PlannedAssault web based mission builder

[jonneymendoza 10]

Looks like a awsome mod. will try this out.

edit: gave it a try and keep getting this error when trying to compile a simple mission where the good guys defend a town and the bad guys objective is to clear it.

error is this:

OPFOR: Cannot find maneuver space to execute a coordinated attack on objective AARDVARK. Please change the location of units or pick a different type of objective.

The OPFOR units are situated around a town in zagrab whle the BLUEFOR are inside the town.

Edited April 27, 2011 by jonneymendoza

[_William 0]

edit: gave it a try and keep getting this error when trying to compile a simple mission where the good guys defend a town and the bad guys objective is to clear it.

...

The OPFOR units are situated around a town in zagrab whle the BLUEFOR are inside the town.

Hi, thanks for trying this. You get this message for two reasons:

- you've positioned the OPFOR forces all almost on top of their objective. If you put them about 1 to 2 km away from their objective, they will have maneuver space to set up an attack

- all OPFOR forces are fixed wing aircraft, so you lack ground forces to attack the city

Have a look at some of the mission editing examples, and then start with a few ground combat units. Once that works for you, add more units for a bigger fight.

William

[The Hebrew Hammer 10]

Interesting, however it isn't very clear on a few things.

When I want a group to be in the cargo of a helicopter, do I drag the units down to "air cargo" or do I place the choppers in the little brackets at the bottom of the map?

[ebarstad 18]

Choppers go on the map; troops in the brackets.

[panda123 10]

nice work thanks :)

Are you planning to add more tasks ?

Edited April 28, 2011 by panda123

[redeyex 11]

Hi William,

I love your creation.

I tried to generate an air assault mission, dutch marines in american C47's, supported by 2 Dutch apaches and 2 Dutch F16's but not much is happening. The choppers get set on hold waiting for a cas call but the f16's just fly in circles. Oh I am also using Mano missiles.

I'll do some checking to see if it is an addon that's causing a conflict.

RedeyeX

Update. I think the problem is with the F16's. I am not sure why but mayby because they travel to fast to hit their waypoint after which they start circling around and around and the mission doesn't continue.

Edited May 14, 2011 by RedeyeX
New info

[TheTrueReds 10]

Hi William, I need your help

I have used the plannedassault for several times with no error, it's work great ( I have already created 6 missions with it). Recently, when I try to create my new mission, I keep getting this error:

"Planning Failure

Mission planning failed for the given mission input. Please look at the recommendations below and make the appropriate changes.

BLUFOR: Cannot find maneuver space to execute a coordinated attack on objective AMY. Please change the location of units or pick a different type of objective."

I tried to change Maps/Mods/Positions too but I keep getting this error.

Here is the screenshot:

[redeyex 11]

Hey TrueReds,

I have been using the same map for a massive armoured assault. It is tricky but I do have some tips.

First what is your objective? single or multiple paths? I use a two pronged attack because a single attack with many units leads to this issue.

Second, I found it helps to cluster the units more together. Almost putting them side by side but not overlapping.

Hope this helps,

Redeye

[TheTrueReds 10]

Hey TrueReds,

I have been using the same map for a massive armoured assault. It is tricky but I do have some tips.

First what is your objective? single or multiple paths? I use a two pronged attack because a single attack with many units leads to this issue.

Second, I found it helps to cluster the units more together. Almost putting them side by side but not overlapping.

Hope this helps,

Redeye

In this map I used Clear 1(BLUFOR)

I tried your tips out and It's work (changed to Clear 2 and further the distance from the units to the objective)

I guest I have the problem in objective type and units' distance :D

I'll try these tips in some other maps ( I got the same problem in Chernogorsk map :( )

Oh and I can't call in fire support although I have put the artillery in the map :eek:. I don't know why...?

Thanks for your tips :)

[_William 0]

Oh and I can't call in fire support although I have put the artillery in the map :eek:. I don't know why...?

