Jump to content
Rydygier

HETMAN - Artificial Commander

For HAC users: What is the maximum number of simultaneously used by you Leaders?  

63 members have voted

  1. 1. For HAC users: What is the maximum number of simultaneously used by you Leaders?

    • Only one
      3
    • Two
      18
    • Three
      9
    • Four of them
      15
    • Five
      0
    • Six
      6
    • Seven
      0
    • All eight!
      12


Recommended Posts

hey rydygier i have a question. Is it possible to request hetman for support?? Like medavec, repair, transport and etc?? if so would he use the units on the map, or spawn new ones? Another thing i know i asked you this already, but he is my problem airtransport. I tried my best to follow your instruction on that air transport your provided us but still not doing the trick. I have a game where most player will be pilots and Ai will be ground troops, i would like to increase the chances of hetman to request troops transport and picups? Any advices other the the ones you gave us prior. Thank you!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Is it possible to request hetman for support??

No. He decides on his own who needs, where, when and what kind of support.

would he use the units on the map, or spawn new ones?

HAC will only use, what he has on the map. It is a commander, that leads troops (uses them for winning the battle), will not create new forces.

Any advices other the the ones you gave us prior.

Rather not. I can only repeat, what I said. Perhaps there is some factor in yours mission, that blocks chance for air cargo calls, or perhaps you expect more, than can be assured. Do not saw your mission, so can't tell, what exactly is going on there. I do not want guess blindly trying to name each possible circumstance. I can look at yours mission in some free time, if possible and if you want.

There will be new thing in the next release - CargoOnly array for groups, that should be used only as a cargo. But do not now, when new version will be ready for release.

Edited by Rydygier

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

maybe you should consider adding this option of requesting support. Anyways I dont want to impose on you. I can wait for the next release and see if cargoOlny array can do the trick. What are some of the new feature you are planing to put on the next release? ;) Aww by the way i forgot to tell you i was able to make it work on MP! Yeahhhh

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I also like the idea of being able to call in support. I don't even know that you're able to do this with regular ArmA support waypoints and what not. Whenever I have a medic/ambulance on standby and I find myself or a large part of my squad wounded, I'll call in and ask for support and every time I get a nice firm "NEGATIVE" back from higher command. Quite annoying when you're without a medic and have a leg wound which prevents you from walking.

I was also thinking Ryd, would it be possible in future releases to include a trigger which you can name for holding POW's? What I mean by that is: Currently when a unit surrenders on the battlefield, he will raise his hands behind is head and just stand there. If you move far enough away from him, he takes off and bails. What would be kind of cool is if you could designate an area for POW's, and have leaderHQ designate one squad or group to 'retrieve' an enemy each time they surrender and escort them back to the POW zone, while another group guards. It could be made so that if an enemy group gets to that POW area, all of the POW's would essentially flee and try to rejoin their army again. I don't know if any of this is possible and I'm sure it would be difficult to put together, but it would make for some very awesome side missions while the battle is going on (think special forces sneaking around the battlefield, avoiding enemy patrols, finally arriving and liberating all of the captives).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

New features - some are in TO DO list (first post) other not, as not decided yet which will be done. Should be fixed overwriting of customly added briefing tasks, should be a way to exclude chosen empty vehicles from assigning them as cargo by HAC, map reading for BB should be drastically (above 10 times in my tests) shortened via loading screen method, improved handling of sniper missions, probably will be added new category for spec forces, excluded from most of regular missions. When not needed, such elite soldiers will guard HQ, also will be sent to kill enemy HQ if known, also to destroy enemy arty units or static weaponry - such things, not decided yet, how their missions will be conducted, probably similar to main flanking maneuver, not sure, if with cargo, or rather stealthy, on foot; will try to change capturing routine to avoid delays in objectives taking, some was complaining about that; still awaits for finishing some MP-compatibility changes of HQ-player communication... Maybe something more, maybe not. There is eg hard to reasonable implement idea of ammo support via ammo boxes dropped with parachute from the plane (can be useful, as ammo vehicles serves only for another vehicles, but would be complicated in setup) or even paradrop, but there are even more serious doubts here mostly concentrating around factor "work needed to set this up compared to achieved effect" - may look nice, but effectivenes is something else.

