Warlords

[pierremgi 4737]

1 hour ago, Glow said:

Air Support Warlords?

 

Would it be possible to put Air Support modules inside Warlords sectors? 

 

The  idea is to have Warlord sector divided for 2-3 air support zones. Mission can be played only by pilots, zones and sectors sized only by AI ground forces.

 

I'm trying to build this but probably some serious work with scripting will be needed. I get some errors and trying to get this work properly but is it even possible? Are modules flexible to handle that? Anyone try it that before?

 

Yes it's possible. Why not? What was your script and the error in rpt file? Modules can be used.

 

 

[Glow 181]

Any working scenario? I though it would not work together. I haven't try to do anything different from those things you can find in tutorials, but it looks like those modules can handle crazy ideas. Now I'm pushing to have this Air Support Warlords working.

[CaptainDawson 93]

@Jezuro, I have to say, whatever changes were made to the servers in the last several weeks have definitely made a difference for the better. I have been getting up to my FPS limit of 60 FPS in Warlords lately, at least until Telos is selected. A drastic increase in performance for me, and since I don't hear as many people complaining about bad frames as much anymore, I think it is improved for others as well.

[Jezuro 452]

I think it was the garbage collector tweaks that did it, namely implementing the engine solution alongside the proprietary methods in Warlords scripts.

[CaptainDawson 93]

I found my new favorite strategy for annoying jet spammers, it will have to work for the time being until the update later this month.

 

 

The fact that a couple of the larger mines were missing later on tells me that my mission was at least somewhat successful 

[Beagle 684]

57 minutes ago, CaptainDawson said:

I found my new favorite strategy for annoying jet spammers, it will have to work for the time being until the update later this month.

 

 

 

The fact that a couple of the larger mines were missing later on tells me that my mission was at least somewhat successful 

I did follow your example and do the same at AAC for OPFOR ;)

 

[Nic1 12]

@Jezuro I think you should add a height limit when capturing sectors. I have seen people hover helicopters many many km in the air over sectors such that they can't be taken down by ground units. And if your team doesn't have any jet pilots or they don't care, nothing really can be done except letting the sector get captured.

 

Edit: this would also prevent jet that fly over a zone for a fraction of a second from resetting the capping.

[CaptainDawson 93]

47 minutes ago, Beagle said:

I did follow your example and do the same at AAC for OPFOR 😉

 

 

But why? I don't think you need to put mines on AAC to suppress Blufor air power lol. Whatever actually reaches the ground on spawn will not typically last long enough in the air to deal significant damage to Opfor. Exceptions being early in the game if Opfor doesn't spawn any planes, or if Opfor doesn't happen to have any pilots logged on, or if Blufor can suppress Opfor by camping all 3 of their airfields simultaneously. The balance is hopelessly messed up... AAC is typically the only place Blufor can spawn jets, and the runway is not even covered by the sector, meaning Opfor can literally stand on the runway and shoot everything that spawns, and even put mines on it. Molos IS covered by a sector, meaning Blufor cannot place mines at all. I've only recently figured out how to suppress Molos Airfield, Feres Airfield, and Almyra simultaneously, and it's not so simple as it is for Opfor to camp the single AAC airsptrip and completely deny Blufor any air assets. And still most players prefer to continuously spawn air assets for Opfor to destroy. I've said it before and I'll say it again, there is no reasonable counter to Opfor's Shikras when AAC is being suppressed, and that happens every game.

 

I've been pushing a new strategy for Blufor lately, which seems to partially solve the issue of incessant camping by Opfor. Just don't capture AAC, until the right time comes. Unless you have ready and willing Blackwasp pilots logged on, there is no reason to create additional targets for the Shikras and Neophrons. They don't come over to Blufor side and camp when there's nothing being spawned! AAC is just a killing ground for Opfor, they even have an island from which they can camp with tanks with almost no fear of immediate retribution. Noobs have no idea where they are being shot from. All those players (with the exception of a few experienced players) that spawn Blackfoots, Pawnees, Wipeouts etc. are literally wasting their CP if they will immediately be shot down within a minute of taking off. It must have worked, cause the lack of Blufor aircraft made most of the Opfor pilots to switch to only Neophrons, until we had enough CP and Blackwasp pilots to actually fight back.

 

Look at this. Top 4 players obliterate everything in the match. You can tell by the kill distribution who is using what vehicle. Me camping airfield spawns and using Rhino on Anthrakia, Sopheles and Juju spamming Shikras and Neophron.

 

I just want the camping to end. Currently the only way to suppress camping is to camp the enemy yourself. I'd like there to be no more spawning vehicles halfway across the map in enemy territory, no more mining and seal-clubbing aircraft spawns, no more unlimited Rhino and Kajman ripple-fire exploiting.  Just let us play the match team vs team instead of 2 campers vs 2 campers dominating the entire match.

[Nic1 12]

@Jezuro Another exploit I have seen is that while enemy players will die (after the timer expires) if they go into unauthorized zones with the thick border around them, their AI will not. I have seen OPFOR players send AI tanks into the BLUFOR base to spawn kill. Not too much of an issue with the base spawn protection, but I still think you should make it so enemy AI die if they enter unauthorized zones.

