LAMBS Improved Danger.fsm

[Tuskegee_99th 43]

I just run Lambs Danger as a -servermod so clients don't need to run it and no signature key required. Works very well for us. Hope I'm not missing anything.

 

[nkenny 1057]

@coul
That's a real bug! Must have been removed in one of the revisions.  It isn't critical as I believe FSMs will time out automatically, but I will look into it further. 

-k 

[mickeymen 324]

Hey LAMBS thanks for the great job.
There is a slight observation of error, as I can assume
If AI enters this position, then this is forever - he will never come out of this stance again

Please fix it.  I watch it in two versions of your mod (lambs-danger-fsm-version-2.3.3 and lambs-danger-fsm-version-2.4.1)

[tvscrrtt 2]

First let me say that this is an amazing mod. I've spent way too long messing with platoon level assault missions and after installing this I had the best firefight/urban combat experience since I installed OFP way back when...

 

I do have a few quick user side questions about using this. The groups under my command (using High Command) included two APCs and two trucks. The APCs would periodically stop and not follow move orders. By repeatedly placing their waypoints they would eventually move, but it took some doing. The trucks developed a weird behavior where they would go to a waypoint, then drive off back into the town and go back and forth a couple times. Eventually they would drive into town, their drivers would disembark and go into houses and trying to get them back behind the wheel was next to impossible.

 

I think the best workaround for both issues is to disable the FSM at some level but I'm not sure which is the best approach. Should I disable it at the group level with danger_disableGroupAI, or go through the individual units with danger_disableAI? Also does EnableAttack still have any bearing on their behavior or are these two variables the best way to control it? 

 

I know you've said that it's geared towards co-op so if there are no good answers that's understandable, plus I'm probably one of 3 people who still use High Command.

[nkenny 1057]

LAMBS Danger fsm HOTFIX

New release: Current version 2.4.2

Changelog (2.4.1 & 2.4.2) 

 

Added None to Task Garrison Exit Triggers (option prevents units from breaking garrison)
Added Increased Flare/Illumination usage on Contact State

Fixed Key Signature issues on Dedicated Server

Fixed AI getting stuck in Garrison State*
Fixed AI getting stuck in Fleeing mode
Fixed vehicle AI would sometimes spam share Information

Removed Investigation path from vehicle FSM (was unused)

*Thanks to @Coulfor finding and fixing the issue.

From the team
diwako / joko / nkenny

[kremator 1065]

Just wanted to say how impressed I am with LAMBS Danger fsm combined with TCL.  Really cool firefights.  Good work !

[reaper lok 82]

41 minutes ago, kremator said:

Just wanted to say how impressed I am with LAMBS Danger fsm combined with TCL.  Really cool firefights.  Good work !

 

Questions:

Would you suggest using LAMBS Danger.fsm and TCL on bother server and client side or just as a server side mod?

 

Also - is LAMBS RPG and LAMBS Suppression recommended or will the LAMBS Danger.fsm cover these mechanics now?

 

Have you seen and performance issues or conflicts with using TCL and LAMBS together?

 

 

Thanx in advance for any feedback you can provide 🙂

 

REAPER

[diwako 413]

2 minutes ago, reaper lok said:

 

Also - is LAMBS RPG and LAMBS Suppression recommended or will the LAMBS Danger.fsm cover these mechanics now?

 

These are not included in the Danger.fsm mod. They however work fine with it.

[drdetroit 77]

22 hours ago, tvscrrtt said:

First let me say that this is an amazing mod. I've spent way too long messing with platoon level assault missions and after installing this I had the best firefight/urban combat experience since I installed OFP way back when...

 

I do have a few quick user side questions about using this. The groups under my command (using High Command) included two APCs and two trucks. The APCs would periodically stop and not follow move orders. By repeatedly placing their waypoints they would eventually move, but it took some doing. The trucks developed a weird behavior where they would go to a waypoint, then drive off back into the town and go back and forth a couple times. Eventually they would drive into town, their drivers would disembark and go into houses and trying to get them back behind the wheel was next to impossible.

 

I think the best workaround for both issues is to disable the FSM at some level but I'm not sure which is the best approach. Should I disable it at the group level with danger_disableGroupAI, or go through the individual units with danger_disableAI? Also does EnableAttack still have any bearing on their behavior or are these two variables the best way to control it? 

 

I know you've said that it's geared towards co-op so if there are no good answers that's understandable, plus I'm probably one of 3 people who still use High Command.

 

I find what works best for me, solo play with AI squad of 8-10, is to set a hot-key to turn LAMBs on/off for your squad AI.  This way they follow your commands, instead of trying to go offensive with AI command directives (I also disable auto-combat mode with C2). 

