co30 Domination! One Team

[bushlurker 46]

Wow Xeno !!!

I only asked about climbing obstacles! - I didn't expect a complete new version !!!!!

hehehe.....

Thanks yet again for all your Arma stuff - hope you enjoy Arma 2 just as much!

Bushlurker

[MAA 127]

I have problems with latest versions (I tested 3.60, 3.61 and 3.70) of Domination - CSLA :(

I select role and push OK button. Mission starts loading and after cca 75% of loading bar game crashes to Windows.

Last writing in RPT before crash is this:

Warning Message: No entry 'bin\config.bin/CfgFaces.'.
SetFace error: class CfgFaces..Default not found
SetFace error: class CfgFaces..Default not found

I'm running ARMA v1.16 beta + CSLA only

Last working version for me was 3.23.

@Xeno: Can you help me with this problem plz?

[xeno 234]

Last writing in RPT before crash is this:

Warning Message: No entry 'bin\config.bin/CfgFaces.'.
SetFace error: class CfgFaces..Default not found
SetFace error: class CfgFaces..Default not found

I'm running ARMA v1.16 beta + CSLA only

Last working version for me was 3.23.

@Xeno: Can you help me with this problem plz?

Nope, can't help you here.

Am not using setFace and the mission.sqm file hasn't changed for a long time.

I get the setFace rpt message too on our server (non CSLA) but it doesn't crash, happens with all missions, not only Dom.

One question though, have you added the beta folder to your modfolders ? (server and client)

Xeno

[MAA 127]

Yes, beta 1.16 is running on our dedicated server and client too.

Version 3.23 is working fine.

[xeno 234]

@Maa

I've started ArmA with CSLA a few seconds ago, no error message, was running fine.

Then I started the server with CSLA, connected, selected Dom CSLA 3.70, no error message, no problem. It's running fine.

1.16 that is.

So it must be something on your side.

Please show me your modset (means -mod=) that you use for starting ArmA and the ArmA server. Are you sure that you have added the beta folder (-mod=@CSLA;beta) ?

Xeno

[MAA 127]

I'm running EXE with these parameters: "-mod=beta;@CSLA -nosplash".

I will try make detailed test tonight.

[Cougar 0]

Just another question :D

Well a couple.

1 How do i add the flares to my planes and choppers, ive been looking allover.

2 How do i add extra vehicles that are respawnable.

3 (and last question) I changed the engineer to a diffrent soldier, still got the same name tho, but he cant load static weapons in (i placed a M119 to test but didten work)

Thanks for a very nice mission :)

[xeno 234]

1 How do i add the flares to my planes and choppers, ive been looking allover.

Just land at the service points (you need at least 3.70 for that) or fly/drive near an ammo truck.

2 How do i add extra vehicles that are respawnable.

Just place them in the editor and add one of the following commands to the init line of the vehicles:

If the vehicle should respawn when it moved and is empty:

handle = [this, 120] execVM "x_scripts\x_vehirespawn.sqf"

If the vehicle should only respawn it it is destroyed:

handle = [this, 120] execVM "x_scripts\x_vehirespawn2.sqf"

3 (and last question) I changed the engineer to a diffrent soldier, still got the same name tho, but he cant load static weapons in (i placed a M119 to test but didten work)

Works with every type of soldier, just give it a variable Name in the editor.

You can change the engineer variables for the mission when you open up i_common.sqf and search for:

d_is_engineer = ["delta_1","delta_2","delta_3","delta_4"];

Be sure to add those variable names as strings.

Xeno

[Cougar 0]

Sorry i meant custom planes and choppers.

As for the engineers.. i got them with those names, do i need a special rank or something to be able to put the static in?

[Cougar 0]

double poste bug

[MAA 127]

@Xeno: problem with CSLA version fixed...it was small problem in CFG.

[xeno 234]

As for the engineers.. i got them with those names, do i need a special rank or something to be able to put the static in?

No, no special rank needed.

@Xeno: problem with CSLA version fixed...it was small problem in CFG.

I'm glad you could solve it :)

Xeno

[Penfolde 1]

Hi all

Is there going to be a East Verion of the domination with the Mil Mi-24 Added to the game? I think this is agreate helicopter and do believe that this addon is used enough.