You can call in artillery, just not on the objective because your Grisha D30 122mm battery has a minimum firing range of 2.4km.

To ensure artillery is capable of firing on the objective, place the artillery in a corner of the map or use lighter artillery. For this mission, replacing Grisha by a mortar section would work fine.

Artillery units indicate their minimum and maximum firing range when you hover your mouse across them.

---------- Post added at 12:09 PM ---------- Previous post was at 11:22 AM ----------

Recently, when I try to create my new mission, I keep getting this error:

"Planning Failure

Mission planning failed for the given mission input. Please look at the recommendations below and make the appropriate changes.

BLUFOR: Cannot find maneuver space to execute a coordinated attack on objective AMY. Please change the location of units or pick a different type of objective."

I tried to change Maps/Mods/Positions too but I keep getting this error.

Here is an explanation of what the mission planner attempts to do, which might help you avoiding the problem.

To attack an objective, the planner does the following:

- it splits the attacking force in one, two or three groups depending of the objective type chosen (Clear 1, Clear 2, or Clear 3).

- for each group, it attempts to line up all combat units abreast, and attack the objective. To that purpose, it picks a form-up position some 900m to 1200m away from the objective. It then picks an avenue of approach from there to and through the objective.

The planner runs into trouble when one or more of the following happen:

- it cannot find a form up location wide enough to assemble all of a group's combat units abreast

- it cannot find an avenue of approach wide enough to move along with the combat units abreast

For reference, a infantry 'platoon' is 20m wide and a mechanized/armor platoon is 60m wide. When you attempt to seize an objective with a single group of 6 infantry platoons, and two motorized platoons, this requires 6 x 20m + 2 x 60m = 240m maneuver space in the form up area and avenue of approach (AoA).

An AoA has 240 m of maneuver space if there's path 240m wide without large groups of buildings, steep inclines, dense forest along the route.

Generally, Chernarus/Vybor, IslaDuala/Bola bonga and parts of Takistan/Nagaro Oilfield are good for single large group maneuvers. Other maps less so.

[redeyex 11]

William I have a question.

I have created an armour battle that deliveres just that but the following happens.

The assaulting forces start towards their assambly points but run into the defending armour. Bassicly the battle takes place before the assambly points are reached.

Now the attackers win and the surving troops reach the jump off point and then nothing happens any more. The units just park and that is it. There aren't many survivors any more but the game is still a loss. Any tips what is happening?

I am using ACE2 and noticed that a lot of vehicles get damaged that the crew remains on board so not all acitve units reach the jump off point.

Because the battle is already completed the air support on either side sit idle. I noticed in other battles that they only go active when (Choppers that is) when the troops move in on their objective. An suggestion would be to acivated the gunships as soon as battle is joined.

Thanks,

Redeye

[_William 0]

... Now the attackers win and the surving troops reach the jump off point and then nothing happens any more. The units just park and that is it....

What's happening is:

- the attack is synchronized on all groups reaching the form up area and occupying their designated spots

- these groups got attacked before reaching the form up area, most likely resulting in wounded men staying behind and taking hours to crawl to the form up area

I've seen this behavior often: Arma groups waiting forever for battle incapacitated members to join them, tank platoons slowing their speed for running and bailed out crew from a damaged tank.

One way of avoiding this is to ensure enough space (separation) between the opposing forces, and ensuring aircraft are placed near the map edges so they don't spot and engage forces moving to their form up area.

Another approach is to run a script in the background that removes crew without vehicles from vehicle groups, and heavily wounded men from infantry groups. I'm tempted to write such a script, but it would interfere with some of the Arma2 AI behavior (such as helicopters touching down to pickup crew from abandoned helis).

I'd love to use a different way of synchronizing the form up and attack (using time-outs, for example). However, at this time Arma is not giving me such a tool.

[Kyle_K_ski 1]

Wow!

I actually feel guilty for writing this, for my time was very limited this weekend, and I was to get back to testing a mod for the original Ghost Recon, but I just had to dabble with your superb mission building program, and I'm more than a little happy that I did so!