[crs24 33]

@Nic1

I suspect from what I’ve seen that the reason it isn’t set to kill AI entering locked sectors is that when you have the AI enabled to fill unused squad leader slots and with the AI in general, they aren’t capable of avoiding traveling through the locked sectors sometimes when traveling to the current objective, so on some objectives they’d get stuck and keep dying in certain situations. Maybe the AI subordinates in actual player controlled groups should still die in locked sectors though.

@CaptainDawson

On spawning things in enemy territory an idea I’ve mentioned before is to maybe have a new parameter that can change airdrops on your location to either the current setup of drop on your location anywhere, be set to require a friendly sector nearby to drop on your location, or disable it entirely and only allow airdrops on friendly sectors.

[CaptainDawson 93]

All I can say is, myself and many other players are really looking forward to the removal of the Jets DLC from Warlords coming up. I know it's only a temporary fix, but I think the average players will start to have a lot more fun during that period. Now every game Blufor feeling obligated to mine Feres and camp Molos to delay the Shikras is just getting annoying. And of course, nearly every game we see Opfor camp the heck out of AAC. Forget Blackwasp vs Shikra or anything else, 2 aircraft spawn points on one side vs 1 on the other is going to create an unfair advantage for one team.

 

Again, air-superiority fighters operating from bases so close to the frontline in this situation is kind of ridiculous. Arma is an infantry oriented game, Jets DLC in Warlords does not present the most realistic or fun side of Arma to the new players.

[WarlordsFanNumber1 2]

 

What happened to the Warlords servers? Only Eu 16 is active, other has endless break time.

[CaptainDawson 93]

15 minutes ago, WarlordsFanNumber1 said:

 

What happened to the Warlords servers? Only Eu 16 is active, other has endless break time.

 

Was a fun little chance to play Malden Warlords with other players for once, since everyone was forced to only use the smaller servers! I assume they are updating or changing the Altis servers, perhaps in preparation for the next update. Looking forward to seeing what changes were made!

[CaptainDawson 93]

In any case, they are back up now. There aren't any changes I can see yet.

[CaptainDawson 93]

[Beagle 684]

2 hours ago, CaptainDawson said:

I would not post my little dirty secrets here. BTW I log on to enemy side first to see where the mines etc. are. Why, because I can!

[CaptainDawson 93]

3 hours ago, Beagle said:

I would not post my little dirty secrets here. BTW I log on to enemy side first to see where the mines etc. are. Why, because I can!

 

There's much worse than that, like the fact that a player can screenshot the locations of all the enemy units, switch teams, and mark them all for his team. The mines are not for people like you who will simply avoid them, they are for the players who continually call in aircraft after aircraft without anyone stopping them. Now that all the longtime players know how to take advantage of the map layout, there is not much left to do but camp airfields and spawns. Today I killed over 5 helis and Shikras at point blank range that Opfor was calling at the main airbase. Get's boring after awhile, waiting out until the Shikra players leave so that Blufor can win.

[Jezuro 452]

I've been experimenting with random base locations and fog of war, as well as procedural zone restriction area. This would allow players to enter only those areas on the map they've pushed through, instead of free movement throughout the map. Also, sector areas of any shape and size, changeable competing sides, singleplayer compatibility and more. Basically a line 1-rewrite.

This will take a lot of time, so please don't expect these changes prior to at least 1.96.

 

[Beagle 684]

54 minutes ago, Jezuro said:

I've been experimenting with random base locations and fog of war, as well as procedural zone restriction area. This would allow players to enter only those areas on the map they've pushed through, instead of free movement throughout the map. Also, sector areas of any shape and size, changeable competing sides, and more. Basically a line 1-rewrite.

This will take a lot of time, so please don't expect these changes prior to at least 1.96.

 

 

Take all the time you need, your work is always welcome.

[.kju 3239]

what about disallowing side swapping, or make some restrictions when done?

[Jezuro 452]

Anything is possible at this point 🙂

[Beagle 684]

2 hours ago, .kju said:

what about disallowing side swapping, or make some restrictions when done?

the restriction is already there...you lose all CP, the value of the intel gained lasts only very short in a dynamic game and is depended on the difficulty setting anyway.

[Markkos26 2]

how can i make warlords save the progress with a persistent sever using TADST? please help me..

[CaptainDawson 93]

20 hours ago, Beagle said:

the restriction is already there...you lose all CP, the value of the intel gained lasts only very short in a dynamic game and is depended on the difficulty setting anyway.

 

Arguably not, if a player joins without the intention of staying on the team more than a few minutes, there is no CP to lose. If players put enough thought into it, they can just for example go on Blufor to use the friendly player markers and find vehicles in a static position like Cheetahs or Rhinos, immediately switch to Opfor and mark all those units for their team, etc. When we already have campers who know where all the fast travel to contested sector spawn locations are, you can't make me believe there aren't players who switch teams to gain an unfair advantage. Also I would argue it is not a very dynamic game when I can predict certain players and certain vehicles being very predictably in the exact same locations nearly every game.

 

I am interested to see what Jezuro comes up with in the way of randomization, any randomization at all would make the game less predictable and more fun. Would add a lot of depth to Warlords too...

[Markkos26 2]

On 7/23/2019 at 8:43 PM, Markkos26 said:

how can i make warlords save the progress with a persistent sever using TADST? please help me..

 I enabled "save game" in the settings when I created the mission but when I log as an admin and hit Esc the "save" option is greyed out. Im not using any mod.