Support - shortly: no such changes here.

Not so shortly: well, HAC has certain routines to determine, where support is needed, that should be not disrupted by player's judgement. It is considered, that every group, including player's, that qualifies for support, made request. If players group is in bad shape, and there is no support, that means one of:

1. There is no one to sent;

2. Someone is en route (perhaps delayed by something or even destroyed);

3. It is too hot around you;

4. There are others, in worse shape, that need that support more (not only you are fighting out there, and yours need aren't more important, than others).

So there is a reason. HAC decides, and groups in need, also player's, await in prioritized queue for its turn, so manual requesting will change nothing except a bit more CPU power consumed on another radio chatter. :) Usually getting resting order is a sign, that support will be granted sooner or later, not only then though.

Rest relies on vanilla build-in features - TL's will use nearby support vehicles for own units, also there is:

RydHQ_SupportWP = true;

With this each sent support will get mentioned "SUPPORT" waypoint, that is another vanilla feature - with that vehicle can and will be requested by TL's over whole map. This feature is not so tested though, but saw few times support granted that way, in fact do not remember case of refusing it. If HQ indeed refuses - well, it is HQ's prerogative, isn't. I can use it "as is", but have no way to change its behavior.

There is no and shouldn't be such thing as guaranteed, 100% reliable support on request despite on HQ opinion even, if this make accustomed by unrealistic games, where support is on every wish team leader annoyed :) . Hard fact of too few/too busy support vehicles can't be changed by bleeding out fellow. Unless you will setup dozens medevacs on map...

POWs with guards, camps and rescue missions to rearm and bringing captives back to the fight - far to complicated. And there is some misunderstanding. Guys surrendering their weapons, that you called POWs are in fact soldiers of destroyed completelly morale. Lost will of fight, not only and not necessarily captured by enemy. They are neutralized because of that, refuse to continue the fight and for sure will not recover to go back into same battle. I can try to make them go in chosen by mission maker place, but this wouldn't be realistic, when surrendering its weapons group is far from enemy (why then should they go to the enemy through hot front line, and not just run in own direction?). They anyway have "allowFleeing" parameter set to maximum, and will mostly run away out of control. Dynamically generated mission, where commando group is "sneaking around the battlefield" is something, that I'm planning, but not for POW liberating, as there is no stricte POW on HAC-controlled battlefield during the battle.

Edited by Rydygier

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oww it seems like you have lots on your plate now!! Anyways are you saying that by requesting support i may or may not receive a positive from HQ?? @stupitwhitekid75 how did you call for support??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Anyways are you saying that by requesting support i may or may not receive a positive from HQ??

I'm saying, tht each group, that really needs support (wounded/damaged/low fuel/low ammo), is considered as requestor automatically. There is no need, no reason and no possibility in HAC for making any separate radio chat requests for that. So HQ (Leader) checks, which requestor can be supported, which at the moment needs support most, and sends one support vehicle, if available, there. Checks out this one as "supported" and looks for another requestor if still has some support available. Fact, that HQ may refuse (means will not send anything) beacuse of limited number of support on the map (obviously depending on mission maker - how many support vehicles will be placed on map for that leader) and also beacuse of other factors as enemy presence in the target area or distance is rather obvious. Same, that there is serious delay needed for support arrival from its current position to the target area. Also many may happen en route. So, as in real, support is limited (based on support units set on map), so prioritized, and not 100% reliable.

As for "SUPPORT" waypoint mode - do not know if, and if so in what circumstancies support veh with such waypoint will refuse support. I guess, that when it is busy with supporting someone already.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I see i think i understand it now!! So anyways it would be cool if you cold make this distinction between player and AI, where HQ would check automatic if AI needs support but player would be need request! ;D.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Such distinction will be hard to incorporate into existing routines, probably doable though, but time consuming and complicated, may need deep reworking of these routines to fit. And this is only "ornament", a candy without real meaning, that will however cost some CPU, and this becomes crucial lately, as HAC is too heavy for CPU aready. Also I do not like such distinctions. Player as far as possible should be treated same way as any other unit. So I think - no. Not now, maybe something someday, when all more important things will be on place and working, I'll be ready to re-think implementing some ornamentation in kind of more player-HQ chatter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would like to see more radio chatter between BB, Leader HQ's, Squad Leaders, Team Leaders, and support. Even with many debug options enabled, I'm still not adequately informed about troop movement, skirmishes, and support locations. The simple BB map marker arrows are a step in the this direction, though squad level info would be nice to see in the side chat to know how other groups are doing. I really like the map marker system that ACE uses by default, but I'm not sure if ArmA will do that vanilla. Does anyone know?

I like the military markers and I wish I knew what friendly LeaderHQ's are saying to the SL's and TL's in the field. I'm not saying the player should be be omnipotent, but I would like to see more communication between the commanders and troops as well as their problems, such as when AI groups are busy. The sync'd attack option in the init is a good example when the groups could communicate with the LeaderHQ's, such as the unit arrives at its waypoint and says "1-1-4A in position, waiting for orders." If the group is delaying other orders from being sent, maybe a LeaderHQ radio message like "Group 1-1-4A report status..." when the group has not reached its waypoint in a substantial amount of time. Even a simple "can't get there" message would be nice, plus that type of message would reveal problems in the map, AI, or HAC, rather than indefinite silence of a waypoint that is never reached. This all may be too much work, but a system in which map markers appear for groups in communication with LeaderHQ's would be amazing. Simple map markers would be nice for support types to place markers at their map locations upon their arrival, so they can easily be found when the player needs to locate resupply/repair/refuel. In some of my longer missions, I've seen motorized patrols run out of fuel. I'm not sure, but I think an AI commander must know of a refuel station in the vicinity when the driver reports low fuel for the commander to issue the "refuel at..." order. What do you think?

The detailed debug functions that are in HAC work, but they tend to give the player technical data and universal information about the behavior of HAC, such as the current targets for all leaders, not enveloping game-play information that would make the individual mission more fun. If the mission maker turns the debug options off and publishes the mission, the player will have little to no information about the map. Maybe that is what the mission maker wants, but manually developing map information takes time and quickly becomes obsolete after the mission has been running for a while. For example, the mission maker places a bunch of objects down to make a base around the LeaderHQ with according map markers. Without the debug options turned on, the player has no convenient way of know the LeaderHQ has driven off the base to a new position.

I don't know. Maybe I'm way off.

Edited by Lucidity

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep, such generated by the others chatter would be climatic and nice to have, I fully agree, I like this idea too, so probably someday will be done something about, when will come time for "ornaments" (means nothing more to do with HAC activities itself). For now not sure, how to resolve this in some cases, as regular oders are in fact issued in very quick series, so trying to simply follow/reflect them with radio comm is not doable. Two ways possible - using Arma's kbTell system, as currently is for orders for human TL, but this is quite repetitive, or making custom sounds, means voice acting sessions, big MB's for that etc. Or even combining both. Probably first would be checked kbTell, till now barely touched by me. But not today nor tommorow, so there is lots of time for concepts, ideas, wishes, disscussion - for determining, how exactly all this chat and non-debug markers should be done for best effect. We have good start.

Support has own markers, that allow them to be found easily in regular debug currently. Do not know, if commander of the vehicle with low fuel can use gas stations as uses refuel trucks nearby, active searching for it via script would be CPU heavy... As for military markers - I'm awared about those for groups/units, using them would be easy, but except one arrow there is practically no markeres for marking maneuvers, defense perimeteres, front lines, withdraw and such.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
regular oders are in fact issued in very quick series, so trying to simply follow/reflect them with radio comm is not doable. Two ways possible - using Arma's kbTell system, as currently is for orders for human TL, but this is quite repetitive

Not all radio sounds need to be spoken, but some radio chatter can be found in the sound packs from OFP and ArmA 1 that was not recycled into ArmA 2. I tried the COWarMod the other day which used those sounds for soldier voices. I found it a bit amusing to hear David Armstrong's voice from OFP. I haven't heard that in over a decade.