I did play an East Game Put the Weapon Pack was poor. There seem'd to very little in the Susat Weapons and Very little way of silenced weapons.

Penfolde

[xeno 234]

Is there going to be a East Verion of the domination with the Mil Mi-24 Added to the game?

3.70 was the last, final Domination release.

If you don't have it yet, you'll find it here:

http://dev-heaven.net/projects/list_files/domination

The Mi-24 is allready part of the 3.70 A.C.E. versions.

Xeno

[FAF_DRAKO 1]

I have a few Bugs to report on Dev-Heaven but the site seems down at the moment... :(

[afp 1]

I was thinking if it was possible to add some kind of a "morale" parameter to the character, computed every minute for example, if no human team player within lets say 50m than this morale drops like 10%. If any team player found, morale goes up to 100%.

This will enforce team playing since most kids go ahead by themselves. Of course, without "morale" you will be less accurate. Also, this should be better for snipers, as they ussually act alone.

[CarlGustaffa 4]

A sniper doesn't act alone. His team leader would be the spotter, and 'squad leader'/platoon leader of either a HQ element if attached to an infantry platoon or the leader of some scouting team. For this application though, a spotter. But not alone. However...

I've given this a little thought lately. Although I agree intensely about restrictions (some maybe even artificial, like in Project Reality), to increase the benefit of staying as a group and increase the bad side effects of not staying as a group, I don't think this is the way to go (as I first suggested).

The new setSkill array seemed like a possibility to control sway and accuracy. But will it affect human players? I doubt it.

Another possibility to control sway (from within ACE) was to use proximity to closest enemy as input. However, if server has autoreveal turned off and player doesn't actively reveal a target (rmb deassigned from reveal function, I've done this), we don't really know where a target is even if we're looking straight at him (I think, didn't check). So using knowsAbout value doesn't seem good either. Only thing left is using proximity without actually knowing. You might call it a 'gut feeling' that an enemy is nearby, materializing as weapons sway, but this might be too magical for some.

So, for Arma2/Next Project I'd like the following to be considered to enhance the gameplay, increase the need to stay together, and in general slow the whole thing down a bit from the mess we see today. Note that these should be default values. Mission should still be configurable so that closed sessions could benefit from it, but for those who just put the mission up on their server without any changes the gameplay should be slower and more teamplay oriented to avoid the bad gameplay we see today on public Domination. Suggested changes as follows:

* Mission system where the first joining loner can actually perform scaled missions suitable to do solo. I.e. via a mission selector. No hardware, in case he is not an AT equipped slot.

* Instead of fully random targets, I like the idea of pseudo randomness. Any random location that is within minimum and maximum ranges from the last target, and no players are nearby. With next target being i.e. within 2-5km range, convoy movement of several vehicles is possible instead of the MHQ airlifting we always see today.

* Restrictions to what weapons you get, like in real life. You pick the slot you want, but you're forced into playing that role. Designated marksmen can exist within the squads or attachment, but only a single sniper team (spotter team leader and sniper) which have access to heavy sniper and pure sniper platforms (instead of just DMR).

* Although you have restrictions, 'emergency' equipment should still be obtainable i.e. through the means of the Ammo Truck. This way, even if everyone else leaves and a big mission is going on, you'll at least have some way of obtaining limited amounts of single shot (scripted if not in default Arma2) AT4s and Stingers. Ammo Truck can be refilled at base. It becomes a tedious job to complete the active mission, but at least it is possible whatever role you have.

* No HALO whatsoever except for the sniper team members (by default). All other players can only get a 'working found UAZ' at a cleared target. This makes it more important for the chopper to pick up all the people and take them to the next target. Anyone unlucky enough to be left behind, can get a vehicle so they at least can get around. At the same time, the sniper team can perform recon of the area and place the radio location manually. Or, they get possibility to teleport to base and obtain an MH6 to arrive on target before the others. A vehicle reserved for them. The others can only enter as passengers, and this works well because you can't switch seats.

* Only a single MHQ/Mobile Respawn, and a single combined lift/wreck chopper. This forces more people to stick together. People doing smaller missions shouldn't need an MHQ. Other choppers could be a medevac UH-1Y (not sure of it's capabilities), and the mentioned MH6.

