Kosmo_ 39 Posted November 30 5 hours ago, zwobot said: Nice work. I put a company worth of Blufor onto I44's Omaha v2 and a reinforced platoon of Opfor into an area of 3 villages and had an instant battle ready in not more than 5 minutes. Is it possible to influence how the hive positions waypoints around the locations? For example decide whether objectives are approached in a frontal assult, flanking or envelopment? Currently the positioning is either defending or attacking the nearest objective from unit, depending on forces ratio. The waypoints are placed halfway from objective to unit with a radius of 500, eventually overlapping. What do you suppose would be the criteria for flanking or envelopment, in a philosophical sense? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
zwobot 22 Posted November 30 My thought was to have a paremeter in the scripts representing the skill of the virtual commander for each side, e. g. "Inexperienced", "Skilled", "Veteran", "Genius" The script would chose a course of action from frontal assault, left flanking, right flanking, envelopment and the selected skill would have an impact on the probability that each of the courses of action will be chosen. For example for Veteran or Genius skill the probability for selecting envelopment or flanking courses of action would be high whereas it would be low for the Inexpierienced skill. You could also skip the skill and parameterize the probability for each course of action directly. Another aspect could be to parameterize the portion of the total available units to be held back in reserve so that another dimension for virtual commander's personality would be its aggressiveness, i. e. more aggressive = less reserves and conservative personality = more reserves. The Hetman AI commander does something similar if I remember correctly. I don't know if either of this is viable with the current design of the Hive and haven't looked into the inner workings of how the assignment of waypoints to groups is coordinated. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kosmo_ 39 Posted November 30 1 hour ago, zwobot said: My thought was to have a paremeter in the scripts representing the skill of the virtual commander for each side, e. g. "Inexperienced", "Skilled", "Veteran", "Genius" The script would chose a course of action from frontal assault, left flanking, right flanking, envelopment and the selected skill would have an impact on the probability that each of the courses of action will be chosen. For example for Veteran or Genius skill the probability for selecting envelopment or flanking courses of action would be high whereas it would be low for the Inexpierienced skill. You could also skip the skill and parameterize the probability for each course of action directly. Another aspect could be to parameterize the portion of the total available units to be held back in reserve so that another dimension for virtual commander's personality would be its aggressiveness, i. e. more aggressive = less reserves and conservative personality = more reserves. The Hetman AI commander does something similar if I remember correctly. I don't know if either of this is viable with the current design of the Hive and haven't looked into the inner workings of how the assignment of waypoints to groups is coordinated. Very interesting thoughts! Yeah I recall Hetman having personalities which affect the tactics. I like to approach this script with the intention of bringing complex behavior from "simple" instructions. I am thinking about having an additional third "strategic" mode in addition to defensive and offensive, "maneuver". It would be triggered when there are unoccupied objectives. The thinking is that the "front line" would be shaped this way from which the situations of flanking and encirclement would emerge. The big question is whether it is better to consolidate all defenses in one place leading to a quick result (decisive loss/victory), or is it better to be spread out and thin the enemy with sporadic engagements and artillery fire (loosing ground). I suppose the same question applies to attacking, is it better to have single concentrated push or multiple skirmishes. Right now this is solved by simply the unit moving to the nearest objective, by chance and distance either forces stay concentrated or spread out. Yes and also objectives currently are considered captured even thought there is no-one present there. Obviously an area can be considered held if it is behind actually occupied areas, essentially in "shadow" of front line. Should defensive forces be held in these areas (essentially forming reserves) our should defenses be only on the actually contested objectives? Interesting dynamic, maybe these decisions could be based on terrain somehow... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
