W.I.C.T -- World In Conflict Tool for ArmAII and OA

[ArmAIIholic 10]

First things first new release will be open-source you all of you (and especially zapat, since he is now master of scripting) will have chance to fully participate and I intend to make a "campaign" to invite all major players here to contribute.

Renaming markers would be excellent idea. For new release I joined flag and ghost flag so now they are one script and it is Dedi friendly not execVM anymore.

F2 has option for changing groups upon respawn and RunForrest already criticize that WICT doesn't have option for choosing group or loadout --- although I think 3 teams and 36 slots in Hornet's nest is enough.... He suggested using Domination template (of course modified).

It would be possible to move a point, but it requires some scripting and maybe I will include it in WICT like a snippet --- e.g. if you want to enable it open flag.sqf and remove some comment lines and viola you have it.

Hints will also be something that is changable but I intend to put all that things in some kind of How-to = snippets. There is a special part of the site for that.

Basically WE will work in the same way as F2 = there is official / common release + snippets and tips how to change / alter some settings.... Waiting for some big fish to make an A2 application :)

Orange bases under attack? Nice one, but I have to think about it how to make it. Maybe one more trigger would do the trick that will detect approaching enemy units....

[katipo66 94]

I think there are some aspects of domination that would be suited to WICT...

AAS (worth looking at) have a good system for changing marker colour depending on ownership of the base, they also have a good system for spawning options depending on what bases you have, but there is a lot of work put into that.

[ArmAIIholic 10]

Yeap I know they are great, but mostly based on PvP.

Problem is that people come around here and ask for a lot of options -- but those stuff are already achieved by some other addons.

Nevertheless the ideas are excellent and they will find right place on WICT site (by the way Wikia is changing interface, so site is a mess now...)

I am trying to stay focused on making populated world that can be implemented to any mission -- for example WICT to VTS, AAS or Domino, and vice versa.

WICT is also changing color of bases and I rewrote that part to be fully compatible with Dedi.

MISSION / ISLAND INDEPENDENT TEMPLATE

zapat and trailer for AAS you Katipo66 posted up above made me constantly think about one thing ---- lots of pre-defined bases template with markers that can be easily activated. For example bases types: infantry, special infantry, scouts, ground vehicles, tanks and air bases, all pre-defined --- without setup --- just to copy/paste.

There is one and only one problem I have to solve: markers and triggers --- for example:

if I have created marker b_0 and it spawns infantry and I want player to copy/paste and make a new base, new marker will be b_0_1, but trigger will be called for b_0.

And I see that people want easy solution without any typing on keyboard.

So only solution would be making e.g 50 pre-defined bases for EAST and for WEST and letting player create lists. The script will go through list and make FLAG instead of EMPTY marker, so that the marker is shown properly on the map :D

And what is the most important player can open any mission and change the spatial position of any base. They would be placed in column in the template and mission designer must drag and drop them + triggers where he want to place a base.

So zapat and Katipo66 did you have that in mind? Or maybe I gave you some new ideas?

And all of you people watching this thread --- it concerns you too --- topic is open for discussion.

[katipo66 94]

So only solution would be making e.g 50 pre-defined bases for EAST and for WEST and letting player create lists. The script will go through list and make FLAG instead of EMPTY marker, so that the marker is shown properly on the map :D

And what is the most important player can open any mission and change the spatial position of any base. They would be placed in column in the template and mission designer must drag and drop them + triggers where he want to place a base.

Well something about all that sounds great! maybe 4 variations on the pre-defined templates 5, 25, 50.... 100+ :p

How will having a lot of bases at various distances effect the spawning?

Also the idea of snippets is great.

I like the idea of dragging/dropping bases around the map.

Edited September 30, 2010 by Katipo66

[TacKLed 10]

Any chance of Civilians being spawned randomly and roaming around the environment?