There's no question, that I had I tried to create everything that's in my mission by hand, hunting down scripts, trying to figure out how to use them, and the like, that it would've taken me weeks, if not months, to do so. I probably wrote this thing with your very thoughtful and generous program in less than 40 min., and that's counting the processing time.

Pretty incredible. :459: Thank you!

All of the accolades aside, I'd like to move on to a list of suggestions (some of which may have been made earlier by others, but I have not the time to read through this whole thread).

Suggestions

Have armed transport helicopters, such as the Black Hawks, be available for close air support should it be needed later on in the mission. More on this below...

I would love to be able to deploy a can of smoke or the IR Strobe at a region, and then Radio an airstrike on said position. Perhaps the player has to hold the device in the hand when the request goes out, something along the lines of, "Target OPFOR at [smoke's/strobe's] location," and then the player has 15 seconds to deploy the device before the air support starts searching for it. Time and again, A-10s and F-15Es flew over one brutal IFV and/or APC without engaging it, and that's while the blasted thing was lighting up my position with its tracer rounds.

Is it possible to mount and have workable Reflex Sights mounted with ACOG telescopic gunsight system, regardless of the weapon the ACOG is mounted to? It's the one major weakness in ArmA 2's aiming system that this can't be already done by default. Even in night time conditions, with the IR laser on, I'd still greatly prefer to use a Reflex Sight for taking my shots more carefully at ranges of 50 m or closer.

In light of the above, is there a way to enable the player to modify his own and his team's kits before starting the mission? It would be ideal to give the fullest range of options possible, even AKs with Cobra sights, for those SF missions.

It would be great to have Special Forces options along the lines of:

4 man element NATO assault rifles

4 man element NATO suppressed assault rifles

4 man element E. Bloc assault rifles

4 man element E. Bloc suppressed assault rifles

9 man squad NATO assault rifles

9 man squad NATO suppressed assault rifles

9 man squad E. Bloc assault rifles

9 man squad E. Bloc suppressed assault rifles

etc., etc.

Add Japan Self-Defense Force units http://www.armaholic.com/page.php?id=14301

Have DeltaForce's Force Recon Black Reskin units available as both SF, black ops, and mercenaries. They're great looking (currently setup so that they require RH's HK416 weapons pack). Available here: http://www.armaholic.com/page.php?id=14070&highlight=BLACK+GEAR

They have a skinning-glitch right now, but perhaps he'd readily fix it once he found out your intentions for them.

And speaking of mercenaries: if possible, have them assignable for both the OPFOR and BLUFOR sides, that way the player can setup either side with employing them in the battles.

If time permits, I'd love to see the following units made available as well for both BLUFOR and OPFOR:

Freedom Fighters http://www.armaholic.com/page.php?id=2888&highlight=APOC

Post Apocalypse Fighters http://www.armaholic.com/page.php?id=11840&highlight=APOC

STALKER Units http://www.armaholic.com/page.php?id=9795&highlight=STALKER

And...Zombies (perhaps also assignable to be hostile to all sides?) http://www.armaholic.com/page.php?id=9207&highlight=ZOMBIE

AI BEHAVIOR/TACTICS

Please note that I'm playing your mod with ArmA II Launcher, and I have its mod priority list set in the following order for the AI mods (all the latest builds) that I'm using while I play:

AI_asr

AI_zeus

AI_GroupLink4

If any of these, or a certain combination of these, interferes with what your program's trying to achieve, please give me your advice.

In the first two playthroughs, I've noticed that when the MH60K's were coming into the landing zone, they were receiving OPFOR fire. After they dropped the infantry off, they kept circling the region, continuously peppering it with support fire for the mission's entire length.

The next several times that I played, the Black Hawks didn't receive OPFOR fire (none that I could see, anyway), and once the infantry units were dropped off, they flew back to their starting locations and stayed there.