zwobot 22 Posted November 30 That could be alternative behaviours as well influenced by the "personality" parameters. The dumb (or inexperienced) AI commander might rush into multiple objectives piecemeal without any reconnaissance. But it all sounds complicated and difficult to get done convincingly for different situations. Examining the gemoetry of the locations within the AO marker and evaluating them into a small number of categories and then having a couple of general courses of actions for each category that the AI might consider (or let the mission designer decide to choose from) and then stick to that more or less. I. e. How are the locations laid out in relation to the forces's starting positions (wide but shallow or narrow but deep or wide and deep...). The defender might deploy smaller numbers of infantry groups in frontline locations closest to the enemy starting positions while keeping a mobile reserve of mechanized infantry and armored platoons in a location further back to react with by counterattack on serious enemy attacks or breakthroughs. The offensive party on the other hand might probe along the whole frontline for a weak spot, also keeping a mobile reserve to take advantage of any weaknesses in the defensive lines (from what you explained this might already be happening alredy to some degree in the current version if you position groups in the editor opposite to locations on a wide front and keep some concentration of groups further back in the centre? Until now I've mostly played a mission with a narrow line of locations laid out west to east and the attackers lined up west of the first location. They basically ganged up on the first location with some flanking going on but that might be caused by the terrain canalizing them into a certain avenue of approach). Or the attacker might throw wave after wave onto the same objective until it is seized and try capturing objectives deeper in the defenders rear areas. I've just found the bongo moth by the way, wtf 😄 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kosmo_ 39 Posted November 30 Version 4 HIVE.sqf Location types now categorized into large/medium/small Additional location types, "Hill" in medium and "StrongpointArea" in small Location types have a separate radius array HIVE_SIZES HIVE_STRATEGIC.sqf Simplified arrays a little Area arrays are reset every strategic cycle New strategic modes, ATTACKING, DEFENDING and MANOEUVRE MANOEUVRE is activated by ratio of captured areas to uncaptured MANOEUVRE causes groups to prioritize uncaptured objectives HIVE_TACTICAL.sqf Split tactical into TAC_WEST.sqf, TAC_EAST.sqf and TAC_GUER.sqf temporarily removed garrison behaviour from infantry Waypoint placement radius depends on the objective size Waypoints that have less distance to objective than radius are now placed from objective's center Transportation is now requested if distance to waypoint is larger than objective radius 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kosmo_ 39 Posted November 30 57 minutes ago, zwobot said: That could be alternative behaviours as well influenced by the "personality" parameters. The dumb (or inexperienced) AI commander might rush into multiple objectives piecemeal without any reconnaissance. But it all sounds complicated and difficult to get done convincingly for different situations. Examining the gemoetry of the locations within the AO marker and evaluating them into a small number of categories and then having a couple of general courses of actions for each category that the AI might consider (or let the mission designer decide to choose from) and then stick to that more or less. I. e. How are the locations laid out in relation to the forces's starting positions (wide but shallow or narrow but deep or wide and deep...). The defender might deploy smaller numbers of infantry groups in frontline locations closest to the enemy starting positions while keeping a mobile reserve of mechanized infantry and armored platoons in a location further back to react with by counterattack on serious enemy attacks or breakthroughs. The offensive party on the other hand might probe along the whole frontline for a weak spot, also keeping a mobile reserve to take advantage of any weaknesses in the defensive lines (from what you explained this might already be happening alredy to some degree in the current version if you position groups in the editor opposite to locations on a wide front and keep some concentration of groups further back in the centre? Until now I've mostly played a mission with a narrow line of locations laid out west to east and the attackers lined up west of the first location. They basically ganged up on the first location with some flanking going on but that might be caused by the terrain canalizing them into a certain avenue of approach). Or the attacker might throw wave after wave onto the same objective until it is seized and try capturing objectives deeper in the defenders rear areas. I've just found the bongo moth by the way, wtf 😄 The changes in version 4 should see some interesting dynamics emerging. In a situation where forces are nearly equal the stance of defence and offence might get triggered my the attacking side taking heavy or important losses, essentially activating forces defending further away (that could be considered reserves). MANOEUVRE should introduce some flanking especially from defender's side. The objectives having varying sizes will make groups spread out and condense depending on terrain which is also interesting (Hills are important because units can see far away and call in artillery, while Strongpoints are essentially chokepoints on important routes). We'll see how these changes play out, even at 4x speed running scenarios can still take 30 minutes. Bongo moth FTW! 