[ArmAIIholic 10]

@ Katipo66 well the trick is designer won't have to enable them all. Making so many bases variants would be maybe too confusing... I am definitely thinking about simple drag and drop template, I can't get it out of my mind :p

@ TacKLed A2 already has ALICE.

http://community.bistudio.com/wiki/Category:ArmA_2:_Editor_Modules

[zapat 55]

Well, I don't think there is cleaner method than the current. The only drawback is, you need to change base name at least at five places (marker, 2 triggers, list, and spawning prob). But if you want to change this, you'll need more scripts which is against performance...

Templates COULD work, but also making the overview of what is happening with what a lot more complicated.

I haven't had any problems with copy-pasting bases, then rename everything in mission.sqf. Thing is if you don't learn this method, you won't be able to change anything later on.

(My further ideas for someone that eager to code something? (like me probably) :)

I had plenty of time studying wict soliders going to the front, and imho it could be tweaked: it is very good now, but maybe it could be even better. but I don't want to go into this though if you are asking about templates: sort those out first.)

Edited September 30, 2010 by zapat

[ArmAIIholic 10]

Yes I agree with changing names "problem" --- it is not problem for you or for me because you are ok with editing mission.sqm, but I get messages from people asking me how to install addon LOL.... most of them want easier way of setting up bases, they even argue that copy/paste from Excel sheet is scripting/coding...... obviously they don't know anything about coding.

I have 21k visits here, but only 400 visits for Online Excel Configurator --- what does it tell you? :D Even I don't configure bases from my head...... Only 400 people actually tried to use that and make something.

So I thought that making a template with predefined bases would be a good starting point. It seams people are more comfortable with small changes in template then making something from scratch even with detailed manual.

Soldiers AI is controlled with FSM. However if you have any ideas PLEASE tell me.

What about your idea of island independent mission? You can send me on PM if you want if you don't want to post it here now.

[zapat 55]

-Well, there is no harm in doing a template mission as well. :)

Anyhow, this is a mission editing tool, so you will need some editing experience with it.

-The frame of the mission is forming in my head. I want to buy OA (I hope it will get through my wife this time, lol) and then develop it for CO. First one island, and then I'll see. I want it completely dynamic (with using safePos and renaming-moving markers), so theoretically everything will be calculated on the fly, meaning it could work on any island. The problem is I already know where are the bases in Timebender and it kills the whole mission for me. :D

I guess it will be a bigger/longer project though. :)

-About fronts: if you move ahead, soldiers tend to fall back thus not giving a nice frontline, but rather a kinda tail after you.

It is Arma's fault, but can be overriden (like I did with heli reinforcements, and like GL4's force move)

So my idea: there could be a frontline and a front area.

The frontline is at square angle with the line between the two fighting bases, and is defined by the foremost soliders.

The front area is a larger rectangle arount frontline.

Units are spawned behind the front area on both sides (to simulate they are coming from the base behind) and they hurry to the front area. They should get there asap.

Once they are in the frontarea they pick the place of a missing tooth along the frontline and try to move there fighting. This way we could get a nicer, always moving frontline with units fighting side-by-side.

This way it could simulate constant reinforcements are arriving at the frontline (which would move with or without you towards enemy base). What do you think?

Edited September 30, 2010 by zapat

[lockjaw-65- 0]

Hi, Just starting to play around with this. I loaded the template mission in editor, dont know if I have missed something that may have already been said but I noticed that the enemy spawn more or less right in front of you. Is there a setting some where that you can do to make them spawn further away, at least out of sight?

[zapat 55]

[Documents\Arma2\missions\mission name]\Usersettings\Startsettings.sqf

WICT_sd = 250;

WICT_sdRand = 500;

sd: this is min spawning distance. Sd+sdRand is max spawning distance.

Note! sd is also the min distance a base will spawn.

[katipo66 94]

So my idea: there could be a frontline and a front area.

The frontline is at square angle with the line between the two fighting bases, and is defined by the foremost soliders.

The front area is a larger rectangle arount frontline.

Units are spawned behind the front area on both sides (to simulate they are coming from the base behind) and they hurry to the front area. They should get there asap.

Once they are in the frontarea they pick the place of a missing tooth along the frontline and try to move there fighting. This way we could get a nicer, always moving frontline with units fighting side-by-side.

This way it could simulate constant reinforcements are arriving at the frontline (which would move with or without you towards enemy base). What do you think?

Brilliant! i know what you mean as i often feel obligated as the player to move forward to instigate things.

And on the note of the mission designer knowing where the bases are, is it possible to randomize a base, like wild card bases that may spawn any config setup you have in setupE or setupW depending on what side owned it.

And on a completely random idea is it possible to put conditions on bases? so that nothing is spawned until the condition is met, so then you could have more meaningful Secop type missions that really are needed to be completed to enable the continuation of the battle from your sides point of view at least.

[lockjaw-65- 0]

[Documents\Arma2\missions\mission name]\Usersettings\Startsettings.sqf

WICT_sd = 250;

WICT_sdRand = 500;

sd: this is min spawning distance. Sd+sdRand is max spawning distance.

Note! sd is also the min distance a base will spawn.

Many thanks, will look at this now ;)

[ArmAIIholic 10]

Now I have big task of replying

dont know if I have missed something that may have already been said

Yo' people you hear this -- that's why I need assistance with Homepage. Thanx LockJaw-65- for asking, yes, this thread is hard to follow and it is now a discussion forum :) Homepage should be answer for that.

-About fronts: if you move ahead, soldiers tend to fall back thus not giving a nice frontline, but rather a kinda tail after you.

It is Arma's fault, but can be overriden

In contrary, it is WICT --- it is spawning units behind you and brining them to the front line and there is already area and line :D But I haven't revealed all coding since now ;)

Idea was to force player to "wait" for friends, not to run & gun in CoD style. Another problem is if you force infantry at FULL speed one machine gun will tear them apart.... :( And enemies are usually coming from the front so they are practically in advantage. And special units are even slower than regular infantry. Maybe I can make some additional points, but AI will face themselves toward enemy base, not what player thinks it is a frontline. So it is kind of dynamic environment for the player.

If the player is pinned down he needs to wait for friendly troops and when they arrive satisfaction is greater.

i often feel obligated as the player to move forward to investigate (? spelling error) things.

You don't have to wait, WICT is bringing battle towards player.

possible to randomize a base, like wild card bases that may spawn any config setup you have in setupE or setupW depending on what side owned it.

Then what is the point of configuring? it is possible to make "second die" but that complicates things way too much

And on a completely random idea is it possible to put conditions on bases? so that nothing is spawned until the condition is met, so then you could have more meaningful Secop type missions that really are needed to be completed to enable the continuation of the battle from your sides point of view at least.

Of course but not on the base. you can make a "story script" that checks your progress and add or remove bases with ghost base function. zapat is expert there.

I analyzed his mission and made markers visible again.... and I got "headache" :D since his mission has many ghost bases and they are "dislocated" from actual triggers.....

P.S.

I just made automatic switchable reinforcements.... sweet....

Edited September 30, 2010 by ArmAIIholic

[zapat 55]

Another problem is if you force infantry at FULL speed one machine gun will tear them apart.... :([/Quote]This is true...

but AI will face themselves toward enemy base, not what player thinks it is a frontline.[/Quote]

My "problem" is that if every unit is facing towards a point (base), they will form a column as time passes. They should rather form a line which moves towards base. And yes, player should wait for units, and units should wait for other units, this is true... but it is not that collected as it could be, I miss the feeling of the frontline, where you can kind of move behind troops...

Don't get me wrong, this is not a criticism of current Wict, but a possible idea to expand it.

zapat is expert there.