Why did they stay and support in the first couple of runthroughs, but not with the other ones? In my opinion, it would be ideal that if the MH60s return to their starting points that they're then still available to come back to the area when support is requested by the player. Perhaps the player would have to click on the map, and the Black Hawks would do x4-5 400 m wide orbits from said click's center?

Is it possible to have the infantry occupy/patrol buildings more frequently than they do already? That should help preserves their lives better. I haven't tried these mods out yet, but they're along the lines of what I'm thinking of. http://www.armaholic.com/page.php?id=13195&highlight=BUILDING+PATROL http://www.armaholic.com/page.php?id=10855&highlight=BUILDING+PATROL http://www.armaholic.com/page.php?id=8925&highlight=BUILDING+PATROL http://www.armaholic.com/page.php?id=6078&highlight=BUILDING+PATROL

The majority of the time, I had major issues to contend with from the AI, as they were really (smartly) bringing The Hurt on. I can't tell you the number of times I'd come around the edge of a building, see a single OPFOR near another building across the street, who would then back away till no longer viewable, and then several minutes later make a full press attack with 3-4 other comrades assisting him! Pretty intense stuff.

Thanks again, and keep up the great work! :)

Edited May 23, 2011 by Kyle_K_ski

[_William 0]

Tropica Toba area (new island/map), TF86 Navy SEALs and Emery's DPVs

Of all the maps I experimented with, Tropica caused the least amount of problems for my planner and for the Arma AI. Hence I've added Tropica's Toba area for mission planning.

To populate your Toba missions with something new, I've added ardvarkdb's TF86 Navy SEALs (all camo variants), Emery's desert patrol vehicles (DPVs), and updated the Exa HMMWVs units to include the M998 variants released recently.

To mimic Desert Storm DPV actions, I've defined a custom 'mod' manning empty DPVs from Emery's addon with DCU uniformed Navy SEALs from Ardvarkdb's add-on.

See this post for more info.

Before you all jump on me with requests for your favourite map (no offense intended, I do like your feedback):

- yes, I really try to add more islands (the server has capacity for more)

- no, I won't add islands which cannot be handled by Arma's AI. For example, Pantera and part of Lingor offer steep hills which Arma's AI fails to navigate. Vostok's Vostok island and Lingor's southern airport feature extensive gates without gaps, causing the AI to get stuck. It wouldn't be fun to create a mission, download it and then notice the mission not progressing.

- no, I won't add islands that I cannot plan decent missions for. At this time, the planner doesn't handle amphibious operations (western Lingor) or operations in dense urban areas (Fallujah). I do want to be able to generate missions for this, but it won't happen overnight.

- no, I cannot add Shapur since all of the British Forces DLC is encrypted, preventing me from getting the .wrp in the .pbo and parsing the map's terrain and objects.

Maps that look suitable for inclusion are ToraBora and (Tup) Qom.

William

---------- Post added at 08:47 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:30 PM ----------

@Kyle_K_Ski: thanks for your extensive feedback. My response is a bit shorter (also check the post above):

As a rule, I won't bother with individual soldier's load-out (or the player's load-out); focus is on company level combined arms battles. I'm not prepared to do data entry for each and every unit, potential weapons, etc. Keep in mind the database at this time includes over 4500 soldiers and vehicles.

Exceptions can be made (for example, adding a variant A2:OA's of US Army soldiers armed with M4's instead of those SCARs, getting face camo right for certain SF or Dutch units).

I intentionally send transport helicopters home after inserting their cargo, even if they are armed. I'm not aware of doctrine that keeps these birds around to engage hostiles. If hostiles need to be suppressed as part of an air assault, dedicated attack gunships and aircraft are made available.

Again, one exception (and already implemented): if the transport helicopter has an AT capability, it is enable to engage hostiles after inserting troops. Think Mi-24 Hind!

Generally, I don't aim to control helicopter behavior outside issuing it waypoints and forcing it to land.

PlannedAssault missions should work great with the AI mods you list.

