High Command Module

[vipermaul 246]

Also Spooner, I think you were speaking of your Single Player experience and tests and not MP right? or at least that was the impression I was left with during our talks on IM.

[spirit6 51]

Also Spooner, I think you were speaking of your Single Player experience and tests and not MP right? or at least that was the impression I was left with during our talks on IM.

I tested the module MP. Although the above mentioned problems are SP and MP related. From 2nd level command with subs the waypoints cannot be given.

[Spooner 0]

No, I haven't even tried it in MP. Another thing I should have clarified. Sorry!

[stuguy 15]

COC is bugged atm; I tested the heck out of this in MP. To get around the tier 2 sub commander issue, I simply used multiple HC command modules by themselves and switch between commanders via team switch. The only bug I came across with this is that sometimes the game "forgets" that the commanders actually have units under their control; the HC menu literally is deactivated for the commander (ctrl+space no longer functions). Modules ran on dedicated servers are hit and miss right now. Keep in mind that running a LAN or Internet MP match with the ARMA2.exe is different from hosting a dedicated server. HC stopped functioning all together on my Dedicated Server.

---------- Post added at 12:19 AM ---------- Previous post was Yesterday at 11:54 PM ----------

can the COC modules be bound to Gamelogic that scripts units and function?

IE:

Commander unit is a game logic that scripts a dynamic player (multiplayer). Scripts and conditions are made and met, so playerX is now the end result for the Gamelogic linked to the HC-C module. That module is linked to multiple subordinates, some physical units, some Game Logics written the similar as before.

Will this function?

[vipermaul 246]

Spooner tested. I tested it. And it is probably best to wait for the 505 release or the next patch, or what ever BI has in store for us next. It is not a very long wait. Hopefully there will be some changes.

[stuguy 15]

yup, it's broke.

[vipermaul 246]

Thanks so much BI and Gaia!!!

The 2nd lvl HC (the Squad Leader slot) can now apply move-to waypoint markers to his 3 fire teams in Multiplayer host. I haven't tested on a Dedi yet. That is next.

I have yet to place a human player in the top HC position, what I call the PltCO *AND* the 2nd level Alpha Squad Leader slot at the same time. But confidence is high that it will work.

The next step for me and my plans in PvP on a Dedicated server is having two platoons worth of slots on the map (1 being the opfor team) and still have everything work. Confidence is high that it will.

I am using Dslyecxi's TTP2 for my High Command structure of slots.

http://ttp2.dslyecxi.com/st_platoon.html

Thanks again BI for 1.02!!

[Georg.B 0]

It seems like High Command doesn't seem to work on dedicated servers. I have a simple structure - one leader and several squads. In singleplayer or player hosted multiplayer it works perfectly fine.

On the server however, even though I can see all the squads properly, I can't seem to give them waypoints at all.

[rübe 127]

Boy is this sweet. Commanding an entire platoon this way is genius, indeed. But I'm too interested in another aspect of this module: Singleplayer(-missions) as in: Squads lead by the AI where the Squad is split into fireteams and the player is some grunt in one of those fireteams or a fireteam-leader (like the early OFP-Missions, damn I like those!), etc.

That's a fantastic tool to greatly enhance singelplayer-missions, from the perspective of the mission-editor/-creater, aswell as from the perspective of the player of such a mission. The AI-Squadleader giving tasks to one fireteam and another task for the other ones... And so long now such fireteam-task has been ordered, the team would stick to the squadleader (like group-unit relationship).

Thus this somehow allows not only an additional layer upwards (Platoon) but also downwards: instead of the Group->Units, now we can have an additional layer here too: Group->Team->Unit. And this is totally titts! :D

Now, what's still lacking for this:

1. AI-Leader should be able to use it's teams well (as a Group-Leader-AI does with its units already; flanking etc,.. sure, flanking is allready implemented, but only on a unit-layer/level.. IMHO tactics/sidetasks would be more easy to programm well with such an additional team-layer)
   
2. At the moment HC works on `Groups` which means if you split your Squad into Fireteams, they are groups aswell. The problem here is, that the Squad should stay an entire group. If I'm a grunt in such a fireteam, I only `see` my fireteam-teammates.. the other fireteams I can't `see` as they are not in my group. (I hope you see the point here)
   
3. There should be a commandWaypoint command or something similar, which implements the needed radio-chatter down the commanding-chain. The addWaypoint command works fine, but there is no radio-chatter. Eg. if the player is a FireTeam-Leader, he should here something from the Squadleader on radio. (like in the group->unit relationship and the other commandX commands)
   

Something tells me, that you guys have already thought about this, and therefore we can find new commands like:

• createTeam, deleteTeam, members, teamMember, addTeamMember, ...
  
