[SP] HETMAN: War Stories

[Rydygier 1302]

Yep, should be possible with small amandements in the code, good thinking. For now the only potential difficulty to overcome could be, if AI would keep targeting visually invisible units, can't recall, if that's the case, I need to do some tests... Also it would be optional and present only in whole map mode (no gain from it in single objective mode).

[velzevul 32]

and, probably, they'll be marked on map. 🙂

[Rydygier 1302]

HWS wip5

 

- In whole map mode all four Leaders are now made invisible and immune to damage, instead fake Leaders are placed, preferably in some building, along with some infantry as bodyguards and near mechanized group as additional protection. True leaders should not be marked (MARTA icon should disappear soon after init). Need to be tested, ho this actually works in longer gameplay.

 

This is by default enabled in whole map mode and disabled in normal mode, but can be switched both ways via advanced setup windows by typing:

 

RYD_WS_LeadersPoofItsMagic = true;//to enable

RYD_WS_LeadersPoofItsMagic = false;//to disable

 

But I didn't tested that.

This way also in normal mode HQ can be better protected. Of course that means additional groups on the map, these groups should be excluded from HAL control. Killing the fake Leaders should make their army morale drop till surrender, as it is with true leaders. 

 

Also BB objective markers should work now, I hope, as intended with colors fitting the side. 

[alky_lee 276]

I am loving the whole map mode. There are a lot more units being moved around by helicopter without trying to land in the enemy strongpoint, which provides much more immersion. 
 

In the couple of missions I have tried so far, time to first contact has been around 20 minutes which is good. The battlefield is much more uncertain as to enemy positions so keeps you on edge. Even waiting for the battlegroup to move up is edgy especially as an enemy armoured column comes over the horizon at you. 
 

One thing I have noticed is that the morale of the players side drops without reason and we surrender just as we are pressuring the enemy strongpoint. I don’t know if it’s a bug or just the leader losing his bottle. It’s probably too early to say for sure. Looking forward to trying wip5.

[Rydygier 1302]

Quote

 the morale of the players side drops without reason and we surrender just as we are pressuring the enemy strongpoint. 

 

Will be investigated. Could be due to killed Leader recklessly moving toward the front, which latest update may fix. Thanks. 🙂

 

Quote

p.s.: any chance of fixing bug in factions choosing interface for "shitload of factions" maniacs?

 

Forgot about that. It's about that atomated double selection on the list? I'll take care about that too.

[Rydygier 1302]

BTW:

 

Quote

if you check 1-st faction in list, at the same time, the 33rd becomes checked too

 

Don't know yet, but there's a possibility, it's a game bug, as official example of this type of control config defines 32 rows. Maybe a coincidence, maybe this list can't properly support more rows even, if it is possible to define more of them. I wonder, if checking 2nd would check also 34th etc.?

 

EDIT: Yep. 2-34 , 3-35 etc. Event handler sees properly clicked rows above 32, but game in the same time switches visually corresponding row below 32 as well, which fact is ignored by event handler. In the same time ctrlChecked command returns true for the latter, but false for the first, one, that was actually clicked, opposite to EH behavior. And visually both are highlighted. Seems it is not intended, generic limitation to 32 rows... A game bug indeed. If that's the case, I can't fix that, but I'll test more later. 

[Rydygier 1302]

I found official confirmation on BIKI: that list is limited to 32 rows. I'll reduce it to that size. Likely it will stay so, unless I find easy enough way to add second list per side for additional factions above 32, but I'll not invest much time into this, honestly > 30 factions at once is... aberration. 🙂  

[velzevul 32]

seems, markers works well - has correct colors and changes it properly with location capturing. 👍

in first test, only one of my officers was invisible (Alpha 1-1). will test more when i'll have more time.

HWS becomes better and better, thank you. :)

[Rydygier 1302]

Quote

only one of my officers was invisible

 

The second was for sure the one, thay should be invisible too, or could that be our "impostor"?

[Rydygier 1302]

HWS wip6

 

The only change is about multi-faction choice GUI. Additional list reduced to 32 factions, but if there's more factions, one more list shouldappear, so now HWS should support up to 64 factions per side... I hope, that number will satisfy you, crazy people. 🙂 However I wasn't able to test that really, I don't have that much factions. Only could test, if GUI works with fake content - it does, there's little glitch: additional empty line on the top of additional list, that vanishes at first click. Reason unclear, but seems harmless. 

 

Checked few times - each time all four Leaders was properly "invisibilized", also found no apparent reason in the code, why it should be otherwise. Unless they re-appear later? But don't know, how that could happen. 

 

 Also briefly monitored morale code, didn't noticed unexplained morale drops, but tests was brief. 