Occupying building is something I'd like to have and spent time on. However, the problems are with the Arma2 AI. Assuming we have buildings with positions to occupy, the only way an AI group is manning these positions is by sending each group member to a position and halting them once arrived (otherwise, they'd move back in formation with their group leader). When you achieve this, then the group won't move when threats appear.

[Kyle_K_ski 1]

_William,

Thanks for the new additions!

Nice! Having the DPV will make for some very rapid infiltrations.

Before I proceed further, I just want to point out a gaff-fix that I received from another thread. Again, keep in mind how new I am to ArmA 2, because (eep!) all of this time I was struggling with the MK17s scopes, and not being able to use their integrated-ironsights atop of their magnifying ACOGs, and...it turns out it's because I neglected to assign a key to "Optics Mode!" Yeah, I did something that silly, :eek: so I take back my concerns regarding the MK17s that I said earlier.

But if you're offering to supply alternate equipment options to the Special Forces units, I again advise about offering up some suppressed assault rifles/carbines. It seems to me that from most of the literature I've read lately, the SF are leaning away from utilizing M4's for a host of reasons. I really don't know how "sneaky" a MK17 sounds suppressed--I'd imagine that the thing would still be pretty loud, and detectable, even with a suppressor on it. Maybe come up with alternate sets of SF armed with suppressed MK16s instead? Here's a video demonstrating how quiet a MK16 is with a suppressor, and while it's not as quiet as Hollywood likes to make suppressed weapons seem in the movies, this suppressed MK16's still pretty impressive to me!

Is it possible to setup your mission planner so that infantry could be deployed 500/750 m. further away from the "optimal" insertion point? Because as it stands now, every single time I've replayed a mission I've cooked up with the planner, the LZ or delivery point is already hot, with lead flying everywhere. If one wanted to ensure a safer, and/or quieter entry, then having an option that's 500/750 m. "safer" than what's currently offered would be ideal. Don't get me wrong, the hot entries are just as tactically stimulating as they are challenging, so I wouldn't get rid of how it's setup now, but it sure would be nice to have a safer option.

I understand your concerns with adding locations that the AI can handle. I'm happy to hear though, that you have/are considering how to improve the AI's usage of buildings.

Again, if it's at all possible to add PMCs as both BLUFOR and OPFOR, that would really be ideal for setting up some pretty interesting scenarios.

I've noticed that more often than not, the UH-60s will usually stay about a lend some fire support even after the troops are deployed, so even if they can't be called back in to lend assistance directly, more often than not they'll probably be around for a bit in any case.

Is there a reason why I don't have an option to do a fast-rope insertion from the UH-60s? That would certainly help out everyone involved if we could.

Also, in regard to supplying the player with the option to have greater options when selecting equipment, is this at all doable via the delivery vehicle/craft that the player is seated in, or will get into? Perhaps with a standard range of tricked-out options, M4s, MK16s, MK17s, M249 SPW, Mk 48, and a sniper rifle.

I'm still pretty shocked at just how poorly the A-10s and the F-15E's are in spotting a target and taking it out. The A-10s have to rake a BMP several times with its rotary canon to finally take it out of commission--shouldn't they be more lethal than that?

That's it for now. I can't get over just how replayable these missions are.

Really great work. Thanks again for sharing! :bounce3:

[Kyle_K_ski 1]

Hello,

I have some more feedback regarding a mission that took, literally, hours to build using the online planner. I had to keep moving units & goals around till the tactical portion could find enough room to maneuver. I've tried playing the mission 5 times, only one of those times allowed the mission to last long enough to actually play it.

First, here's the mission: http://www.mediafire.com/?mmg3zqvcf4dmtrc

It's a three-prong invasion set at Chernogorsk. It makes very extensive use of addons, with the British forces supplying most of the armor, and the U.S. supplying most of the troops. Regular and airborne units make up the meat of the Russian OPFOR.