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dalber24 165 Posted November 30 31 minutes ago, Kosmo_ said: Version 4 Spoiler HIVE.sqf Location types now categorized into large/medium/small Additional location types, "Hill" in medium and "StrongpointArea" in small Location types have a separate radius array HIVE_SIZES HIVE_STRATEGIC.sqf Simplified arrays a little Area arrays are reset every strategic cycle New strategic modes, ATTACKING, DEFENDING and MANOEUVRE MANOEUVRE is activated by ratio of captured areas to uncaptured MANOEUVRE causes groups to prioritize uncaptured objectives HIVE_TACTICAL.sqf Split tactical into TAC_WEST.sqf, TAC_EAST.sqf and TAC_GUER.sqf temporarily removed garrison behaviour from infantry Waypoint placement radius depends on the objective size Waypoints that have less distance to objective than radius are now placed from objective's center Transportation is now requested if distance to waypoint is larger than objective radius Thanks for this update, it's really great, how HIVE is progressing!!! Cheers.- 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kosmo_ 39 Posted December 1 V4.1 Small fixes Sped up TAC a little, sleep delays only happen if unit is not in busy array Transportation is now requested if distance is radius * 2 from waypoint Re-added infantry getting waypoints to nearby building from waypoint Building has to be within objective radius Time to update A3 one once again 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kosmo_ 39 Posted December 1 Aight so I got an idea: What if much like individual units in a squad make up squad formation, individual groups would form platoon formation. This could be extrapolated, platoons form brigade formations https://imgur.com/a/0HviUzW 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dalber24 165 Posted December 1 5 hours ago, Kosmo_ said: V4.1 Spoiler Small fixes Sped up TAC a little, sleep delays only happen if unit is not in busy array Transportation is now requested if distance is radius * 2 from waypoint Re-added infantry getting waypoints to nearby building from waypoint Building has to be within objective radius wow! you are a machine, I had not tried the v4 yet, I will trying it right now.... 31 minutes ago, Kosmo_ said: Aight so I got an idea: What if much like individual units in a squad make up squad formation, individual groups would form platoon formation. This could be extrapolated, platoons form brigade formations It's a good idea, I like it, and at least one squad should be special operations, Rambo style, with a lot of skill. Or am I rambling too much already!?I wonder when you sleep... Thank you very much!! 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kosmo_ 39 Posted December 1 2 hours ago, dalber24 said: wow! you are a machine, I had not tried the v4 yet, I will trying it right now.... It's a good idea, I like it, and at least one squad should be special operations, Rambo style, with a lot of skill. Or am I rambling too much already!?I wonder when you sleep... Thank you very much!! As the name implies, special operations are... special (= novel) operations (= neither strategy or tactics) xd. I don't think that will be a consideration for now, however I have observed some very interesting behavior when a helicopter is grouped with infantry. Once the helicopter receives "SAD" waypoint the infantry will dismount at first contact leading to a very cool scene. (your enthusiasm cheers me up continually, thank you too!) 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dalber24 165 Posted December 2 20 hours ago, Kosmo_ said: As the name implies, special operations are... special (= novel) operations (= neither strategy or tactics) xd. I don't think that will be a consideration for now, however I have observed some very interesting behavior when a helicopter is grouped with infantry. Once the helicopter receives "SAD" waypoint the infantry will dismount at first contact leading to a very cool scene. (your enthusiasm cheers me up continually, thank you too!) Haha, yes it's true, I've seen some crazy things with hive, (in a good way...) Yes, I'm sorry if I sometimes act schizophrenic or overly enthusiastic,🤪🤪 "it's just that I really love it when talented people do great things", it's also a common trait in my country, we are very passionate.No one should confuse enthusiasm, joy, passion, encouragement, with flattery, I clarify this because I know that in other countries they see it that way. And that's because they don't know Argentines. Cheers 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kosmo_ 39 Posted December 3 (edited) Version 4.2 Updated HIVE_SPAWNING.sqf 30% of groups are spawned from random type, so for example infantry formations will have some supporting vehicles Group strength now changeable with rotation of marker. 