HETMAN - Artificial Commander

[Rydygier 1302]

Emmm. Not sure, what do you mean? "To do" is also current change log, but what this quoted stuff has to do with it? I must apologize, I'm not english native speaker, so sometimes I may do not understand something, just like here. :) About quoted text can say, that was unable to repro mentioned issue, and never encountered this. As for SECOPS - this probably will be not working well with any version of HAC, because of mentioned reasons (you can use them both, but with silly and unpredictable effects).

[euly 0]

Emmm. Not sure, what do you mean? "To do" is also current change log, but what this quoted stuff has to do with it? I must apologize, I'm not english native speaker, so sometimes I may do not understand something, just like here. :) About quoted text can say, that was unable to repro mentioned issue, and never encountered this. As for SECOPS - this probably will be not working well with any version of HAC, because of mentioned reasons (you can use them both, but with silly and unpredictable effects).

I was looking for "bug fixes," but if your To-Do list is your objectives, then that's satisfactory.

[Rydygier 1302]

Yes, "to do" gives info about all changes after last official release (currently after 1.1) including bugs, features, ideas, changes - all. Red is cancelled, green is done, black awaits...

[euly 0]

Yes, "to do" gives info about all changes after last official release (currently after 1.1) including bugs, features, ideas, changes - all. Red is cancelled, green is done, black awaits...

That works. For the morale drop when the leader dies, all I meant was the units should do something like flee or surrender when the leader is killed, not simply behave normally.

[Rydygier 1302]

I see. I was thinking about that some time ago - what will do an army, when it's general is no more. My answer was - first, will do its last orders with normal activity, because soldiers at the start do not even know, that Leader is dead. Only after some time, after many futile attempts to establish communication wit HQ begins to grow anarchy, and morale starts to drop. At least I think so. In my opinion may take long houres before that. So IMHO at first the only effect of lack of the HQ "brain" should be only lack of new orders. Decay of the forces will progress slowly, after some time. So now, is there need to implement such a long-term behaviour changes in HAC? Who will play long enough after Leader's death to see these changes?

[orcinus 121]

That works. For the morale drop when the leader dies, all I meant was the units should do something like flee or surrender when the leader is killed, not simply behave normally.

That was certainly the case in medieval times when the leader was often a king, emperor, or other 'noble'; in such cases the cause was obviously lost, as usually it was in a battle with some other robber-baron scumbag (to quote Bob Geldof). Modern armies don't give up just because a general gets killed. They have a general staff with senior officers who know the battle plan in detail and are of comparable competence. Whether there would be much of a morale drop is also debatable, the troops might become angry and more determined/ruthless.

@Ryd: depends how early & how the leader is killed. Had one early trial of HAC with DAC where I placed the BLUFOR camp close to Leader A & he got squished by a tank...

An alternative - for the remainder of that cycle (& maybe for part or all of the next) no new orders are issued as the general staff regroup & the replacement ensures he is fully informed on all aspects of the situation. Perhaps also drop all Leader competencies due to stress/anxiety at unexpected responsibilities) by 5 or 10% for a few cycles?

[Rydygier 1302]

Currently new Leader has permanetly lowered competencies of his predecessor just because of that reasons - I think, that new Leader will haven't enough time during the battle to get such degree of control, as had previous leader. It is interesting idea to add additional pause before new cycle because of familiarizing with situation.

[orcinus 121]

You know, the thought occurs to me that if you gave the Leader a small group of staff officers - to whom command would normally devolve, in order of seniority, if the leader is slotted - it would offer the enterprising (or maybe suicidal) player the prospect of trying to infiltrate & take out that group; which would royally screw up both morale & command continuity/competence.

[Rydygier 1302]

Currently this is quite like this. As long, as there is someone alive in Leader's group, after his death next group leader will become a Leader, but with worsened parameters (reasons mentioned before). Only thing currently not implemented is morale drop after destroying all staff group. This is rather pointless, because morale is tested and used only in main HAC loop, which is ended, when there is no more Leader's group - after that morale parameter is useless in fact. However, is possible very simple external code, that may do with given army anything desired after such event, eg make'em all cowards, that very easily will run away (in fact currently same way morale drop affects groups). Something like:

waituntil {sleep 5; (not (isNil "RydHQ"))};

sleep 60;

waituntil {sleep 30;(isNull RydHQ)};

{_x allowFleeing 1} foreach RydHQ_Friends

[meltedping 0]

have tried wip4 with 2 sides + some civies:

and after 20 min this writes in rpt "Error in expression <_z = _z + 1}] do

{

_KnU = RydHQ_Friends select _z;

{_x reveal (vehicle (leader _>

Error position: <select _z;

{_x reveal (vehicle (leader _>

Error Zero divisor"

[Rydygier 1302]

OK. Thanks for info. I know exactly where this error occurs (Rev.sqf - file unchanged since 1.1, so this is rather not about anything introduced in wips), but haven't idea, why. Syntax is good I think, otherwise this should repeat every 20 seconds.

It is simply routine for revealing all allies and know enemies for player controlled team leaders and Leader's group. I can only guess, that this is because unexpected _x (Leader's or human TL's group) became null for some reason (was destroyed?) after defining this array (very unlikely, but possible). Not enough info. This was occured once, or repeated cyclical/often? Something noticeable occured same time or you did something? There was used any other addons? Can I see mission, where this error occured? This will be probably most helpful. For now I'm busy with something else, so for now can't do extensive tests trying to get repro on my own.

[euly 0]

That was certainly the case in medieval times when the leader was often a king, emperor, or other 'noble'; in such cases the cause was obviously lost, as usually it was in a battle with some other robber-baron scumbag (to quote Bob Geldof). Modern armies don't give up just because a general gets killed. They have a general staff with senior officers who know the battle plan in detail and are of comparable competence. Whether there would be much of a morale drop is also debatable, the troops might become angry and more determined/ruthless.

I understand that, but my point remains that the hive-mind (HAC) shouldn't just stop when the unit representing the delegation of orders ceases to exist. A party of units that make up the command function sounds just as well (I prefer to use the armored HQ vehicles), but I'm still looking for the AI's final behavior to be something more than unplugged from the system.

Edited June 4, 2012 by Lucidity

[stubs 10]

Hey Rydygier.

If you need anything tested or done, just PM me. I still find this addon to be truly amazing and a blast to create battles with!

Thanks, Stubs.

[Rydygier 1302]

OK, people, decided to re-arrange my priority list. My another project:

For now called "WarMonger", Kind of dynamic SP mission(s) plus framework for another, where whole map is covered by strongpoints (own code, but idea partially inspired by Igneous1's exciting RUFS project), patrols, garrisons, minefields (again, code is whole mine, but some ideas (idea of marked minefields) from Wolffy.au AP Mine Field) and so on, where all this is script-generated from null, means a scripts, that gives without any manual settings such effect for any empty map. All this semi-random and semi-unpredictable, means every time looks another way, but every time (well... mostly) should look reasonable. Init of such mission takes several minutes because of really massive caluclations of dozens of positions (based on locations surrounding mostly, searching for flat places etc), dimensions and optimal directions (many FOV scans). Important: there will be not a single damn spawn from thin air during gameplay, no caching, none. Player will get a map with all "pieces" from the beginning really existing on it. Exception may be maded for missions with Rincewinder, that will not kill immersion, because magick is irrational by assumption. It is for guys (and ladies, if any? Hmm... BTW any lady actually is on board?), for whom, like for me, such spawning "dirty trics" are simply huge immersion killers, that makes any action pointless and meaningless. This means two things: ready mission will be quite heavy because of many units on map (in such degree, that 100 groups per side becomes serious limitation here for Chernaruss map), and also lighter, beacause loops for spawn-checks are unnecessary here. For now beta-functional is "bare" framework, so main part is ready. At least one mission should be powered by FAW, Rincewinder, and HETMAN, all together (if CPU will handle all this of course, will see), so this is not so off-topic here - HAC's and any scripting main goal is playing, so decided, that I must to try pack all my "half products" into something "final", means really playable. :) Will see, if I could achieve this.

