HETMAN - Artificial Commander

[taro8 806]

Hmm... I will test further to see if I get orders. I play on cadet mode thats why waypoints may show up on map.

Some SECOPS missions may work rather well like search for weapon caches or patrol, HVT may work as well. I'm not sure about defense missions, does HAC move soldiers if they man static defenses? If not defense and attack may work somewhat. I think I will try this out.

Still idea with HAC adding task in journal is very sound.

Another odd thing I noticed: If HAC has mechanized units with AAV and another one with LAV, it will send the one closer to the objective as scout (even if difference is just few meters). AAV is pretty slow and usually hauls a lot of guys inside (making it juicy target) with makes it subpar choice for scouting. Maybe adding LAV as scout would be good idea?

[igneous01 19]

is HAC working for guerilla/independant side as well? I have not fully checked yet but just wanted to ask just in case since it was not mentioned.

[Rydygier 1302]

Yes, HAC may control all factions except civilians.

@Taro8

As for units sent to scout - Mechanized infantry with LAV or AAV is in the same categories - "ATInf", "Inf" and "Larmor". To give a priority to LAV I would have create a separate category for it. I can do it, but I do not know if it's so significant difference ... HAC sends to reconnaissance units of this types only if it can not send any scouts, snipers or FOs. Alternatively, you can add a "LAV25" classname to RHQ_Recon so will have priority over the AAV, but in this way, an unit may be excluded from an attack missions because considered as reconnaissance unit. About SECOPS - I'm not convinced, but if I can figure out how to distinguish units spawned by the module and it will not be too complicated, I can think about optional disable HAC control over them.

Edited December 26, 2011 by Rydygier

[mankyle 370]

I'm for adding support groups such as the HMMMWVs Ambulances, Fuel, repair and Ammo trucks.

Those groups would move to a position behind the frontlines, like the reserves do.

Then the combat groups would move to the support groups when their vehicles are damaged, low on fuel or on ammo.

[katipo66 94]

Alternatively, you can add a "LAV25" classname to RHQ_Recon

I like this option, as opposed to locking it down, this way you can have M1A2 as recon if thats the type of mission you want...

[taro8 806]

About SECOPS - I'm not convinced, but if I can figure out how to distinguish units spawned by the module and it will not be too complicated, I can think about optional disable HAC control over them.

Best way is to extract Secops module and see if units created by it have any specific names. If not you would need to capture the moment they are created and somehow make units, created by SECOPS module, excluded from HETMAN. Still Im just thinking about the possibilities if its too much then dont worry.

About LAV: I just pointed out thing I found odd. This could be solved by adding "Medium armor" (IFV?) category, in with AAV, Bradley's and BMP's etc would reside. HAC could use light armor as scouting and supporting vehicles then.

EDIT:

I think I found solution to HAC completely messing up missions: why not add another mode of HAC? In with it would command only units that it's allowed to.

This solution is rather easy to implement (I think) just add condition to excluded list so ALL units are excluded unless they have specific phrase in name (HAC_[something], HACB_[something]). Or create "include list" with above condition so mission maker can assign units under HAC command during the mission.

This way player can have dynamic battlefield without breaking stuff like SECOPS, also this would allow for some scripted sequences. HAC would become a tool for mission maker for creating unscripted battlefield rather then separate game mode by itself. Still, option for complete control for HAC should still be there.

Edited December 26, 2011 by Taro8

[mjolnir66 48]

Maybe split RHQ_LArmor and RHQ_LArmorAT so that vehicals that are more dedicate APCs have their own class, maybe you could get it so on the attack they stop a fair way back and drop their troops off, or do what we do and drive right in and throw their troops straight onto the objective.

[taro8 806]

For me (Im using quite a bit of AI enchanting addons) when infantry with APC in group is engaged they immediately disembark and proceed to fight on foot under the cover of their APC. I think this is best solution as APC charging right into enemy is juicy target for AT weapons. Loosing APC AND whole squad dosent seem to be worth it.

Light AT or medium armor or IFV's, the name dosent matter as long there will be new category for nasty stuff like ERA Bradley's or BMP-3's.

[mr_centipede 31]

First of all, you have done a very good job on this mod.

Secondly, as a suggestion, why not make an audio/text cue when the player received orders from HQ, like a command like sideChat or hint. Also, I think it would be good idea also to have a destination marker on the map for the player, so that the player know where to go. Sometimes ppl play with minimal HUD and dont have wp cue on their hud.