90 degrees = 75% group strength, 180 = 50% and 270 = 25% Ammunition status can be changed with color of marker. Green = 75% ammo, Yellow = 50% and Red = 25% Morale (skill) can be changed with alpha of marker. 0.75 alpha = 75% skill, 0.5 alpha = 50% and 0.25 alpha = 25% Spawning markers will now have text with information, "UNITS", "AMMO" and "MORALE" Small patch 3/12 Reduced size of "Armored" groups so it makes more sense Made markers alpha to switch to 1 after spawning rotation and alpha no longer need to be exact, == changed to >= and <= Edited December 3 by Kosmo_ patch 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dalber24 165 Posted December 3 3 hours ago, Kosmo_ said: Version 4.2 Spoiler Updated HIVE_SPAWNING.sqf 30% of groups are spawned from random type, so for example infantry formations will have some supporting vehicles Group strength now changeable with rotation of marker. 90 degrees = 75% group strength, 180 = 50% and 270 = 25% Ammunition status can be changed with color of marker. Green = 75% ammo, Yellow = 50% and Red = 25% Morale (skill) can be changed with alpha of marker. 0.75 alpha = 75% skill, 0.5 alpha = 50% and 0.25 alpha = 25% Spawning markers will now have text with information, "UNITS", "AMMO" and "MORALE" New features!!! I love it They are very interesting features, group strength, very interesting for the overall dynamics, ammunition, very necessary, morale, I think it's great to have the factor on the battlefield where everything can change from one moment to the next, due to the fear factor... Thx for this update!!! Keep it up!!! Cheers! 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kosmo_ 39 Posted December 7 Version 4.3 HIVE.sqf Additional parameter, HIVE_DEBUG2 Looping is now 600s, 300s and 150s HIVE_SPAWNING.sqf Removed opacity parameter, alpha of marker doesn't matter anymore. Morale and supply has 3 states now: High, Medium and Low Supply is now "colorGreen", "ColorYellow" and "ColorRed". Morale is now: 0 degrees, 120 degrees and 240 degrees. Exceptions list for certain factions New marker type, "b_empty". Can be used for factions which have unconventional cfgGroups structure Balancing done for different group types, infantry formations should have some chance against armored formations Reduced spawning radius to marker size * 100 BIS_fnc_findSafePos now defaults to marker position if no valid positions found HIVE_STRATEGIC.sqf Fixed issue with debug markers not updating. HIVE Battle generator: https://forums.bohemia.net/forums/topic/291063-sp-hive-battle-generator/ 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dalber24 165 Posted December 9 On 12/7/2024 at 6:16 PM, Kosmo_ said: Version 4.3 Spoiler HIVE.sqf Additional parameter, HIVE_DEBUG2 Looping is now 600s, 300s and 150s HIVE_SPAWNING.sqf Removed opacity parameter, alpha of marker doesn't matter anymore. Morale and supply has 3 states now: High, Medium and Low Supply is now "colorGreen", "ColorYellow" and "ColorRed". Morale is now: 0 degrees, 120 degrees and 240 degrees. Exceptions list for certain factions New marker type, "b_empty". Can be used for factions which have unconventional cfgGroups structure Balancing done for different group types, infantry formations should have some chance against armored formations Reduced spawning radius to marker size * 100 BIS_fnc_findSafePos now defaults to marker position if no valid positions found HIVE_STRATEGIC.sqf Fixed issue with debug markers not updating. HIVE Battle generator: https://forums.bohemia.net/forums/topic/291063-sp-hive-battle-generator/ Excellent! another good update! as I said before I like the moral thing Thanks for the update!, now I'm going to look at what's that new thing you left there... another hidden gem? Cheers!! 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kosmo_ 39 Posted December 10 Version 4.4 HIVE.sqf Removed StrongPointArea from locations array HIVE_TAC Made waypoint position default to target position if no suitable position at midpoint was found HIVE_SPAWNING.sqf Adjusted spawning radius to marker size * 150 Changed group type units values And maybe something else I already forgot about 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dalber24 165 Posted December 10 Wow wordless!!! @Kosmo_ I truly and wholeheartedly say this, thank you for your time and hard work. Cheers.- 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