* A better defined role for the MHQ. Not only as a spawn point, but also more a headquarter. In the headquarter you can view mission status screen, obtain new missions etc. This will require those on smaller missions to get to the MHQ before obtaining a new mission. This should take away the need for any artificial timers.

* No teleport magic except for the newly joined player. Say teleport will only last for 30 minutes. Teleport also only from base to MHQ, not the other way around. Keeping the chopper alive becomes a priority.

* Revive system. All players can revive another, but the revived player will be in so bad shape he better find a medic or aid station to be useful. Staying close to your team pays.

* Increasing respawn timer. Everytime you get shot the respawn timer doubled. This can't be handled with Arma/Arma2 (most likely) alone, so here we need a 'prison' script where you cannot get out from until the timer has elapsed. Playing smart and staying alive becomes a priority, but even that unforgiving headshot does not cause that much agony for the player. Due to the 'kit system', the respawn should then be instant to disallow other players from obtaining your weapon and the mission suddenly has two M107 snipers. Spectating script should be available for those unlucky ones that have to wait a while to get back into play.

* Maybe a maximum number of respawn before the player slot becomes unavailable. I did this in early Dominatrix where number of lives left was determined by the number of remaining targets when the player entered.

* No more 'magically refilling crates'. Contents should still be local to player and the contents of it should be stored on each players client. No artificial crate timer needed now. If you need to refill a crate, you have to bring it to base and refill it there. Makes ammo runs a requirement.

* Field ammo crates should only contain ammo, and with limited amounts so that it should be possible to do a mission. When a player starts to get depleted, he will have to share ammo with others. All changes to weapon loadout should be done in the base.

* Limit the amount of hardware we can obtain throughout the full mission. I.e. one plane or one attack chopper only. Two tracked armored vehicles. Three wheeled armored vehicles. Four HMMWV vehicles. Maybe use point gathering to obtain it. This provides a greater sense of having to protect the vehicles, and the mission will provide a decent amount of hardware support without getting too obsessed with hardware.

* All enemy vehicles locked by default. Maaaaybe an exception for UAZs, since I think US soldiers would be able to operate these without a course. A US machinegunner or medic driving around in an enemy T90 doesn't make sense to me from a realism standpoint. The insane "Friendly T90" problem goes away, and we get a stronger focus on infantry teamwork. If you want russian equipment, join a server playing the russian side version, or vote for it.

* Completing missions or tasks will add to the mission point pool. These points can be used to obtain hardware. Do 100 small tasks to obtain enough points to get a tank (as in simple solo missions). Or 10 smaller tasks to get a tank. Or two main missions to get a tank.

* Failing a mission or task would reduce points from the mission point pool. Missions should be able to be failed deliberately. But a voting system should have to be built into the mission. Doing a main target solo after having been spotted (in the current system), would be a perfect candidate. You will loose points, but the target will not continue to receive paradrops until you have been respotted. And you can continue solo on the server performing other easier tasks until the server becomes more populated.

* Vehicle entry restrictions and default locked. When a new vehicle is obtained, only the three players with the highest scores, or admin, or superadmins, can unlock the vehicle. Superadmins can also lock a vehicle manually if they so desire. If they don't want to take control over it, they can unlock it for the other players. Who uses it then becomes an agreement, not a matter of who gets to it first. When rebuilt at the wreck shop, it becomes locked again.

* Sites. The enemy firebase could consist of three 2 gun artillery sections forming a complete battery. Maybe at two different locations where only the farthest one will be used if within range. If we locate them by accident or by obtainign intelligence, we can choose to destroy it for a limited amount of time. After this time the enemy will rebuild it somewhere else. The current 'destroy artillery base sidemission' will then be replaced with a task to destroy a gun factory. Same with static AA sites (ZU-23). Two AA sites would become a massive threat, especially in the beginning, and would have to be dealt with or ignored. Once you find a location, it becomes a valid task to choose in the mission selector (check using EH-Hit?). Both site types should be protected by a full sized enemy squad.

* Patrols. Vehicle patrols and foot patrols. Vehicle patrols same as todays isle_defense system, but using far less dangerous vehicles. No tanks or shilkas. UAZ and lightly armored vehicles are dangerous enough, especially early in the game. Keep them fuelled though ;) Maybe just a fuel script that sets a random amount of fuel. I want combat and firefights, not anhiliation and instadeath. Believe me, a BRDM-MG and UAZ-AGS can do a shitload of damage when they attack us from behind. When we locate a moving patrol, we get constant marker update on their location as long as they are alive.