Every time I've tried to play this mission, I get the following error report:

[]:'threat/' not an array (Continue)

I proceed with the mission anyway, and within 5-10 seconds of its start, the game crashes to desktop. For some reason, the event seems to occur whenever I hear the Bradley's engine firing up as it begins to accelerate.

In the past, I have played another mission that I created where whenever the Black Hawk came crashing down, the game would CTD as soon as it hit the ground--I could hear only part of the collision/explosion sound effect before the desktop would appear. I could test this out forever for it just so happened that I created a Save point just before the Black Hawk was invariably shot down.

I only bring this up now, because it seems these CTD events are just preceded by a sound effect being played. To be clear, for the mission with the Black Hawk, I did NOT have any mods installed that adjusted sounds. For the current 3-pronged assault on Chernogorsk, I am using a sound mod, RWS, which is available here: http://www.armaholic.com/page.php?id=13252&highlight=RWS. I have patched the RWS sound mod with the two patches that were released for it.

I only mention the sound "issues" in case there might be a connection to the CTDs.

At this next link, I supply my DxDiag reports, and whatever file that I could think of that might help track down the "threat/not an array" and crash to desktop issues: http://www.mediafire.com/?wmjrtex5yqo52bd

Also, do you ever envision providing the mission designer the option of having all sides available as BLUFOR and OPFOR? The reason why I ask, is that I'm sure that there would be a good deal of missions created over fictional scenarios where the British and the Germans are opponents, or the U.S. versus the UK, and so on and so forth. It would be great to have such flexibility.

Thanks again for all of your hard work.

Yours!

:)

[delta99 34]

William, outstanding work. I just tried a quick test mission and it worked great.

Looking forward to generating more missions.

Once again, great great work here.

[_William 0]

@Delta99: thanks for coming here and providing feedback! enjoy your missions.

@Kyle_K_ski: thanks for going all the way in reporting these problems. I've downloaded and tried your mission which ran without issues for over 10 minutes.

The file to check for issues is the arma2oa.rpt file in c:\<user>\Appdata\Local\Arma2OA. Here, I did see the 'threat/ not an array' warning. My understanding is that his warning originates from a badly configured add-on, most likely one of the P:UKF rifles.

From checking the readme file that is part of your mission, it seems you've selected more mods than you've used units from (the DPV, F-15E, Exa HMMWVs, ...). In general, that's not recommended for two reasons:

- loading the mission may take more time (since more add-ons have to be loaded)

- it increases the probability of add-ons interfering with another

I do suspect your CTD originating from one of the add-ons.

One possible work-around (but not for everybody) for creating large scale attack missions on maps offering little maneuver space is to work with smaller units (tanks section instead of platoons), generating the mission and editing the generated mission to add more tanks / soldiers etc.

From your earlier post:

- suppressed SCAR configs: provide me the weapon and ammo class names to remove, and the weapon and ammo class names to add, and I'll add a unit definition. Tier One, I assume?

- option to (manually) place LZ and FUP (form up points): more users are asking for this. Adding it is a matter of finding time and balancing priorities with other improvements.

- BLUFOR / OPFOR freedom: I've experimented with this (to play US Army vs USMC). Won't add it until I've added a text search ability for specific units across mods ("Javelin" showing all mods and units featuring Javelin in their description), so the number of units becomes easier to handle.

- fast-roping: didn't have time too look into this

@all: This week, I'm busy adding support for JCOVE/lite (VBS2 freeware variant supporting a good range of UK Armed Forces equipment, Iraq's As Samamah map, and some Iraqi freedom fighters).

[Kyle_K_ski 1]

_William,

You're welcome in regards to "going all the way" in making accessible everything that I could think of in regards to helping hunt down a bug. It's the least that I can do considering all of the hours you've poured into this thing on our behalf. I would seriously hope that everyone who uses this superb resource would be as considerate.