 

Next week I plan to focus on Warping Plague scenario, so there may be some "lull" on HWS front. 

[scimitar 221]

Thanks for the new wip, Rydgier. Choosing multiple factions for each side seems to work quite well with the extra column. I haven't had a chance to play a mission through to completion yet with wip6 but it was very cool to be able to spend some time with Cold War US Army and German Bundeswehr troops in the field together fighting against the Soviet Army and the East German NVA. I look forward to spending a bit more time with the mission sometime in the next few days. There is one thing that I'd like to as about though. Would it be too difficult to add in some support options such as requesting transport or mortar/artillery barrages and possibly even some CAS? Transport (heli or wheeled) would be the most useful to me as sometimes I get tasks that are quite a long ways off on foot. I've tried commandeering civilian vehicles spawned by TPW mods but when I do, for some reason they often disappear as I drive them or teleport me to the south-west corner of the map for some reason.

 

I'm not a big fan of Altis as I've played on the map way too much and I really just don't like the drab look of semi-arid terrains (I hate arid terrains even more!), so I took a look at the instructions in the first post of this thread and ported wip6 to Livonia. That will bring my enthusiasm for the mission way up as I think it's a very good terrain for Cold War scenarios. I was actually quite surprised at how easy it was to port the mission following the instructions (considering I have zero experience with the editor!) but I'm completely in the dark as to how to pull off a port using an older map such as those in the IFA3 map pack as the extra step required really left me scratching my head in confusion. I'll get to that later though as there are quite a few more recent maps that I like so I'll port the mission to some of those as different wip versions are released. Thanks again for all your hard work.

 

[Rydygier 1302]

Quote

Would it be too difficult to add in some support options such as requesting transport or even mortar or artillery barrages and possibly some CAS? 

 

Such requests appeared from time to time when I was developing Hetman. People are used to have such stuff at their will, but I was always refusing, as it is deeply against the very idea of HAL, where decision, what, where, when and how isn't player's, but HAL's. Frankly, I could script such stuff, but I never wanted to go that way. In HWS player can always change his role to someone with assigned vehicle for example. That being said, there's a rule, I like: in case of doubts make it optional. I can at least put some thoughts into disabled by default but possible to enable system, where player could use, say, mouse actions to convince HAL, to use given support, if available, in the way, player wants. It still would work in Hetman way - will utilize HAL's procedures to deliver, but player's request would become obligatory in HAL's decision making routine. But that sounds rather complex, so if it happen, it wouldn't by rather anytime soon. 

[scimitar 221]

That sound reasonable. Transport is the only one that I would really like to see but it's not that big of a deal. Do you use TPW Mods by any chance? If you could look into and possibly resolve the issue that makes the spawned vehicles de-spawn and do the teleporting to the lower left corner of the map, that would solve a lot of the transport problems as it would be fairly simple to grab a parked truck from the nearest village. Thanks again.

[b3lx 161]

I'm having two problems that might be related. I cannot get HWS to work in Shapur (hangs forever in loading), I wonder if the map is too small. Also I've been trying to use a RydBB_MC trigger to limit battle area in Altis without success, it either returns something like "failed initialization: no forces available" or it hangs forever. 

[scimitar 221]

I occasionally get the "no forces available" error but it seems to be something related to badly configured faction mods rather than HWS.

[b3lx 161]

7 hours ago, scimitar said:

I occasionally get the "no forces available" error but it seems to be something related to badly configured faction mods rather than HWS.

It only happened when I used RydBB_MC trigger but if its a mod thing I would like to know what is so I can fix it, I'm using my own faction mod. Anyway since I get problems on the Shapur map as well I think there must be some minimum map size or something like that that is behind this

[Rydygier 1302]

OK, hopefully I'm back here, working on some hard to nail down issues with RydBB_MC and other bugs, I introduced to normal mode by the whole map code. When I sort them out, I'll provide new wip and some explanations about RydBB_MC and porting to pre-Arma 3 maps. 

[Rydygier 1302]

HWS wip7

 

Sorted mentioned issues with RydBB_MC and other bugs. 

 

RydBB_MC is a name of a square trigger, that can be put on the map in order to limit/define the battlefield for HWS. Two main uses are limiting gameplay to only one part of some big map and defining battlefield for old, A2 maps. In case of Arma 3 maps it is optional, but in order to run HWS on the pre-Arma 3 map, RydBB_MC must be put on the map. It may cover whole map or only part of it, must be there. The reason is, Arma 3 maps have in their configs value defining its size. Arma 2 map config lacks of this value, therefor it has to be provided by other means - RydBB_MC trigger size is used instead. The new thing here is, now RydBB_MC trigged doesn't have to cover whole map, when you are porting HWS to old maps. 