• createTask, sendTask, sendTaskResult (which are AI-Tasks according to the comref, as opposed to the simpleTask-commands)
  

in the comref. Unfortunately it seems that thoses weren't used much or even not at all in the campaign/missions. So examples are lacking to get a picture for what those commands really are. Could someone shed some light on those?

[Mougli 10]

Hi Everyone!

I'm new to ArmA 2 editing, and I've looked into HC module.

I've figured out what Spooner showed us in the HC example, but there are some things that bother me.

I have a platoon leader commanding 3 squads, and each squad leader commands 2 fire teams.

Using a HC example-like pattern, the squad leader can use HC to control the teams (i.e. give orders to fire team leaders) and not the individual soldiers.

That's ok since it's the way the squad leader will usually command, but in some cases, as a squad leader I'd like to be able to give orders to a specific soldier (the machinegunner, for instance).

But since HC break group relationships, I cannot give the machinegunner orders even if I am his leader.

I don't know if I made myself clear enough. But is there any workaround to this?

[vipermaul 246]

Mougli,

There is no currently known workaround for this.

I do not believe it is in the design of HC.

The feature you are asking would also allow the PltCO to give a direct order to the machine gunner of the Alpha Fire Team 2 (thus by passing the Squad Leader & the Fire Team).

But one could make some script changes in the future to add this functionality.

Perhaps CoC CEX in the future or some other community contributor.

[Mougli 10]

OK, thanks for the reply.

That's no big issue, the current behaviour should work fine enough for me.

[Katash 10]

Ok I'm trying but failing to create something similar (but on a company scale) to this :-

'Platoon Command' has control over 3 "Squads"

Each 'Squad' has control of 3 fireteams.

When I spawn as 'Platoon Commander' I'm shown I have control of the 3 squads but it shows them incorrectly as a fireteam icon, not a squad icon - If I order alpha squad to go and attack a stationary tank only the squad leader and his 2IC move to target, obviously not equipped to destroy the tank they do nothing.

What I'm trying to do is get him to order his AT fireteam to move up and support him - therefore obeying the 'chain of command'

found this code on the biki to enable COC

BIS_HC_0 setvariable ["chainofcommand",true];

Which I am adding to a units init and also tried adding to a HC module init but still no joy.

Has anyone had any succsess acomplishing this yet?

Any help much apreciated

edit: Patched to 1.02

[Spooner 0]

1.02 doesn't tell me the full version, but I'll assume you mean 1.02.58134. I don't know why BIS tells us hard to remember build numbers and doesn't just have 1.2.0, 1.2.1 like most other games. Anyway, that is another issue...

BIS_HC_0 refers to the first placed logic, where the second one will be named BIS_HC_1, etc.

I think the easiest thing would be to add to ALL logics:

this setvariable ["chainofcommand",true];

[Mougli 10]

Spooner's idea is working, but now it's the riflemen who doesn't stay in formation with their FT Leader. And adding an HC-Commander/subordinate logic inside the fire teams sounds like overkill to me (but that's probably working, I'm too lazy to try it out :D)

Katash : If your squads are grouped like in your chart, the HC module will recognize them as a fire team, since the subordinate group contains only 2 men (the squad leader and the 2IC)

[KJT 0]

Spooner's idea is working, but now it's the riflemen who doesn't stay in formation with their FT Leader.

There seems to be some kind of bug or feature in "chainofcommand". First only the group leaders follow their HC group when it is moving. And only after they have reached the destination will the men in their group's follow. Also all groups will move to the same position which does not look nice. Groups should maintain the same formation in relation to each as what has been set for the HC group (or something like that). For example player commands three AI groups and they each command three other AI groups. If player sets AI group formation to column then all groups under that group's command move into column so that there is fixed distance between the groups. And even better would be that groups would take default formation depending on the order and conditions.

-KJT-

[Spooner 0]

Well, as a USMC SL, you have command over a medic and 3 fireteams (=4 entities under your control). The problem you are having is with the idea of delegation, not with the system as such. If you want to micromanage 13 guys, then use a single group. If you want to manage 4 entities, make each a subordinate group. There is a reason why military units have a chain of command - it is precisely so commanders only manage a small number of subordinates rather than each commander having complete control over every man.