is currently at the stage, when works may be paused for some time, so now will try to re-write big parts of HAC's code. After that HAC should work similar (same) way, but this is very needed for any kind of further improvements. I'm really tired of changing each eight sets of scripts for each new thing, when should be possible, that each leader will use same set (to reduce number of files nearly to 1/8). Currently to many unnecessary work, that also generates big chance for mistakes during change process. There are also many redundant parts, that now I'm ready to replace for functions (think, that now know enough about them). Next step should be inventing and implementing both mayor features, that awaits their turn long time - Big Boss (he should use "map sectorization" idea for gathering info useable in decision process), and guerilla mode for each leader (as third mode after offensive and defensive). By the way should be implemented also minor features, as flare usage and so on, and maybe some code improvements for existing features. All this are my plans. Still haven't ready concept for BB and guerilla. Now will see, if I'm ready now and knowledgeable enough, so if I'll be able to materialize all this and how long this will take.

About last error:

Did some quick test - tried to reveal non-existing unit for a group, or existing unit for non-existing group, but this not produce reported by meltedping error, so for now have not any idea about origin of this error.

Thanks stubs, I think, that there will be many tests needed after above described changes. :) For now just enjoy HAC and report here any spotted duirng battles bugs or RPT errors.

Edited June 5, 2012 by Rydygier

[kremator 1064]

Ooooh new mission sounds great!

[stubs 10]

Hey Rydygier, I'm not sure if you already tried to fix this. Anyway i was testing with HAC 1.11wip4 and the aircraft weren't attacking for some reason. I found out it was because the two lead aircraft kept turning off their engines. Again, it was only the leader of the two plane groups.

Thanks, Stubs.

[Rydygier 1302]

Thanks, stubs. Can you provide more details about this? Planes was flying, but not shooting or not flying at all (I suppose that, if engines was turned off)? What exactly aircraft this was? What kind of order was issued to them (marker description, if turned on)? In HAC code there is only one place, when engines are turned off - it is when vehicle reaches its target when in "idle" mode, but air units are (should be) excluded from idle orders...

Unless problem is with engines turned of in the air - such thing was once reported to me earlier, but still see no way, how HAC could do that.

EDIT: tested: placed one A-10 on the ground, and I'm sure, that HAC not issuing idle orders to this plane, as should be, so only theory, that links HAC with turning engine off fails here. BTW, have very small experience with planes in Arma (practically never use them, no need), so was surprised, when plane without any waypoint, on its own (without HAC) started to move across airstrip, but not quite straight, so eventually veered onto the grass and went into the bushes. Same with group of two F35B - jet ride to the park. It is normal behaviour?

Anyway, to do something about I need repro mission, where this issue is exactly pointed and is present every time or often at least. Without this can't do anything, only blindly guessing.

Edited June 6, 2012 by Rydygier

[stubs 10]

I'll check right now. I was in the gunners seat of the aircraft and suddenly the engines turned off, it glided in a straight path telling the other aircraft to engage untill it crashed. I also started the aircraft off on the ground on a taxiway.

I'll check, but I hope this helps, Stubs.

---------- Post added at 01:50 AM ---------- Previous post was at 01:29 AM ----------

Alright, I have absolutely NO idea what the problem is... I tried a controlled experiment with no alterations at first. We arrive at waypoint, engines shut off.

Then, I comment out the exact line of code you specified (Copy and paste into search bar in file) and the plane heads for it's waypoint and keeps flying straight for about 15 minutes until I quit.

Lastly, I try the last piece of code in a gamelogic with my start-up line, as soon as the plane gets a waypoint, the engines shut off!

Sorry for all the trouble, Stubs.

I just tried the above two changes again, same results, then for S&G's I tried them together, and the plain flew off away in the wrong direction in a straight line.

---------- Post added at 02:04 AM ---------- Previous post was at 01:50 AM ----------

I can recreate it in Arma 2 because I was using IF:44. By the way, the planes veered off into the grass because they were faced the wrong way on the taxi script.

I'll recreate this in vanilla Arma 2, Stubs.

---------- Post added at 02:19 AM ---------- Previous post was at 02:04 AM ----------

Well, it seems to work fine in Arma 2 with all the tests I ran...

Must be an Iron Front problem.

Edit: Definently an Iron Front problem, I tried all kinds of planes and situations in Arma 2, but to no avail to recreate the bug.

did you use the arma "air" class or your own "air" class to remove idle problem as the iron fornt devs might use a different class.

See ya tomarrow, Stubs.

Edited June 6, 2012 by stubs

[Rydygier 1302]

Not a trouble, but big help, and thanks for this. So we know more now: there is IF:44 used, aicraft is at least with two seats, and this seems to be independent of "idle" orders - if one time (commented line) falling not occurs, and another - all idle turn off, falling occurs. We also know, that this happen, when aircraft arrives at its destination. More questions: this was "SAD" or "Destroy" waypoint? Machine is set for HAC as fighter (only Air RHQ) or bomber (also BAir)? But most important, that this is IF (another game, unles you mean I44 mod). So we will see, if this will occur also for Arma 2.

Thanks for info about airstrip. Indeed - I'm really not a pilot. When flying it always end with big explosion, when I hit the ground - not able to maneuver and keep aircraft in the air same time, not mention of fighting simultanously. No skills. :)

Edited June 6, 2012 by Rydygier

[meltedping 0]

Thanks Rydygier, you gave enough info, and i sent you IM :)

OK. Thanks for info. I know exactly where this error occurs (Rev.sqf - file unchanged since 1.1, so this is rather not about anything introduced in wips), but haven't idea, why. Syntax is good I think, otherwise this should repeat every 20 seconds.

It is simply routine for revealing all allies and know enemies for player controlled team leaders and Leader's group. I can only guess, that this is because unexpected _x (Leader's or human TL's group) became null for some reason (was destroyed?) after defining this array (very unlikely, but possible). Not enough info. This was occured once, or repeated cyclical/often? Something noticeable occured same time or you did something? There was used any other addons? Can I see mission, where this error occured? This will be probably most helpful. For now I'm busy with something else, so for now can't do extensive tests trying to get repro on my own.

Edited June 6, 2012 by meltedping

[stubs 10]

I tested the rest of the planes in Iron Front and they all seem to share the problem I mentioned. They fly to destination and then they turn off their engines and glide to a crash. As for the waypoint, I'm not sure whch one it was as it doesn't show what type if you're not the leader (map or 1st person). All the aircraft were set under RHQ_Air, the bombers were also under RHQ_BAir, and the Fighters were also under RHQ_RAir. Just to confirm, I have been using Iron Front the whole time, and I tested for the problem in Arma 2, but it didn't happen.

Thanks, Stubs.

Edit: By the way, sometimes the waypoint would be just 100m away, then plane would shut off engines.

[Rydygier 1302]

So it looks like some IF's incompatibility with HAC (or even vice versa :) ) if Arma don't share this problem (my tests with Arma confirm that also - got some hard time trying to fly after leader at waypoint one of these damn machines for testing purposes :) ). If I had to guess (and only this can do without IF) it is something about differiences in the manner of waypoint behaviour. Perhaps in IF same waypoint makes, that group doing something else, than in Arma. Only blind guess though. Thanks for testing stubs, great job.

[stubs 10]

Didn't mean to double post!

[euly 0]

I'm going to try HAC with a coop mission (just me and one friend). The mission is big, so if we die, we'll need to respawn. Do I need to to enable "RydHQ_ResetOnDemand = true" in the Init.sqf and then call RydHQ_ResetNow when we respawn or will HAC detect our units after it's next cycle?

[Rydygier 1302]

HAC should detect (re-)spawned units with next cycle. Reset is not needed. Still, not sure if HAC is fully MP compatibile.