I think that is all. Thank you & good job :)

[subroc 4]

Ive noticed a thing that i miss in HAC. Right now im using multiarea defence by moving the hq marker around (1st strongpoint fall retreat to 2nd etc). When running in debug i notice that the markers very often stays around the first objective. It would be real neat to have a variable to reset the commanders calculations like RydHQ_reset.

Thank you for making this, its really fun just to pit AI on eachother in the editor and watch them bash it out.

Btw tried it in MP and it seems to work fine if you just run in on the server and not the clients

[Rydygier 1302]

Thanks for another good ideas, folks. I have already long list, and still remain a few days until end of the year. :) I wonder how many of them I manage to add in the new version.

---------- Post added at 12:13 ---------- Previous post was at 12:10 ----------

I think I found solution to HAC completely messing up missions: why not add another mode of HAC? In with it would command only units that it's allowed to.

This solution is rather easy to implement (I think) just add condition to excluded list so ALL units are excluded unless they have specific phrase in name (HAC_[something], HACB_[something]). Or create "include list" with above condition so mission maker can assign units under HAC command during the mission.

Or maybe use the above mentioned idea with HAC control for synchronized units only. Yes, this may work fine. Thanks a lot.

---------- Post added at 12:16 ---------- Previous post was at 12:13 ----------

Btw tried it in MP and it seems to work fine if you just run in on the server and not the clients

That is good nerws. Thanks for reset idea. Currently there is some reset script, but it works every 10 minuts and not all calculations are reseted.

EDIT: About "medium armor" category - making it is not a problem. Most importantly is to determine exactly which units would qualify (eg from Arma 2 will be, let's say, BMP-3, T-34 may be too... anything else?) , and what exactly will be difference in their behavior and uses on the battlefield compared to tanks, and also compared to behavior and uses of lightly armored vehicles.

Edited December 27, 2011 by Rydygier

[katipo66 94]

The way I understand it is the commander makes calculated waypoint decisions but does not effect ai behavour? Or does he give behavour also? Personally I'd like behavour left to default, or optional, I'm sure I have seen ai squads disembark and fight separately, same also with helos filled with a squad? Not always, but that's true for this set of scripts, something different eachtime!

Sorry cannot test, camping with no pc :(

Anyway what I'm meaning is I love the way this calculates and assigns clever waypoints but not sure I'd want it to control any engagement from there other than default?

Sorry if this dont make sense! In tent wif Ifone and bottle of whiskey (dancing banana)!

[Rydygier 1302]

I agree, task of HAC is and should be assigning a waypoints rather than control of AI behavior on unit/group level (there are other great addons for that purpose). Thus my doubts about the new "Marmor" category. Differences between waypoints allocable for "Larmor" and "Harmor" and those for "Marmor" will be probably very little, and such category units behavior could vary significantly on unit/group AI level, which is not intend to modify by HAC.

Edited December 27, 2011 by Rydygier

[mjolnir66 48]

I agree, task of HAC is and should be assigning a waypoints rather than control of AI behavior on unit/group level (there are other great addons for that purpose). Thus my doubts about the new "Marmor" category. Differences between waypoints allocable for "Larmor" and "Harmor" and those for "Marmor" will be probably very little, and such category units behavior could vary significantly on unit/group AI level, which is not intend to modify by HAC.

Light armour should be used for flanking and recon more, wheres medium armour and heavy armour should be more for assaults.

[Rydygier 1302]

OK. It is both reasonable and, probably, possible. :)

[taro8 806]

Sunchronization may create problems for less able mission makers. It will be harder to add units under HAC command during the mission. If, there is include list (like current exclude list) it make things easier.

Im still in favor of HAC commanding units if they (or their leader) have specific phrase in name. Saves a lot of hassle when you want to create missions quickly.

Medium armor category should include "tanks, but not tanks", ie. armored vehicles that arent tanks but can make REAL mess. Bradley's, BMP-3's (maybe 2's as well), even heavy AA units (Shilka's and Tunguska's are fucking deadly when they get their beads on some unfortunate target).

So it should look like this:

*Light armor: heavier wheeled armored vehicles (LAV, strikers), light tracked vehicles (M113)

*Light AT armor: as above, but it has to be able to knock out tank quickly (like stryker with AT cannon, or other LA with AT missiles)

*Medium armor: heavily armored and armed troop carriers (Bradley's, BMP-3, 2), heavy tracked vehicles that arent tanks (shilka, tunguska), light tanks

[Rydygier 1302]

Well. So maybe you can "incude" units in this mode in various ways. Will think. :)

[taro8 806]

When you are member of team, HAC commands show up on map as waypoints like in cadet mode, no matter the difficulty.