 

How big this trigger should be - depends on your needs, but keep in mind, how much of space HWS requires typically to place both armies. If the battlefield will be too small, scenario may technically work, but armiers will be too close or even intermixed, so you'll get instant mess situation. That's the Shapur map case. it is tiny, too small. After today's changes it should work, if RydBB_MC placed (Arma2 map), but it is too small. Also, whole map mode requires some locations of certain types within the battlefield boundaries. 

 

Here's an example of RydBB_MC trigger usage on Altis to limit the battlefield:

 

Spoiler

 

And the Shapur situation for whole map and next for normal mode:

 

Spoiler

 

 

Now, if used, in game there should be rectangle red marker visible showing defined by RydBB_MC area. It can be used in both modes, normal and whole map. 

[velzevul 32]

hi, Rydygier! very glad, you returned to HWS. :) 
tryed wip7. looks like everything works well.

wanna ask again about end conditions for "whole map" mode. is it possible to modify its parameters somehow (number of captured locations to win, percentage of casualties for "lost will of fight" ending)?

[Rydygier 1302]

Quote

 is it possible to modify its parameters somehow

 

It wasn't, so I added some. 🙂

 

HWS wip8

 

- free choice button disabled, when whole map mode selected (pointless in this mode);

- free choice click has to be within defined battlefield area or will be futile (it was possible to choose a battlefield in normal mode out of RydBB_MC area, which led to "no forces" exit);

- added new variables to customize victory conditions for whole map mode (not tested thoroughly), with their default values:

 

1. How much objective lost/taken should affect morale.

 

RYD_WS_MoraleObjCoeffL = 1;//losing
RYD_WS_MoraleObjCoeffG = 1;//gaining

 

It is multiplier of default morale impact at every objective taken/lost. By default, a side will lose 10 morale divided equally between all Leaders (5 per Leader). By default a side will gain 20 morale divided equally between all Leaders (10 per Leader).

So, if you set for example L to 0 and G to 100, sides will not lose any morale due to objective lost, and will gain 1000 morale per Leader at each objective taken (which basically mean guaranteed reset to nominal morale value - 0 (morale ranges from 0 to -50, oddly enough, I know...). Setting both to 0.1 will reduce any objectives morale impact to 10% of default. Technically, negative values are possible, in that case gaining objective will lower the morale, and losing - will raise it. 🙂

 

2. How big part of not taken initially objectives side need to take in order to win the battle by "domination", per side.

 

RYD_WS_TakeToWinA = -1;
RYD_WS_TakeToWinB = -1;

 

"A" side is always player's side. Typical values range from 0 to 1, where 0 mean 0% of not taken objectives and 1 - 100% of not taken objectives. Not taken objectives are all, that aren't taken by given side already at battle begin (include not taken by anyone and initially taken by the enemy). For example A = 0.5 means, that A side need to take (control simultaneously) at least half (50%) of objectives, that wasn't taken by A side at the start. If value is negative, this victory condition is disabled, if value is >1, this condition is enabled, but never fulfilled. Value = 0 means automatic victory soon after battle beginning. 

 

For customization of default values, variables should be typed into the Advanced Setup window as usual. 

[Rydygier 1302]

I've posted new wip link with new variables to customize whole map victory conditions and other stuff above this post, but that post is flagged pink - hidden until moderator approval. Weird, it's first time, such thing happens to me. We've to wait, I guess, wondering, how long actually...

[scimitar 221]

I have a simple question. When you say "pre-Arma 3 maps" is that a reference to just A1 and A2 maps that haven't been ported (such as FDF Podagorsk) to A3 or is it in reference to all maps that were originally created before A3 was released but have since been ported (such as those from CUP or IFA3)?

[Rydygier 1302]

Ported too.

 

IMO you can safely assume, any ported to A3 map originally created prior to A3 will likely required RydBB_MC trigger to work with HWS. 

 

To be technically precise: it refers to every map, that is configured in a way, Arma 2 (and possibly older too) official (and user made alike) maps was, exactly - lacking "mapSize" config entry. AFAIK maps ported by projects like CUP or IFA3 count as pre-Arma 3 in this regard, still lacking that entry, although in theory the one, who ports such an old map, could update the config along the way probably... It's easy to test though, if usual A3 standard port returns errors without RydBB_MC trigger, but works fine with this trigger present - it's the case of pre-Arma 3 map config.  

[scimitar 221]

Thanks for the response. That clears it up for me. 🙂

[Dedmen 2590]

23 hours ago, Rydygier said:

Weird, it's first time, such thing happens to me. We've to wait, I guess, wondering, how long actually...

I guess because of that link, auto spam detection.