 

If things get crazy and I get overwhelmed during combat, as can happen when getting flanked by enemy AI, I'll turn on LAMBs and put them in combat mode and unleash the hounds.  They do a great job clearing, covering and moving without any input on my part...quite amazing.  I'll usually follow them at this point.

 

Once we're out of danger, and everything under control, I'll turn off LAMBs and combat mode.  They will regroup and chill.

 

Good luck!

DrDetroit

 

 

[tvscrrtt 2]

The hotkey idea is definitely a nice touch. I usually don’t have issue with my own squad, it’s the others I’m trying to control with high command that cause issue. Though really even without LAMBS high command is a bit of a cluster

[mickeymen 324]

On 5/4/2020 at 9:56 PM, nkenny said:

LAMBS Danger fsm HOTFIX

New release: Current version 2.4.2

 

@nkenny I tried to test and that's what I noticed:

 

1. It looks like all your new waypoints are ignoring the internal settings (Combat Mode, Behavior, SpeedMode) or I'm wrong?

I set your TASK GARRISON waypoint with Behavior - "Aware" SpeedMode - "Full" but I saw some units from the squad walked slowly, with weapons lowered, as it should be at Safe Mode.

Is this normal or is it a mistake?  It seems to me that this ai-behavior should not be in Aware mode, how is it done in a vanilla game. This behavior is only suitable for safe mode

 

2. I noticed that I can’t switch  TASK GARRISON waypoint using a trigger to another waypoint (Skip waypoint settings inside trigger). 

After the trigger was activated, the units was should have leave their garrison and rush to another waypoint, but this did not happen. Does it mean that LAMBS waypoints cannot be skipped by means a activated trigger?

More accurately - I synchronized the trigger with the TASK GARRISON waypoint, and set it to switch to another waypoint within map, but not a single unit that took up a position inside the house did not leave the house in which it is currently located.  Question - Is this your idea or is it a mistake or or is it impossible?  Please clarify.

It seems to me that any waypoint should be skipped using a trigger, not this way?

[M1stb0rn 0]

What happens when you set a plane or helicopter as Dynamic Artillery?

[jokoho482 39]

On 5/31/2020 at 3:46 PM, M1stb0rn said:

What happens when you set a plane or helicopter as Dynamic Artillery?

Nothing. we check in the config if it is a Artillery, if not they wont be registered.

[Jimi Markkanen 14]

Already asked about this on the Workshop page of the mod, but AI using IFA3 flares seem not to be functioning. There's at least a setting for AI to use illumination, so I figured it should be a function.

[nkenny 1057]

@mickeymen
1. We allow the waypoint modules to be a little more invasive in terms of changing behaviours and combat modes. Best way to see which do what is to experiment a little.  That said: When AI enter buildings, they are often limited to walking pace. This is a limitation of pathfinding. 

2. In the same spirit as (1), the waypoint modules are not designed from the ground up to be easily linked into a chain of actions.  These are better realised as "end states" or "fire and forget" modules. Easy ways in which to deploy the AI to a specific task.  That doesn't mean it is impossible to string together different behaviours.  The way to realise it is by using the taskReset module.  Of course, if you are constructing a more advanced mission like that, I would advice creating your own  scripted handler and calling the functions directly. 

@M1stb0rn
As Joko says, only artillery units will be added to the artillery pool. Future versions will add CAS support 🙂

@Jimi Markkanen
Not familiar with IFA3. By default it will only consider underbarrel grenade launchers. I suspect these weren't really around in WW2. hehe.  Perhaps future version.

-k 

[mickeymen 324]

12 hours ago, nkenny said:

@mickeymen
1. We allow the waypoint modules to be a little more invasive in terms of changing behaviours and combat modes. Best way to see which do what is to experiment a little.  That said: When AI enter buildings, they are often limited to walking pace. This is a limitation of pathfinding. 

2. In the same spirit as (1), the waypoint modules are not designed from the ground up to be easily linked into a chain of actions.  These are better realised as "end states" or "fire and forget" modules. Easy ways in which to deploy the AI to a specific task.  That doesn't mean it is impossible to string together different behaviours.  The way to realise it is by using the taskReset module.  Of course, if you are constructing a more advanced mission like that, I would advice creating your own  scripted handler and calling the functions directly. 

 

Hi! I apologize, but I did not quite understand you.

Before, I only asked about taking into account the settings inside the waypoint (Combat Mode, Behavior, SpeedMode). Unfortunately, it seems to me that LAMBS waypoints will not take this into account.

I was also puzzled by the inability to skip your great waypoint - TASK GARRISON.

If the player can force the AI to occupy the building, that’s great!

But if after this, the player cannot skip this waypoint to new waypont, outside this building, then that’s not good.

 

I still do not understand how you feel about these two points - Can you implement this in LAMBS or can't?

[nkenny 1057]

@mickeymen

TaskGarrison is meant to be a long term garrison, not simply checking a building, or temporarily holding it. Because the waypoint is actually a handler for a scripted function and not a "way point" in the BIS sense, it should be treated as end state when activated through waypoints. There are technical and game design reasons for this. It is, however, possible to skip out of the garrisoned state. You can do that by using the taskReset module, or simply by running the taskReset function directly on the unit you wish to have abandon the garrison. That could be achieved within the trigger or statement you are using to have the garrisoned unit move again. 

 

The function to taskReset is 

[<group>] call lambs_wp_fnc_taskReset;

 

Doing so comes with the limitation that this group will be fullly _reset_. Essentially the members of the group will join a freshly created group. 

 

-k 

[nkenny 1057]

LAMBS Danger fsm

New release: Current version 2.4.4 *HOTFIX*

Changelog

 

Added context_menu actions support to the Zeus Enhanced mod
Added configurable setting for ‘combat mode’ sharing distance
Added patrol option to taskGarrison and taskCamp (default is disabled)

Improved taskAssault (more reliable)
Improved taskRush with dynamic cycle times

Fixed random suppressive fire in taskCQB and improved house selection routines
Fixed vehicles suppressing through terrain and high flying aircraft
Fixed units will more reliable man static weapons in taskGarrison and taskCamp
Fixed units will more reliably deploy static weapons from modded content
Fixed units with LAMBS AI disabled will no longer be forced into combat mode by information sharing
Fixed artillery registration issue
Fixed in Zeus, moduleCQB and moduleAssault would always delete the logic even when asked not to.
Fixed various issues in Eden and Zeus modules

This version fixes and improves many small aspects of the mod related to task modules and group level behaviour. For players using the Zeus Enhanced (ZEN) mod, we’ve also connected the modules to the contextual menu for ease of use.

 

The next move from the team will be an restructure of the naming scheme of many of the functions. As LAMBS Danger has proceeded the complexity of the project has increased. We are experimenting with future features.  among these are: enhancements to artillery, a much requested reinforcement system, adding a post-combat AI, a dynamic close air support engine, and various other pieces. As always we are committed to keeping the mod from overriding mission makers intentions and hence creating a seamless improvement to the game. 

From the team
diwako / joko / nkenny

[LSValmont 789]

7 hours ago, nkenny said:

From the team
diwako / joko / nkenny

 

You my sirs are gentleman of the finest kind!

 

Thank you for your game changing endeavors and I wish thee godspeed and good fortune!

 

PS: What is the current setVariable to disable LAMBS on units temporarily? I need that for a custom UI I am making for commanding LAMBS units 😉 

[nkenny 1057]

@LSValmont
<unit> setVariable ["lambs_danger_disableAI", true];

 

-k 

[domokun 515]

Does this mod influence the accuracy of AI in anyway?

Because I convinced my squad to run it in our Antistasi WW2 game yesterday and when we got decimated by highly accurate mortar fire they claimed it was due to this mod... 🙄

[nkenny 1057]

LAMBS Danger.fsm affects no weapon settings.  With that said, the shared information may have other emergent properties. If anything the tendency of infantry to move and shoot in cqb may cause decreased accuracy.

 

-k 

[mickeymen 324]

On 6/12/2020 at 2:08 AM, nkenny said:

LAMBS Danger.fsm

 

Hey @nkenny do you have somewhere a detailed text description for each LAMBS specific waypoint, LAMBS module?

 

I looked for information somewhere and saw only your videos on YouTube. Unfortunately, I do not understand English speech well and would prefer to find text descriptions.

It seemed to me that you had a description on the first page of your mod, but now I do not see any descriptions there/

If you do not have them, in future please create a detailed description for all LAMBS users. If you still have them, please provide links.

[nkenny 1057]

@mickeymen
Have you checked the gitHub wiki? https://github.com/nk3nny/LambsDanger/wiki/Variables-and-functions
----
 

Here is the first of a three part series that covers the design philosophy of LAMBS Danger and how the module system works.  Next video will consider Zeus and a more in depth look at the various modules. 

-k 

[mickeymen 324]

21 hours ago, nkenny said:

@mickeymen
Have you checked the gitHub wiki?

Oh no...

Now I looked and discovered a lot of new things for myself, thanks for this info!

 

I liked it:

Quote

taskCreep
Have the AI stalk, raptor style, the player forces.

The group will attempt to move as close as possible before unleashing a hailstorm of fire. Sneaky, stealthy and quite scary.

 

Lol! you are realizing my dreams! Thank you!