I've contributed designs to a good number of mods in the past (mostly Star Wars related, and, sadly, most of said projects fell through, but there are some notable exceptions I'm proud of), and modding can be a pretty thankless endeavor at times, which is why I'm sure to give the kind of feedback a developer deserves.

First, if there's one general behavioral adjustment that I would LOVE to see implemented it's how the AI handles piloting helicopters, especially when they're getting within 1,000 m. of the landing zone. Too often they pull their nose up and then dramatically gain height. What's the point in hugging the terrain if one's going to suddenly declare "Hey little boys with big toys, I'm right over here!" And then every BMP and APC lights up the air around the craft, causing it to then temporarily give up its approach to circle about the region two or three times, exchanging machinegun rounds with ones from blistering canons.

Most of the time, I can understand why the program selected the flight path for the insertion, but it almost always does the above, and, in my opinion, then badly botching it because it blew its cover. I'm not the best pilot around in this game, but even I can keep below a hill line, keep it there till the landing zone is reached, and all without my having to gain height to do it. Now I guess that I could Team Switch to be the pilot, but I avoid Team Switching like the plague, as for me, it's a real killer of feeling immersed.

If there's anyway that these helicopter insertions could be pulled off so that the above is avoided, it would elevate the Planner to Truly Astounding status (whatever that means, lol).

Also, in regards to having air support "do its thing," I keep coming back towards feeling like it needs more time before helicopters are sent in, because frequently the air support just keeps flying over one armored unit after another, without addressing it. The F-15E has the best performance so far, but I can frequently observe it race about 3-4 times before actually trying to destroy a major threat to the incoming choppers and/or ground units. It might not seem as much fun to have the players hang out in the crew compartment, hovering, or idling, for 5-7 min at the very start of a mission. before actually moving in, but honestly, if the player was forewarned of this in the beginning, and an explanation as to why is given, I'm convinced that most would learn to live with it, because not doing so means learning to die without it. And what fun is that?

I didn't know that the Planner was setup to load up ALL of the mods, even if they're not actually used. What a revelation that is!

I typically "overload" the mods I want just so that I have flexibility to more easily play around with units in the Planner. I guess that I'm going to have to be a lot choosier now.

- suppressed SCAR configs: provide me the weapon and ammo class names to remove, and the weapon and ammo class names to add, and I'll add a unit definition. Tier One, I assume?

I'm wary to give any suggestions, for I don't have your expertise in how the Planner is best optimized in regards to the mods/adjustments that are made. Thanks for asking though! I'd certainly be ready to supply suppressed weaponry to any sort of SF group, whether they're Deltas, SEALS, Tier 1's, etc. I just question as to whether or not they'd be equipped with suppressed 7.62s, as it's my understanding that the sound signature is noticeably much louder than a suppressed 5.56, whether it's an M4A1, a SCAR, or HK416. If anyone can supply any confirmation on this, I'm sure that it would be embraced for consideration.

Perhaps I'm being too nit-picky. Having one's squad automatically spawn with a marksman armed with a suppressed (but still quite loud) M21/M25 might be a bit of a pain because he'll draw more attention than everybody else's suppressed HK416s, but then, he should be applied differently by the player's because of the characteristics his weapon possesses in comparison to what everyone else is carrying.

- option to (manually) place LZ and FUP (form up points): more users are asking for this. Adding it is a matter of finding time and balancing priorities with other improvements.

Yeah, I have to admit, I really like the sounds of this!

- BLUFOR / OPFOR freedom: I've experimented with this (to play US Army vs USMC). Won't add it until I've added a text search ability for specific units across mods ("Javelin" showing all mods and units featuring Javelin in their description), so the number of units becomes easier to handle.

So, you've actually done some testing in this regard? If you could make this happen, it would open up a whole new universe in regards to potential scenarios. Interesting ones too!

- fast-roping: didn't have time too look into this

That's fine, as you certainly sound very busy! Could it be that I'm missing a number of key presses to find this option (do I have to order the pilot/my squadmates to fast-rope, or should it be done automatically?)

Thanks a lot for your editing advice!