* Intelligence. Part of any good wargame should be the gathering of intelligence that serves a purpose in which we have time to react on. I.e. search an enemy squad leader body and obtain call codes that let us have early warnings for enemy planes being sent to the AO. A 30 minute warning, and we have time to prepare for it. It makes everything so much more natural and rewarding. Obtaining intelligence could be the random finding on an enemy squad leader. Higher chance on an enemy officer. An higher still on being sent on a specific mission to obtain specific intelligence but not always there. We get a mission success and earns the points, but chance would have it that what we was looking for wasn't actually there. This would be a typical stealth mission for any small unit.

* Maybe enemy air support shouldn't be so constant. If we have absolutely no way of fighting it, we should be able to outwait it until it has to return for fuel. Maybe then do we get time to prepare better for the next time it arrives.

* A skiptime system. If voted for, we could agree on skipping time from anything from 6 hours up to a whole month. Skipping time would reset the negative effects such as respawn timers, but would cost points. This is very nice if we suddenly want to continue the mission at night, if only for the environment change or a hard stealthy mission that can't wait. Also it allows us to make use of global weather systems when those comes around. I.e. in ECS where playing at winter gives completely different weather than when playing in the summer. Sunrise times can become a factor, but moonrise times and moon phases even more so for night lighting considerations.

* A custom voting system, with a voting success threshold. Can be used to select who is eligable for using obtained vehicles, or even control who is allowed to fly. This way we can pick the pilot or say that the platoon leader is the only one who can drive the MHQ. Or even a voted kick (if possible) or jailtime for a player acting badly. If a platoon leader that has been voted MHQ driver goes idle, the rest can vote him to jail time for 5 minutes and the MHQ is opened for anyone to drive. An admin can turn off the voting system and will remain in effect as an admin is logged in. A vote could also be used to nullify respawn timer of a newbie player who is not yet used to Arma2, but whom we feel is really trying the best he can. Simply for trying he should be rewarded, but this is something only humans can evaluate.

* More flexible settings. Instead of all changes being preset within the mission scripts, an admin can go in at any time and change these settings. Or, a selected few of them. All could possibly turn this into crazy gameplay again, so care should be taken and weighed carefully against bad side effects. A script could contain a list of super admins with even greater rights.

* Much longer respawn times of the respawnable vehicles. It should really hurt to loose a chopper we need. I think I'm using 20 minutes in Dominatrix for the only lift capable heli. Loosing this is a bitch, but we'll just have to learn to cope with it during that time.

Again, I stress that these changes are supposed to make public gameplay much better out of the box. But clan editing gurus can naturally go in and change the settings for their server. Being full of restrictions doesn't serve a clan well on a locked server, since they are capable and trained to operating as a unit anyway. But these guys usually have a member fully capable of adjusting the mission setting and recreating the pbo. But for public games where people use the mission out of the box, I think it should be heavily geared towards enforcing teamplay. We've tried being completely open in Armed Assault, but although being a popular mission, I honestly don't think it worked out. Also look at the success of Project Reality, where adding restrictions actually enhances the gameplay and is a quite popular modification. I never tried it though, but I really like what I read about it.

Evolution and Domination are getting closer to eachother. Due to lack of dynamic large scale persistent capable missions in Armed Assault that focuses on team and role playing, I think one of them should focus more on this for Arma2. I think it should be Domination :)

I realize this is a heavy rant :) But I don't want to write them as single tickets as most of these feature changes belong together. They won't do much good on their own.

Just my $200 :D

[Binkowski 26]

Thank you Xeno...amazing work, hope to see it in ArmA2 :D

[afp 1]

"A sniper doesn't act alone. His team leader would be the spotter, and 'squad leader'/platoon leader of either a HQ element if attached to an infantry platoon or the leader of some scouting team. For this application though, a spotter. But not alone. However..."

Well if its a designed marksmanship within a team he may be detached to a higher position alone by himself, for example.

I like you ideas, tho some look rather hard to be designed...