EDIT:

Here is another idea: when HAC shuffles units around (moving reserves, patrols) if they arent reinforcements, they should have limited speed+safe. This way they will keep on roads when they can instead of plowing through countryside. Also it looks more realistic with units slowly and carefully driving and soldiers walking instead of running all the time.

Another idea are patrols: when HAC has few units in reserve it will order some of them to start patrols to check if there are any sneaky specops guys around. Most important areas would be:

*area around commander

*area of high reserve concentration

*a road between commander and troop concentration points (preferably patrolled by cars and light armor), nothing big just 2 looped waypoints. behavior should be set to the one that will keep patrol on roads

*Combat Air Patrols for planes

Such patrols will make things more interesting for specops oriented players. It will be a bit harder for them, but it will also create some nice ambush opportunities.

Edited December 28, 2011 by Taro8

[stupidwhitekid75 11]

Hi, just wanted to say this is a great add on! I hope you don't quit working on it, I honestly can't see myself playing very often without it and I am very hopefully that I'll be seeing it continued on into ArmA 3 ;)

Some ideas/improvements I thought I might add:

1. Something I have been noticing, whenever you start off in a mission, no matter who you play as or how many friendly/enemy groups there are, you are always placed as a reserve unit and are forced to wait around for nearly 10 minutes before entering the fight. I don't want to say do away with this completely, because I like the randomness, especially the feeling you get when you're ordered to assist a unit under fire, going into a situation not knowing exactly what to expect. If this can be fixed I would make it more random, like a 50/50 chance of being placed as a reserve force or attacking force immediately at the start.

2. Reserve units/defending units should do more than just sit in the same position they were placed. These units should wait in place for some period of time, while all the attacking units move out, only to then be placed in defensive positions to aid in any oncoming enemy assaults or even nearby passing enemies. The defensive positions should be logical, for example don't design it so that a tank drives up a mountain. Instead the forces should be moved in sort of a hasty 360* defense, sending infantry up highly elevated areas to spot from afar while armored units sit low on the ground, close to roads to defend the most logical assault points.

3. Forces should use different formations. This could be based on several things: squad size, type of units, size/shape of area they're attacking, etc. For example, a four man fire team would do best in a 'delta' formation, as they form a diamond and are able to engage from north, south, east or west immediately depending on where they came under fire from. Armored units would be more effective in spaced out, line like formations, as all of their available firepower is up front and ready to be used as well as making too many targets for the enemy to effectively engage. Wheeled units would do better in column or staggered column formation as they're primarily regarded as transport vehicles. They are able to quickly move from point A to B, if the lead vehicle comes under fire, the rest can stop in formation while infantry disembark and assist in engaging targets. Some work might need to be done to improve the units ability to create column formations and movement however. I proposed staggered formation simply because it opens up the possibility of two firing lanes, maybe not as quick but still has the ability to increase overall firepower when engaging targets while on the move.

4. Recon/SF units who are used to scout areas should be able to relay info back to the commander, who then is able to place positions on the players map to alert him of enemies positions. I'm not saying use the moving icon that alerts the player of every enemy movement, instead, make it an X or something written briefly describing the type of target, how many troops/vehicles/aircraft, and a time stamp suggesting when the enemies were seen here. This provides the player with an idea of the enemies position and what force size they're potentially facing to determine how they may go about attacking. The catch is that the position will not always be accurate as a short amount of time would pass between relaying info, and it would only be updated in intervals like 5 or 10 minutes. If the observing/scout force was eliminated, there would be no new information updates regarding enemies.

5. Supply units should come in two types: mobile and stationary. Mobile are only able to move if grouped with at least 1 offensive unit. These two or more units would move along roads to each concentration of friendly forces, beginning with the largest and finishing with the smallest. The units will not travel off the road, they will get as close as possible and units in need will move to them to get what they need. Once the supply units have visited each main concentration of forces, they will move back to base where they'll wait X amount of time before traveling out again. This creates supply convoys, something I think would be really cool because of the ability to attack them..disrupt flow of supplies (vehicles would have to stop to engage attacking forces, possibly even attempt to retreat if overwhelmed, resulting in friendly forces unable to heal wounded or resupply to continue the fight) or eliminate them all together. Stationary supply units would have no offensive supply units attached to them, and would remain at base, causing units who were in need to go all the way back to their base to get what they need and then rejoin the fight.