[kremator 1064]

Unfortunately the helicopter pop up problem is a known BIS problem. It is VERY annoying even as a human pilot to encounter this. That is why experienced pilots put the helicopter into a dangerous but spectacular sharp turn just before the LZ to really bleed off the speed.

[Kyle_K_ski 1]

Unfortunately the helicopter pop up problem is a known BIS problem.

Ah, that's good to know. And here I thought that it was maybe due to the AI mods that I'm using.

I made a new mission last night, and spent half an hour just watching the insertion over and over again. Every single time, the Black Hawks behave as if they're A-10s! Super aggressive isn't adequate to describe their courage/utter lack of intelligence, especially when what they're pursuing, over and over again, are the APCs, and the IFVs. There were times when a whole squad of Takistan infantry were tightly clustered within 10 m. of the armor, and the Black Hawk completely ignored the soft targets, and stayed dedicated to the hard ones. This behavior was unbreakable, that is, until the Black Hawk was either damaged enough that it was forced to land, or outright destroyed.

Does anyone know of a mod that curbs this behavior? If so, please supply a link to the file if it's handy, because as it stands right now, the over-the-top machismo is almost the sole source of ruining the insertions.

[_William 0]

I made a new mission last night, and spent half an hour just watching the insertion over and over again. Every single time, the Black Hawks behave as if they're A-10s! Super aggressive isn't adequate to describe their courage/utter lack of intelligence, especially when what they're pursuing, over and over again, are the APCs, and the IFVs. There were times when a whole squad of Takistan infantry were tightly clustered within 10 m. of the armor, and the Black Hawk completely ignored the soft targets, and stayed dedicated to the hard ones. This behavior was unbreakable, that is, until the Black Hawk was either damaged enough that it was forced to land, or outright destroyed.

Does anyone know of a mod that curbs this behavior? If so, please supply a link to the file if it's handy, because as it stands right now, the over-the-top machismo is almost the sole source of ruining the insertions.

Assuming you're referring to landing under fire in LZs with nearby armor, then this behavior is by design (and added as a feature to the PlannedAssault mission).

The default Arma behavior would abort any attempt to land a helicopter when being engaged, leaving the heli hovering indefinitely.

I got the helis to land under fire by repeatedly issuing a land command, disabled use of landing lights by using STEALTH mode, and allowed the onboard gunners to engage without the heli straying from its intended path by disabling the AI 'targeting' behavior.

There will be situations where this behavior isn't perfect, but it is pretty reliable and gives players what they ask for (air landings), which the default Arma2 behavior won't.

See here , here and here for a background on the tweaking performed.

One way to avoid the problem you're running into (IFVs in/near the LZs) is to position OPFOR vehicles away from their objective and BLUFOR LZ. As long as there are a few defenders near the OPFOR objective, it will be fine. OPFOR vehicles will be directed to the objective and arrive later, perhaps after the insertion.

In case you're simply unhappy with Blackhawk target selection, I don't have answer.

Edited June 7, 2011 by _William

[_William 0]

JCOVE/lite aka VBS2/VTK 1.22 support

No new Arma II stuff today. Instead, I spent the past weeks adding support for VBS2, JCOVE content to PlannedAssault.

It's funny and frustating at the same time how similar and different Arma and VBS2 are. Some commands do the same but are called differently (currentWaypoint is called waypointCurrent), some commands only exist in Arma2 (landStatus to check if a heli pilot can land, findEmptyPosition), and others only in VBS2 ('vector math', line-of-sight checks). Also some of problems I put behind me when switching to Arma2 pop up again.

See this post for more info.

I'll be traveling next week to a game AI conference in Paris, so don't expect big updates soon.

[.kju 3239]

William will you do a presentation again at the conference? (and later share it on your site)

[Kyle_K_ski 1]

_William, that's pretty cool that you conduct conferences on AI. Yeah, I second PvPscene's motion that you post up your presentation. That would be a treat to see.