In an army squad of 9 guys, 2 subordinate groups might be a bit limiting, so you might consider having 4 buddy teams (4x 2 men) to give you some more fine tactical control.

CAVEAT: Currently, the subcommanded AI are particularly dumb and so having only lose control over them doesn't work. What is needed is for the HC AI to be improved, rather than changing HC so you have fine control over every man, which rather defeats the point of the CoC altogether.

Edited June 27, 2009 by Spooner

[KJT 0]

CAVEAT: Currently, the subcommanded AI are particularly dumb and so having only lose control over them doesn't work. What is needed is for the HC AI to be improved, rather than changing HC so you have fine control over every man, which rather defeats the point of the CoC altogether.

I don't think that BIS meant the HC module to have many levels including AI commanders. As you said there is now practically no specific code for any higher level actions. But of course I hope that they will at some point do that. Or the community can do it.

-KJT-

[Spooner 0]

Yes, absolutely! Multi-levels make a lot more sense when all commanders are players. However, there is no reason that complex fsms could not be written to manage multiple-levels of command, but really, the effort would be enormous if the sub-commanders are to act as you would like them to. You are actually asking for more intelligence in HC sub-commanders than I've seen within single AI groups that aren't part of a structure. No surprises that they aren't perfect yet...

[Mougli 10]

The best solution I've found for this problem (at platoon-level) is the following :

The PltCO uses HC to command Squad Leaders. Squads are simply linked to their respective SL, and fireteam members are assigned a team color at init with

this assignTeam "color";

This way IA-controlled squads respond correctly to orders given by the PltCO, and Player controlled squad-leaders can easily issue orders to fireteams.

The only drawback is that I cannot find any quick way to select a colored team.

EDIT :

Well, this method does not allow player-controlled fireteam leaders to actually lead anybody nor allow the squad leader to set waypoint for his teams, but that's the best solution I've come up with.

Edited June 27, 2009 by Mougli

[KJT 0]

Sure it would be lots of work. Actually I would like to see something like the battles in Combat mission series in Arma2. Not just generic CTI which is more like running from town to town - now each group acting on its own. But I think it is more suited for WW2 and not so for modern combat (well I'm just more WW2 buff myself).

-KJT-

[vipermaul 246]

There seems to be some kind of bug or feature in "chainofcommand". First only the group leaders follow their HC group when it is moving. And only after they have reached the destination will the men in their group's follow. Also all groups will move to the same position which does not look nice. Groups should maintain the same formation in relation to each as what has been set for the HC group (or something like that). For example player commands three AI groups and they each command three other AI groups. If player sets AI group formation to column then all groups under that group's command move into column so that there is fixed distance between the groups. And even better would be that groups would take default formation depending on the order and conditions.

-KJT-

Yes I saw this too. I was in the middle of writing up a bug on it but real life got in the way.

[richardg 10]

Man, this is the best thing about ARMA2 so far. I'm thinking of PvP company level battles, with players as CO. (Droooool)

But you guys are thinking too small. Chain of command should be Company commander, then platoon leaders. You want to keep your span of control between 3 and 7 units (like they do for real.) Ya can't effectively manage more units than that. Going down to squad and fireteams is overkill. Unless your playing the part of the platoon leader

[Meatball0311 79]

I really would like to have a Command Module.... does anyone have any type of script I can use in the mean time?

[Meatball0311 79]

Wow... I found out what you guys have been talking about and my last post is pretty stupid.

Ok... so I am getting familiar with the High Command modules and this is what I got so far...

What I am setting up is a Marine Infantry Squad... so it is a Squad Leader (SQL) controlling 3 Fire Team Leaders. (FTL)

1. I placed a "High Command - Commander" game logic named "BIS_HC_0" and synchronized it to my SQL (player).

2. Then I placed a "High Command - Subordinate" game logic synchronized to my 1st FTL and linked it to the "High Command - Commander" game logic named "BIS_HC_0".

3. Then I placed a "High Command - Subordinate" game logic synchronized to my 2nd FTL and linked it to the "High Command - Commander" game logic named "BIS_HC_0".

4. Then I placed a "High Command - Subordinate" game logic synchronized to my 3rd FTL and linked it to the "High Command - Commander" game logic named "BIS_HC_0".

Ok so how am I doing so far?

What I want to know is how do I tell a Fire Team Leader to mount his team into a vehicle?:confused:

Do you think I will have to make a radio trigger to accomplish this??:confused: