Passage of command after respawn to 2ic (Needs fixing, please vote on ticket)

[terox 316]

1) Group leader dies

2) Group Leader Respawns

3) Second in charge Player unit now has group leadership, Not the respawned group leader

This can often cause a breakdown in command and control due to non responsive player who didn't initially want to take a leadership position and now unwittingly finding themselves leading a group when they may not have a microphone, or understand the voip channel system.

Typically on an organised server, the group leaders are selected because they can respond to voip and have the ability to lead a group. Command channel can then be used.

We are now getting situations where players who do not, can not take control of a group are being forced into that position

Please vote on this ticket to raise awareness of this issue

http://feedback.arma3.com/view.php?id=17520

[Tankbuster 1747]

What's worse is that command of the group can pass to an AI.

[cuel 25]

This can easily be solved with scripting

---------- Post added at 12:14 AM ---------- Previous post was at 12:14 AM ----------

Combination of respawn event handler and selectLeader command

[terox 316]

"This can easily be solved with scripting" is not a permanent solution to engine bugs. It is simply a temporary fix to a localised issue at best.

Unless you personally are going to educate every single arma scripter to date and all those in the future and fix every mission already in existence

[cuel 25]

It's not an engine bug per se (I'd call it a feature), when you die the second in command takes charge. You're suggesting the engine can decide when the first unit should take command or not, he might be miles away, hence why the 2ic should have command (since he might have to use he command channel) and whenever the original SQL returns, he can take charge again (with scripting, easily done. Can be turned into an addon easily). It's not my job to fix other peoples missions, and if they want this functionality (they might not), it's their, or an addon/scripter job to fix it.

[terox 316]

It is an engine bug when the 2IC could be an AI, then what, ask the ai to nicely command the players via voip?

For base respawn it should be the initial group leader.

For group respawn, the next Player unit

It should not be an AI

If that's a Feature, then so is the uniform bug that removes the uniform on respawn

Nice!

In an MPmission, where the mission is played in an organised way , players will take a position of group leadership because they have the ability to command, use voip etc. Admins will even insist on those not responding on comms to deslot from such positions so that command and control can be established and maintained.

Others will specifically not take a leadership role because they do not want the responsibility, don't have a microphone, dont know how to do it etc.

As it stands right now, those unwilling, incapable will be forced into that position.

I have seen countless numbers of gaming sessions fail or be negatively effected because of this and even knowledgeable and capable scripters do not code their missions to take this into consideration.

This is moreso an issue in the public environment where newcomers to the game are ever present, than the clan / private server environment where most if not all players are experienced with Arma

Edited February 28, 2014 by Terox

[Variable 322]

I think that at most command should not pass to an AI unit. I don't think that a respawned leader should maintain command automatically. The unit he respawned to could be incapacitated, far away, a medic, a pilot or in other condition where commanding is not desired.

What would be good for coop is a new feature that allows admins to manually nominate a leader. This will also fix the horrendous AI assume command case.

But Terox, in CiA, if the guy who got the command bar does not wish to lead, he just ignores having the command bar and another assumes command. What so bad in him commanding without a command bar?

[terox 316]

command chat and inability to control AI in the group

and before anyone sparks up with teamspeak, acre etc.

We are talking about issues that DO occur on a public server.

The game has built in voip, with various channels.

VOIP is the most accessible to new players

New players tend not to be very Group Leader orientated or understand how to control AI

In this situation you need veteran players to take leadership roles, which they do.

Then they die and respawn, now we have a newcomer to the game, who may not even have a mic, have little clue what is going on, has no idea how to control AI etc and the whole mission becomes a shambles.

The mission commander then has to cycle through to side chat and spam every player with comms that should be carried out on command chat. This is not an ideal situation

Anyone who doesn't play a lot in public environments as either a mission commander or group leader will probably not appreciate the difficulty this causes for them.

Anything that makes public play smoother has to be important. There is are an awful lot of players who come to arma, jump on a badly organised server or a mission that just doesnt cut it and leave arma for good. We need to try our utmost to keep this fresh blood in the Arma community so they can filter down to the clans, or the clans will eventually become stale and fade away.

Good public gameplay is the place this has to start and the tools made available for that scenario should work their best

Edited February 28, 2014 by Terox

[cuel 25]

Didn't notice the thing about AI, which I agree with. Not the rest. Not likely you'll see any "fix" to that since it is mission dependent and implementing it would break some missions.