6. MEDEVAC option. Allow teams to be able to call in MEDEVAC transport. If a squad is severely wounded (over 60% killed or wounded, wounded to the point where they can't walk, that way squads won't request them left and right), they will move away to a presumably safe area to call in a MEDEVAC helicopter or vehicle to pick them up and transport them back to base so that they can heal/rearm/etc. It would be up to the commander based off of other requests, how many MEDEVAC transports were at his disposal, where the requesting squads are, potential threats along the way, etc... as to whether or not it would be approved.

7. Sort of side missions. If a helicopter or jet gets shot down in battle and the pilot/co-pilot survive, it would be wise for the commander to split up the nearest combat group to rescue survivors. The pilots would be added to the rescue group through like the 'join' waypoint, and would be brought out of the conflict zone and removed from the group once returned to base somehow (whether they get there via vehicle or air transport) where the would wait the rest of the match out (since they probably have no other real use w/o their own aircraft). The catch would be that the rescuing group couldn't stray too far from the original group they split from because they might be under contact from enemies and would need the assistance. Distance from the group to the pilot could play a major factor in whether they're rescued..if they're 100 meters away..they can probably save themselves with a LITTLE bit of assistance from friendlies. Meaning that they sort of would shift their fire in that direction to keep heat off the pilots while they ran away. 200-400 meters would call for a rescue, and anything beyond that would depend on nearby enemy forces, terrain, etc. In most cases after 400 meters the pilots would be on their own in terms of survival until they got within the 200-400 meters distance and were able to be rescued.

Sorry for such a long post, just some input to maybe help out this already outstanding addon. Will add more later if I can think of anything. Keep up the great work!!!

[taro8 806]

Ad 1. Actually it depends what unit you are part of and how close its to traget at start. I was able to see a LOT of action by being a part of squad with LAV that started a bit closer to conquest target.

Ad 2. See my idea about patrols that should give something to do.

Ad 3. Im in favors of HAC changing formations. Also changing behavior (safe, stealth etc.) and speed would be great.

Ad 5. Some kind of supply system was already discussed before and maybe it will be added,

Ad 6. First Rydygier must create basic system that will allow vehicles to carry around soldiers. Right now infantry only uses vehicles if they are in their squad. MEDEVAC would be pretty easy, HAC would only check if units have a lot of wounded and send some vehicle to pick them up and drive to nearest ambulance, AI will do the rest themselves I think.

Ad 7. If there will be new mode for HAC then SECOPS module will be all you need.

[kremator 1064]

Talking of wounded .... if we were to use DAPMAN's first aid stuff, you would get troops rolling in agony. A simple load into vehicles and transport back from frontlines and voila casevac.

Regarding the helicopter missions .... now if only this could be put over the top of spx2high's Workhorse mission :)

On a separate note .. I'm following this thread daily (even hourly!) to check what new things Rydygier (and the rest of you) have come up with. The potential for this system is HUGE !

[Rydygier 1302]

@stupidwhitekid75

1. Hmm. There is no such rule implemented. And personally can't confirm that. During the game, quite often I was sent to attack or to scout right away.

2. I hope I can get the new version of the defense more dynamic and generally make reserve does not stuck on makeshift defensive positions, as it is currently. I doubt if I can make defensive positions were occupied even better thought out. Units are currently deployed on the ground within which to handle best (infantry in an urban area and among the trees, vehicles, on the contrary), and reconnaissance units and snipers on elevated positions with good wide field of view towards enemy. There is even reverse slope set ambushes. Something else - the most logical positions are also the easiest to predict. I wish the script could also from time to time to surprise. The issue of selection of position is a matter of solution to the problem creation of such a code, which sifted unfavorable positions or choose the best. Available commands and my ability to give me a limited room for maneuver in this regard. Moreover, to designate positions most appropriate from a human point of view I would have to use a complex topography scanner. I saw something similar, but such programs are extremely "heavy" and will cause great lag. And will still remain a matter of interpretation of these topographical data... The effect is not worth that price. Unfortunately, algorithm does not think like a man. Maybe I can do something in terms of guarding the nearby roads.