"Restrictions to what weapons you get, like in real life. You pick the slot you want, but you're forced into playing that role. Designated marksmen can exist within the squads or attachment, but only a single sniper team (spotter team leader and sniper) which have access to heavy sniper and pure sniper platforms (instead of just DMR)."

This sound good but practically it works against the gameplay.... for example, if youre an artillery operator you may want to get into fight when no more big targets...

"A better defined role for the MHQ. Not only as a spawn point, but also more a headquarter. In the headquarter you can view mission status screen, obtain new missions etc. This will require those on smaller missions to get to the MHQ before obtaining a new mission. This should take away the need for any artificial timers."

This is awsome, maybe ability to build additional buildings like in warfare? MHQ should be indeed more like a way to set a camp nearby main objective.

"No teleport magic except for the newly joined player. Say teleport will only last for 30 minutes. Teleport also only from base to MHQ, not the other way around. Keeping the chopper alive becomes a priority."

This wont work practically, people die often, there is already a mode without it, its so sad when you need to spend half hour to get back into action. I would go even further, I would let the choice to paradrop from main base..

"Revive system. All players can revive another, but the revived player will be in so bad shape he better find a medic or aid station to be useful. Staying close to your team pays."

This works indeed as expected. I always try to have a team mate when playing revive mode. People tend to stay more together indeed.

"Increasing respawn timer"

It will screw the gameplay, no matter how long respawn timer is people will act the same on the battlefield.

Anything that delay getting to action zone will screw the gameplay. People play this game to shoot, not to spend too much time around.

"All enemy vehicles locked by default."

I think this is a must too. Foolling around in enemy tanks screw the other people fun. No more "Dont shoot my tank".

"Completing missions or tasks will add to the mission point pool. These points can be used to obtain hardware. Do 100 small tasks to obtain enough points to get a tank (as in simple solo missions). Or 10 smaller tasks to get a tank. Or two main missions to get a tank."

This would be so cool too.

"Vehicle entry restrictions and default locked. When a new vehicle is obtained, only the three players with the highest scores, or admin, or superadmins, can unlock the vehicle. Superadmins can also lock a vehicle manually if they so desire. If they don't want to take control over it, they can unlock it for the other players. Who uses it then becomes an agreement, not a matter of who gets to it first. When rebuilt at the wreck shop, it becomes locked again"

Hierarchy within "free multiplayer games" with players aging from 10 to 50 should be avoided. Simply it wont work. Thats why Evolution lost in front of Domination, people didnt have time to gradually achieve the level to get a tank or a better weapon.

"Maybe enemy air support shouldn't be so constant. If we have absolutely no way of fighting it, we should be able to outwait it until it has to return for fuel. Maybe then do we get time to prepare better for the next time it arrives."

Stingers should be fixed in the current ACE version...

"Much longer respawn times of the respawnable vehicles. It should really hurt to loose a chopper we need. I think I'm using 20 minutes in Dominatrix for the only lift capable heli. Loosing this is a bitch, but we'll just have to learn to cope with it during that time."

I very much doubt that you can change the people teamplaying behaviour this way...

cheers

Edited May 22, 2009 by afp

[CarlGustaffa 4]

Oh I forgot to mention: The spotter also becomes the only artillery operator. Being forward and in a scout role this combination makes sense to me. The sniper and spotter gets the benefits of getting to the AO early, have a good overview over the situation, but don't get some of the cheaper aids (such as player markers) to attract more mature peopl into these roles (instead of the triggerhappy ones). Call for fire should be made more difficult too. The RESCUE operators are the platoon HQ element, say platoon leader and platoon sergeant. PLT LD controls the tactics, such as operating the monitor (or UAV in Arma2). PLT SGT controls logistics, such as airdrops. These are their benefits, but they don't get the best weapons to fight with. Pros and cons for all roles.

I have some detailed ideas about the MHQ capabilties and what the RESCUE (HQ element) should be able to do.

"This wont work practically, people die often"

And that's the problem. People not only die often, they die way too often. I recently played for nearly 15 hours befure I got killed in action for the first time. So it's only a matter of playstyle. That being said, the mission was adjusted in terms of how much armor were present. But people who die too often should be punished for it in order to induce a safer way to play. I had 120 seconds respawn time, and those who didn't complain like a bitch about it, played much more carefully. So I like to think it works. Arma2 isn't like other FPS.

