infantry group and 8 * 0.5 = 4 armored groups. Air and sniper groups will be allocated in default way;

That is one thing. Note, that mentioned reserve, and units busy or combat ineffective are excluded. SO now about reducing reserve:

RydHQ_AttackReserve = 0.5 * (0.5 + (RydHQ_Circumspection/1.5)) – multiplication of total number of available in given cycle combat effective groups by this value will return number of such groups, that HAC will keep as main reserve (part of them may be used for main flanking maneuver);

Formula after = is default value if this variable is not defined with other value by user. So to overwrite default reserve settings just define this value with needed multiplier. For example use RydHQ_AttackReserve = 0; to disable reserve completely, so available for attack will be all groups combat effective and not busy.

Additionally we also could convince idle groups to go wherever we want using not only "secondary objectives" but also "idle decoy" described in chapter 3, this also may act like kind of "wave attack".

Other possibility - divide AI forces between several Leaders, each with objectives on the same locations. Each will send towards objective or spotted enemy own portion of groups, so in summary amount of sent groups will be for eg. 3 Leaders tripled.

Also, using:

RydHQ_CaptLimit = 10 - the number of allied units (not groups!) near an objective that commander will consider as sufficient to “capture†that objective. The lesser value the more dynamic progress.

You can control amount of units sent with capturing mission, so this is another way to tweak number of groups basically send forward.

---------- Post added at 00:20 ---------- Previous post was at 23:19 ----------

With troop movement, its slow, really slow, so slow to the point where if you're using a large island, you could take a nap before the action starts.

Well, if you set foot infantry on large area - what else to expect? Nothing more RydHQ_Rush can be done for foot infantry speed. Want quick action? Use faster units, deploy enemy close or reduce battlefield area...

Early on, before I started placing units in strategic places on the map, I would try to have them deployed from a base. For example, I would place everything in a base, like 10 groups of infantry, 3 APCs, 3 trucks, and 6 helicopters (6, because many would either crash or be shot down). At the start of the game, it was all too common to have 7 infantry groups immediately set out on foot, while two groups boarded trucks, and one group boarded a helicopter. What was HAC thinking? It had 5 more helicopters at its disposal. Those choppers should be acting like taxi drivers working for tips.

HAC assigns cargo only for certain kinds of tasks: basic attack mission, capture objective mission, main flanking maneuver and flanking SpecFor attack. At the beginning most of "not using cargo" groups most probably are just at idle patrols, only some may be used for recon (no cargo - low profile required) or capturing, if rapid capturing active (cargo possible). In reality idle groups in fact should rather do nothing, awaiting orders. In the post above are some tips, how to make HAC send more groups with mission with cargo possibility. You can configure HAC so will send immediatelly even all its groups forward, just this is not desired be me for HAC default behaviour. Small idea to consider - perhaps I'll implement kind of meta-configs, that with one line will set whole bunch of sub-configs, kind of easy to use "behavioral profiles", must to think about that. Something like RydHQ_MindlessWaveTactics = true. Besides - that's Hetman, not your servant. He knows better and decides, what choppers should do, not you. :)

There is also RydHQ_CargoOnly array just to be sure, that given vehicles will be not busy with anything else, and always ready for taxi.

I'm not sure in fact - what exactly do you expect? So HAC will by default at init put majority of his infantry into the choppers and send all them... where? Towards first objective just like that? Taxi each group here and there on its idle patrol? I don't like it at all.

If the first waypoint for a group is closer than 1000 meters, it seems logical for them to use a truck or walk, but for a truck to go off road is risky, and likely to become disabled after hitting rocks and trees.

We all know driving AI quality in A2. Yes, I could, and probably will try to make HAC assign trucks only, when destination is near the road, but, as we know, a truck is fully capable to stuck even on straight road. If this is too annoying - disband the trucks...

A group walking, in safe behavior, takes a long time for them to get anywhere. Maybe when HAC first initializes, it could work on mobilizing troops using helicopters, then revert back to standard behavior after troops have reached their first distant waypoints.

See above. At the beginning, unless you set special config, most groups are idle. What else they should do before recon is complete? Rush blindly towards objective? Possible to configure that way if you wish, but such wave tactics will be not default.

For trucks, it would be good if they would primarily use roads

These do that anyway.

and unload troops near their closest waypoint that aligned to the road,

A bit more tricky than above solution with choosing transport depending on distance between goal and nearest road segment. We can't reliably predict route, that AI will choose, so to know, when group should be disembarked, we need constant situation monitoring. Heavy stuff.

rather than trying to deliver them in the woods or in rocky terrain that could permanently disable the truck. As of right now, a low fence can take out a truck's tire.

Yes, that is frustrating. As HAC will not control drivers on their route, we have one of above solutions - only near-road missions for trucks, monitoring for disembark moment or no trucks. I prefer first.

If a group has a vehicle attached, it is almost always a death sentence for at least one member of that group. Motorized and mechanized infantry just do not work very well in ArmA. The crew tend to act like they are riding a bull at the rodeo when they are in formation and someone is always ran over.

True. And frustrating as hell. Sadly HAC can't fix that. From my experience - this often appplies also for not grouped vehicls as transport after disembark. Thus delay between disembrak and vehicle returning. Not always sufficient.

As for the stalemate because of bled out forces, I don't know. It seems something else needs to happen other than the forces going into idle mode. Maybe the remaining units could pull back and fortify a strategic location, such as a town or a military compound. Those military watch towers on the map could work, if they could find one. Any better ideas?

Well, indeed, for bled out forces I would expect rather defensive positions, no idle wandering. Not sure, what happens with HAC decisions after 8 hours, for obvious reason this can't be reasonably tested or checked and worked out by trials and erros method. Anyway, if losses are massive, with default config, is most likely that HAC will choose defensive stance and will remain. But I wonder, if after so long time morale even then will finally raise enough to go back to the "offensive". Still if morale was low, probably is, that all groups will with time panic or surrender, which is permanent state. But if no, then someone should be sent with recon, capturing after morale raising etc... unless all groups are permantly combat ineffective due to losses or no ammo. Playing in debug mode so long may answer that, but I'll not spend 8 hours just for that, to many other things to do... I simply can't tell, what exactly lies behind such situation, too many things may affect that.

Finding certain kind of strategic positions like military bases isn't trivial. Better just set there objectives.

[euly 0]

Well, if you set foot infantry on large area - what else to expect?

I expect the commander to mobilize the troops, not go on smoke break.

Besides - that's Hetman, not your servant. He knows better and decides, what choppers should do, not you. :)

Are you sure it's not Mr.Magoo Commander?

So HAC will by default at init put majority of his infantry into the choppers and send all them... where? Towards first objective just like that? Taxi each group here and there on its idle patrol? I don't like it at all.

Not to each objective, just their first distant objective. Why not use the choppers if they are not being used?

Edited October 23, 2013 by Lucidity