Do not know, if commander of the vehicle with low fuel can use gas stations as uses refuel trucks nearby
A vehicle that stops at a gas station will be refueled as long as it stays still. What if HAC were to identify the locations of fuel stations as it analyzed the map, could the AI then know where the stations are, like parked support vehicles? Perhaps these could be high value areas? Edited by Lucidity

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What if HAC were to identify the locations of fuel stations as it analyzed the map

This is about search for certain object across whole map. Even, if did once, it is extremelly heavy for CPU - imagine, all map objects must be checked, and then found stations sorted by distance to choose closest. These stations must to have special ability of refuelling (rather than cars have it when close to certain buildings), but this is my guessing and do not know, how to determine via script, if given object has that ability. Something with config perhaps? Also, if AI does not recognize and use such places, may be difficult to make via script them go there close enough to refuel. I do not say "no", simply do not know for now, how to achieve that in reasonable way (without checking all objects on the map). This need thinking and testing - means later.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Artillery is handled and working, I hope? Similar way - is assumed, that every known enemy is potential target. HQ decides, which is most important, and which can wait until some battery will be available. So this also is prioritized. Also illumination is automaticaly requested when enemy near, by defending groups at night, and smoke for withdrawing groups. BTW would be nice to add also communication related with this to mentioned "chatter background", isn't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:D YES IT WOULD! Hey do i need to put the artillery module on my mission?? how can i request artillery support?? does it work anything like this,

. another thing, do i need to define on init which of my guys are snipers or does it recognize automatically? and when i do does it avoid giving mission that are not suited to snipers ??? How do i keep hetman from using my backhawk medavec for stupid mission. Edited by Odyseus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
:D YES IT WOULD! Hey do i need to put the artillery module on my mission?? how can i request artillery support?? does it work anything like this,
. another thing, do i need to define on init which of my guys are snipers or does it recognize automatically? and when i do does it avoid giving mission that are not suited to snipers ??? How do i keep hetman from using my backhawk medavec for stupid mission.

You should not add the artillery module to your map, just group the standard cannons, mortars, and MLRS/GRAD in individual groups (not mixed groups). Check the manual for more information (https://docs.google.com/document/d/1cVRPr3YLfmM5TNl9-7sPmiKYstpje0i_X2N9lpvQ_1g/edit) I don't believe there is any way to call artillery, but I could be wrong.

For snipers, currently, they are treated as recon units, which is not much different from general units, so you'll see them on patrols, attack missions, recon, and general running around. The next version of HAC (which should be major, and hopeuflly released soon) changes much of the behavior of snipers to be more practical and do things like find elevated advantage points and wait, like true snipers. Rydygier is also working on the behavior of Special Forces units, so they'll hopefully do things like assassinate enemy LeaderHQ's and guard their own Leaders. (A problem though with SF units is they are not standard equipped with AT weaponry)

For your UH-60 MEV, do you have your init arrays set up for the OA units? If you do, can you confirm that the "UH60M_MEV_EP1" is only listed under RHQ_Support and RHQ_Med? If it's under RHQ_Air, RHQ_NCAir, RHQ_Cargo, or RHQ_NCCargo, it will probably be used for recon and maybe transportation. If you still have problems and the MEV is only listed under the Support and Med arrays, you may try grouping the blackhawk by naming in its init, e.g. "Med1 = group this" then adding Med1 to the RydHQ_AOnly, RydHQ_ROnly, RydHQ_NoFlank, RHQ_NoDef arrays in your init.sqf file.

Edited by Lucidity

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Snipers are recognized automatically, if present in default RHQ categories (there is category for snipers) for not vanilla snipers classes there is separate init config RHQ array, that works same way, as any other init config RHQ for additional units for HAC. Each arty group on mag receives own Arty module automatically, via script, so no need any additional set up except arty group itself. Of course normal rules, as min/max range are still valid.

Some notes to above:

To add target to the "queue" from which HQ chooses cyclically most important targets for present on map artillery enough is simply to spot (to know about) enemy. If distant - take some time to look at them via some optics to increase knowledge factor, and make it that way "known" for Leader. As with other support - there is no way to manually force HQ to use artillery for target chosen by you. As always - HQ decides (that's its purpose after all...).