I analyzed his mission and made markers visible again.... and I got "headache" :D

[/Quote]

Lol no... :) Altar was an experiment about how stuff works. I got headache of that too... :D :D

[TacKLed 10]

What I meant was civilians spawning along with the soldiers, not just civilians

[zapat 55]

I guess you can.

eg.: in \usersettings\E_reginf\1.sqf change createUnit for a civilian. But I don't know the effect, it is made for military groups, where the leader has AI and the rest of the team follows.

What do you need it for?

[katipo66 94]

Of course but not on the base. you can make a "story script" that checks your progress and add or remove bases with ghost base function. zapat is expert there.

I analyzed his mission and made markers visible again.... and I got "headache" :D since his mission has many ghost bases and they are "dislocated" from actual triggers.....

P.S.

I just made automatic switchable reinforcements.... sweet....

Ahh ghost bases, ok im off to try that out...

EDIT: I tried and failed with ghost base... i had a normal base setup with triggers for east and west and marker, the plan is for the east base to spawn after a condition !alive p1 was met, i did not have this base listed in the startsettings but did in setupE i then had this in the trigger _null = ["east","b2","add"] execVM "WICT\ghostBase.sqf"; i placed p1 inside the trigger, preview and eliminate but no spawn... i think im missing something?

automatic switchable reinforcements! sounds interesting, units in your group will be auto replaced, and playable?

Edited October 1, 2010 by Katipo66
Tried and failed :(

[ArmAIIholic 10]

My "problem" is that if every unit is facing towards a point (base), they will form a column as time passes. They should rather form a line which moves towards base. And yes, player should wait for units, and units should wait for other units, this is true... but it is not that collected as it could be, I miss the feeling of the frontline, where you can kind of move behind troops...

That is assumption, but not the actual situation. Units are radially distributed so they will basically approach from radial directions. They are never instructed to form a column. However, they will form a "column" if they are using road, for example, to reach some far destination, but completion radius is big enough to ensure that units will have freedom to use covers etc. Therefore, even if they form a column it is because they cover each other or use the same pathway associated with particular terrain.

What could be tweaked is to add 10-20% of spawn distance to enemy units, so that they are spawned further and you have time to wait for friend units to arrive. It is in conflict to spawn friend units behind and to bring them close to the front line fast enough. But it is possible to spawn enemies a little bit further.

@ Katipo66 -- it could be anything, because ghostBase is tested and it is working. You can send me a mission to have a look, I cannot tell much with your description.

And yes reinforcements detects if in your team has less then 4 players and sends switchable / playable reinforcements. If they are killed during that process it will send them again after some time. Max 5 time reinforcing.

That will be a snippet, not actual part of the WICT.

P.S. I hope that release, at least of Hornet's nest v2.0, will be at weekend. Cheers

[zapat 55]

That is assumption, but not the actual situation. Units are radially distributed so they will basically approach from radial directions. They are never instructed to form a column.

Yes, this is my experience, and it is an assumption. Maybe I am not even right with this: I've just started to spot this effect when I introduced UAV for my mission:)

I know units are radially distributed. When the front is standing, it works okay. They do not stay "parallel" though:when you start to move faster than other units and you move a lot, they tend to end up longer than wide (thats what I meant on column.) and not trying to form attacking line, when a new front develops. Thats why I had the idea of the foremost unit should be heading to the base, units behind should not go to the base, but form on the wings of foremost unit, or something like that.

I am not saying it is a good idea, I am just explaining it to make sure you do understand what I am trying to say. Forums is a soooo limited way of communication. :)

[ArmAIIholic 10]

but form on the wings of foremost unit

and sometimes forums are great to filter and find the right word :D

got your point and I will see what can I do :)

[gridley 17]

First, thanks a ton ArmAIIholic- I think WICT is tremendous, and has tremendous potential.

Now, I agree with Zapat - the various groups fighting along a "front" don't have any spatial relationship to each other. A way to "maintain contact" with adjacent groups, so that flanks remain protected somewhat, would really add to the game. The fighting that often raged just within sight of my group in World in Conflict was a great part of that game. Even though their objective might not be clear, the fact that they were within visual contact gave some feeling of being part of the bigger picture.