3. I will think about diversity of formations. The question is, as far game AI will use in the fight advantage that those formations provide. Himself have little idea about under what circumstances which formation is best, except that for the transport column in the fight rather line, so I will rely on your suggestions, unless someone can tell me anything else about when formations which should be used. I will be grateful for any information in this topic. Efficiently moving a column of vehicles on the road is a hard thing. So far I have not seen any script that would solved this issue. Each of the tried is sometimes unreliable. In addition, the best move vehicles very slowly. BTW I noticed that also infantry is moving on the road in a bizarre manner. Hence, I am rather willing make to moving unit avoided roads ...

4. Currently, a similar system is used when the player is a leaderHQ unit. In this case, cyclically known enemies are to reveal to him and it gives a similar effect, because shown information is incomplete and does not necessarily valid. I can share this information to all. I will think also about markers.

5. Such convoys of supplies would be great. Maybe I can add something like this, but I can not promise anything. It looks complicated to implement. In any case, some form to provide logistical support should appear.

6. I'll see what I can do ...

7. Here I am afraid that we enter a very complex level of behavior mapping. Separately, it is all probably to do, but gathered together... I look at already long "to do" list and wonder how heavy to bear for the game proves a script that takes account all these interesting ideas, and to what extent I can, with my little skill, do not disappoint your expectations, folks. Your creativity is far beyond my expectations. :)

Thanks a lot!

---------- Post added at 13:07 ---------- Previous post was at 13:00 ----------

The potential for this system is HUGE !

So huge, that begins to frighten, what awaits me. :)

[taro8 806]

You should refrain from directly affecting units behavior. Just tell them what they are supposed to do, Arma 2 AI is surprisingly good at situations like that.

2. Just tell them to set up defenses in towns and forests. These locations are only ones that provide decent cover in Arma 2. All you need to do is set AI in combat mode and they will seek cover by themselves.

Maybe you could add option for mission maker defined important spots? Just anything would do game logic, trigger or unit. HAC would consider such position important and try to capture or defend it. For example you use dynamic object placement, using game logic, to create base, then put logic's name in some list, then HAC will consider area around that point as strategically important.

3. I actually dont have much problems on roads, just tell vehicles to drive slowly if its safe. If they are needed somewhere then plowing through everything is ok. Dunno what is your problem with infantry they use roads well for me, again just if they are safe.

As for formation:

Line - firepower focused to front, great for frontline combat

Column - for mobility when moving around while its safe

Wedge - general purpose formation

Diamond - all sides are covered good for defense if you dont know here enemy is

File - very tight formation, I usually keep my squad like that in case I need their support

Echelon - I think this one is for Aircrafts, its less likely they smash into each other when turning

4. Maybe you could use UAV system of mapping: marker with time, use markers for units types and stars to show their relative strength.

6. Again medevac would be just HAC pulling out damaged units and moving them to nearest ambulance, AI will do rest themselves. Or sending Ambulance to squad if its safe enough.

[Rydygier 1302]

2. Thanks, I think I shall make use of this advices. As for the important points - I was thinking of a similar system, could combined with optional additional objectives. Maybe I would add objectives of different types. One would have just to get, other to hold or something like that.

3. Thanks for info about formations. About my road problems - convoys, if that consist more than one vehicle, often stucks, drivers suddenly stop, twist to the side, turn back etc... Infantry groups, that has just slowly going down the road trying to set a long column along the roadside, but units often turn back, go to the end of the formation, then turn back again ... hard to describe. I have Arma 2 1.10 only.

4. Probably good idea, will see;

6. Yes, it probably will be something like that. I hope, this will be enough.

[taro8 806]

3. I just did some testing on latest CO (+GL4, ASR AI):

*Convoys of vehicles works fine. I tested wheeled, cars and tracked grouped together on normal speed (slow was to slow IMHO). Once group sorts out itself the ride is pretty smooth. Tracked vehicles are bit messy when turning, but it actually makes sense considering how they turn, but I had smooth ride along southern Chernarus coast in mixed convoy (AAV, M1A2, HMMVE and MTVR)

*A squad of infantry (14 guys) works fine with "safe+limited". Once they get going its pretty much just dudes walking in line at side of road. At sharp turns some stop (to keep formation and order), but I didnt notice any problems you mentioned. When stopping some of them just look at side, IMHO its very convincing and looks like a nice touch.

FUN FACT: I just noticed that soldiers leave footprints! I never knew there was something like that! :D

Edited December 28, 2011 by Taro8