Btw, they should be able to respawn at MHQ when they die, not only in base and having to wait for a chopper. I agree this would be too tedious. But if they choose base respawn instead, maybe to change weapon, then they should bite the inconvenience bullet and having to wait for chopper.

1) You're killed.

2) You instant respawn and put in jail until the variable respawn timer has count down.

3) When timer is up you get the option where to respawn/teleport, MHQ or Base.

Maybe good play could rewarded as well. If you stay alive for 5 minutes, then the respawn timer is halved again. The point is that playing like an idiot should hurt.

"Anything that delay getting to action zone will screw the gameplay. People play this game to shoot, not to spend too much time around."

I disagree. Simply by removing the ability to parajump into target and picking others up in chopper for delivery to next target, much better teamplay was achieved. Now most of us arrived at the target at the same time, and the chopper getting us there was never shot down by Kamovs in the area because we hadn't been spotted yet which would have triggered the event.

"Stingers should be fixed in the current ACE version..."

Maybe so, but with limited weapons not everyone get a hold of Stingers. Also considering that weapons is only available in the base it can be hard to get to. A couple of emergency Stingers is available in the Ammo Truck though. In Dominatrix the enemy air support is extremely rare, and if you've found the intel, you have a lot of time to prepare.

"Hierarchy within "free multiplayer games" with players aging from 10 to 50 should be avoided. Simply it wont work."

Probably only done wrong. You would have to use communications more, that goes without saying. And someone not reacting to this could be vote kicked. I've had two engineers not fixing the chopper, and one outright stole the MHQ instead driving off with it. Left me stranded calling for a chopper, which did eventually arrive. The stranded chopper never did receive any attention during the remainder of the game. How sad. All because of stupid players who only wants to shoot.

"I very much doubt that you can change the people teamplaying behaviour this way..."

Once they loose the chopper for flying right into the zone and/or being kicked for it, they will eventually learn. When superadmins are present (not voted admins), people tend to listen to them. If they don't the kick button is usually not far away.

[afp 1]

Lol Carl, you're either in the Army, or rarely worked with civil people :) If you limit their rights they will soon get away. Kick vote to enforce something looks a bit too much for me.... I'm very much for teamplaying too but I think some more subtle methods should be used - like shooting them in the head :D

[Tankbuster 1746]

3.70 release frontpaged at Armaholic

[CarlGustaffa 4]

False on both accounts afp :) When I see deliberate team killing for any reason, I am usually the one to leave.

Enforced roleplay seems to be a very popular mod for BF using the PR mod. Maybe some of the immature player would rather play Evolution, that's up to them. Problem is that for us that likes coop, we have no good game mode available where gameplay isn't ruined by such players. Every admin/modder could change this behaviour to setup like the current system, but that would require setting up the mission to do so, not something that happens right out of the box.

[TOPKICK 10]

Hi there,

Xeno, firstly awesome work mate - Domination & ACE are the two things that have kept us going on ARMA for so long.

Were just having a really strange problem with the latest domination release. We have ARMA all patched up to the latest version and the latest ACE version - if we run it on the dedicated box it all seems to run fine except no AI spawn what soever.

The mission starts, we're are given a first mission (no side missions) and that it - nothing else seems to happen. This is the same if we run it locally also. I've obtained versions from multiple sources, even from the MP CACHE after playing it on a server that was working. Anyway, if you, or any of the community have any advice would be much apreciated.

- Topkick

[afp 1]

False on both accounts afp :) When I see deliberate team killing for any reason, I am usually the one to leave.

Enforced roleplay seems to be a very popular mod for BF using the PR mod. Maybe some of the immature player would rather play Evolution, that's up to them. Problem is that for us that likes coop, we have no good game mode available where gameplay isn't ruined by such players. Every admin/modder could change this behaviour to setup like the current system, but that would require setting up the mission to do so, not something that happens right out of the box.

Hey Carl, I was kidding with team killing, I really belive that subtle enforced methods like "morale" that I suggested are the solution. On private servers with mature people you don't need any of them because people respect the team playing, I was talking about free servers where all kind of people log in and most of the time no admin is present.

Edited May 24, 2009 by afp