As for spotting - decided to use Call For Fire philosophy, means every grunt can point potential targets for artillery if only know "nineliner", and is assumed, that everyone on map knows this simply CFF procedure.

Sniper classes by default will be still used as secondary recon and in urgent need treated as regular infantry in next release, difference will be in the manner of executing dedicated to such units sniper missions. Of course its class can be subtracted from chosen category via RHQs subtraction array, but now I'm unable to say, what consequences may have sniper class left only in sniper category and removed from infantry category. Currently sniper missions can be issued against enemy recon units or AT infantry (most infantry groups are AT capable). Perhaps this list will be extended somehow eg with all infantry and static.

As for multi-role medevac choppers, with cargoOnly array perhaps will come NoCargo. For now its class can be removed from cargo category (and perhaps NCCargo too, if unarmed). Rest can be done by putting this class into NCAir RHQ (so no combat missions, should exclude also from recon missions). This is for 90%, as it is late. "Only" and "No" arrays should also help.

Edited by Rydygier

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When helicopters or planes are listed in the RHQ_RAir array, do I need to put them in groups and list them is RydHQ_Ronly array?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is not necessary, so it depends, what you want to achieve exactly. RHQ_RAir will make that vehicle a recon of first choice. ROnly will disable regular attack missions for it. As usually at the beginning there is anyway recon performed before any enemy is spotted - in this part ROnly probably will not change much. Later will keep that kind of aerial unit from regular air attack missions. Aerial are excluded from idle and capturing missions, so except another recon mission will be possible resting and cargo missions (if can take passangers and is in cargo category; also support, if this is support unit as well). That should be all, I think, not quite sure though, may forgot about something else.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If anyone is interested, here is a mission I've been working on for some time now called Day In The Desert. There's no briefing or any fancy stuff. It does require OA and it does have BAF + ACR units, but they should work in lite versions (without the full DLC). Place the file in your "\arma 2 operation arrowhead\Missions" folder.

I highly recommend it be played with ASR_AI to allow the AI to rearm easily and use various tactics, plus the AI units skill levels are based on their ranks.

The system I play on is an Intel I5 (3.3ghz), 4gb ram, with a GTX680 (but it should be fine on anything above a GTX470 fermi or equivalent).

Any suggestions or requests are welcome.

Edited by Lucidity

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey, great. Thanks for that.

BTW I do not know, if there such thing, as ACR lite, I apparently haven't (can't play), also according to displayed list of lacking pbos looks, like ASR is necessary to play.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hey, great. Thanks for that.

BTW I do not know, if there such thing, as ACR lite, I apparently haven't (can't play), also according to displayed list of lacking pbos looks, like ASR is necessary to play.

It's a free download - get it here:

http://www.arma2.com/index.php?option=com_rokdownloads&view=file&Itemid=20&id=805%3Aa2co-compatibility-mp-patch--acr-lite-〈=en

Enjoy :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi!

I have a general question regarding armed transports. When I am commanding a squad with transport vehicles attached (such as HMMWVs, Strykers or addon vehicles such as EXA's RG31 or the Ridgeback), even if I am in the vehicle I always get assigned a "get in" command. After that, the command chain for me stalls, sometimes for ages. Apparently I can fix it by disembarking everybody, and then re-embarking. When I get a command to leave the vehicles, I also usually get a "get out" instead of an "unload" command.

This seems to affect the AI too, who sometimes get out of their vehicles, and then not all squad members get in again resulting in Units trailing the vehicles, or gunners not getting into their gunner positions again and instead occupying cargo seats.

I´ve not got a repro mission as I am still trying to determine if this is a problem with this one Mission I have, or if it is something that happens in general. Do I have incorrect settings or wrongly applied classname tags in the lists?

I´ll upload a repro as soon as I figure out which vehicles actually are affected and under what circumstances. It is just something I noticed whenever I play one particular (addon heavy) mission I built, and it makes the mission unplayable for me due to the erratic behaviour of this weird glitch.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now

×