Thoughts? Can this be accomplished with DAC?

[ArmAIIholic 10]

@ Gridley what you and zapat suggested is part of the AI, on which I am not working right now.

However, I am thinking about some decision making algorithms that would help this feeling, since the idea to, for example, increase spawning distance for enemy units is not good at all --- I gave it a thought and I realized it would give the enemy advantage of flanking.

So solution would be tweaking AI --- all units spawned with WICT will have a goal to take a base, whether or not you are watching. WICT is not completely player-centric, it just uses player's position to concentrate fights around player.

But decision making --- is there a unit that needs help, is there a threat, e.g. a tank that we should avoid and wait for backup etc. are something else..... That is a separate story.

If you study DAC you will see it starts randomly. Although there are zones and waypoints that connect zones, it is random until some encounter happens and some group calls for backup. WICT is more focused on gameplay around player and giving exact orders to attack a base.

DAC units are attacking the whole area (finding a point in another area which is connected to current area) and for my taste they are way to spread out and random. There are several differences like replacing / respawning dead units, which is not the way WICT does (dice-based spawning), DAC joining small groups into bigger ones --- WICT has global assault and clearing battlefield etc.

However you are free to make missions with those two modes and decide which roles they take (primary / secondary). Just keep in mind that engines are different. It is a fact that some ideas are more achievable with DAC than with WICT.

So post here what would suit your needs the best. I will see if it is achievable through WICT.

Best regards and welcome here,

ArmAIIholic

[katipo66 94]

Hi,

Just some more random thoughts, sorry if its already been discussed or known off,

Dynamic respawn for multiple bases can be achieved simply by nul = ["east","b_1"] execVM "WICT\flag.sqf"; "Respawn_East" setMarkerPos getPos b_1 and the respawn marker moves to captured zone, its not pretty but it works... you just need to give the base trigger of your side the same name i.e. b_1.

I think Helo and winged are able to capture bases, could this be turned off or optional?

Is it possible to put a cap on units? W_htank = 90, 5;

So solution would be tweaking AI --- all units spawned with WICT will have a goal to take a base, whether or not you are watching. WICT is not completely player-centric, it just uses player's position to concentrate fights around player.

Some how i think that might work/feel better because sometimes i see a lot of friendlies just patrolling at the back while their brothers are dying in the frontline...

what if bases weren't bases!!?, what if they were areas or zones with capture points inside them like a cluster of three (or more/less) triggers that need to be held to capture the zone, something like this

Or maybe thats too much, im just thinking out loud and throwing it out there :D

Edited October 3, 2010 by Katipo66

[ArmAIIholic 10]

That is possible Katipo66, but if other side retakes that base b_1 you have to find some "backup" base or you will spawn inside enemy's base. It complicates the flag.sqf script and it is a matter of taste - I prefer mobile base since it emphases COOP.

Yes they are able to capture bases because they are detected as BLUFOR / OPFOR units. So would you like tanks not to be able to capture bases? That complicates a trigger since you have to put kindOF and to detect weather unit in the trigger list is air unit.

In the case of player --- some people argued they don't like possibility that player can capture base with heli --- I say if player is skilled enough and nobody takes him down -- why not?

Therefore, in both cases I think that the drawback/disadvantage is minor when compared to request that is in front of the scripter.

Conclusion: it is possible to do it, but it requires scripting that goes beyond simple WICT setup.

I am not familiar with caps...?

Yes they are patrolling because they maybe didn't "know about" enemy base when they got their orders....... As I said working on dynamic AI decisions will be my next project.

I think you did't read directional bases, right? :) Just kidding, maybe you did, but you didn't connect it with this --- your image is perfect example of directional base and I will use it on WICT's site.

Thanx for discussion, always a pleasure to talk with you Katipo66