euly

Are you the group leader? Did you install CBA manually or with SixUpdater?

CBA is required.

That is an excellent idea, as long as it's not a flood of idle/useless information. An abundance of voice acting may be unnecessary, but a few brief commands with natural voices would definitely improve the clunky mechanical game voice. I think the best application for voice actors would be to mimic dialog and tones of the in-game voices, so the exchange of human and computer dialog is not completely unnatural. Some phrases that might fit well would be: "Yes" "No" "Working" - something in progress. "Acknowledged" - comms with leaders "Over" - ending a radio transmission "Do you read?" - request comms "Recon mission" "Attack mission" "Fire mission" - artillery or whatever "Strike mission" - aerial attack "Support inbound" - approved support request "Support denied" "Responding to" "Hostiles spotted at [x,y,z]" More visual information in the side-chat would probably be welcomed in HAC before full implementation of voice recordings, so maybe the development of LeaderHQ communication would help display activity which could be interpreted by voice actors at a later time.

Thank you Rydygier, this should be fun.

I've seen this before and I believe it is in relation to HAC-BB issuing orders, but I wasn't able to isolate the problem, even without addons. The High-Command module can help determine the group names in game (Ctrl+Space on the map screen) and the RPT file can tell you which group is having trouble ("C:\Users\YourProfileName\AppData\Local\ArmA 2 OA\arma2oa.RPT" opened in a text editor). MoveIn: Soldier B 2-4-A:1 already in vehicle B 2-4-A:1 MoveIn: Soldier B 2-4-A:2 already in vehicle B 2-4-A:2 MoveIn: Soldier B 2-4-A:1 already in vehicle B 2-4-A:1 MoveIn: Soldier B 2-4-A:2 already in vehicle B 2-4-A:2 That's what my RPT looks like when this happens.

If anyone is interested, here is a mission I've been working on for some time now called Day In The Desert. There's no briefing or any fancy stuff. It does require OA and it does have BAF + ACR units, but they should work in lite versions (without the full DLC). Place the file in your "\arma 2 operation arrowhead\Missions" folder. I highly recommend it be played with ASR_AI to allow the AI to rearm easily and use various tactics, plus the AI units skill levels are based on their ranks. The system I play on is an Intel I5 (3.3ghz), 4gb ram, with a GTX680 (but it should be fine on anything above a GTX470 fermi or equivalent). Any suggestions or requests are welcome.

When helicopters or planes are listed in the RHQ_RAir array, do I need to put them in groups and list them is RydHQ_Ronly array?

You should not add the artillery module to your map, just group the standard cannons, mortars, and MLRS/GRAD in individual groups (not mixed groups). Check the manual for more information (https://docs.google.com/document/d/1cVRPr3YLfmM5TNl9-7sPmiKYstpje0i_X2N9lpvQ_1g/edit) I don't believe there is any way to call artillery, but I could be wrong. For snipers, currently, they are treated as recon units, which is not much different from general units, so you'll see them on patrols, attack missions, recon, and general running around. The next version of HAC (which should be major, and hopeuflly released soon) changes much of the behavior of snipers to be more practical and do things like find elevated advantage points and wait, like true snipers. Rydygier is also working on the behavior of Special Forces units, so they'll hopefully do things like assassinate enemy LeaderHQ's and guard their own Leaders. (A problem though with SF units is they are not standard equipped with AT weaponry) For your UH-60 MEV, do you have your init arrays set up for the OA units? If you do, can you confirm that the "UH60M_MEV_EP1" is only listed under RHQ_Support and RHQ_Med? If it's under RHQ_Air, RHQ_NCAir, RHQ_Cargo, or RHQ_NCCargo, it will probably be used for recon and maybe transportation. If you still have problems and the MEV is only listed under the Support and Med arrays, you may try grouping the blackhawk by naming in its init, e.g. "Med1 = group this" then adding Med1 to the RydHQ_AOnly, RydHQ_ROnly, RydHQ_NoFlank, RHQ_NoDef arrays in your init.sqf file.

Not all radio sounds need to be spoken, but some radio chatter can be found in the sound packs from OFP and ArmA 1 that was not recycled into ArmA 2. I tried the COWarMod the other day which used those sounds for soldier voices. I found it a bit amusing to hear David Armstrong's voice from OFP. I haven't heard that in over a decade. A vehicle that stops at a gas station will be refueled as long as it stays still. What if HAC were to identify the locations of fuel stations as it analyzed the map, could the AI then know where the stations are, like parked support vehicles? Perhaps these could be high value areas?

I would like to see more radio chatter between BB, Leader HQ's, Squad Leaders, Team Leaders, and support. Even with many debug options enabled, I'm still not adequately informed about troop movement, skirmishes, and support locations. The simple BB map marker arrows are a step in the this direction, though squad level info would be nice to see in the side chat to know how other groups are doing. I really like the map marker system that ACE uses by default, but I'm not sure if ArmA will do that vanilla. Does anyone know? I like the military markers and I wish I knew what friendly LeaderHQ's are saying to the SL's and TL's in the field. I'm not saying the player should be be omnipotent, but I would like to see more communication between the commanders and troops as well as their problems, such as when AI groups are busy. The sync'd attack option in the init is a good example when the groups could communicate with the LeaderHQ's, such as the unit arrives at its waypoint and says "1-1-4A in position, waiting for orders." If the group is delaying other orders from being sent, maybe a LeaderHQ radio message like "Group 1-1-4A report status..." when the group has not reached its waypoint in a substantial amount of time. Even a simple "can't get there" message would be nice, plus that type of message would reveal problems in the map, AI, or HAC, rather than indefinite silence of a waypoint that is never reached. This all may be too much work, but a system in which map markers appear for groups in communication with LeaderHQ's would be amazing. Simple map markers would be nice for support types to place markers at their map locations upon their arrival, so they can easily be found when the player needs to locate resupply/repair/refuel. In some of my longer missions, I've seen motorized patrols run out of fuel. I'm not sure, but I think an AI commander must know of a refuel station in the vicinity when the driver reports low fuel for the commander to issue the "refuel at..." order. What do you think? The detailed debug functions that are in HAC work, but they tend to give the player technical data and universal information about the behavior of HAC, such as the current targets for all leaders, not enveloping game-play information that would make the individual mission more fun. If the mission maker turns the debug options off and publishes the mission, the player will have little to no information about the map. Maybe that is what the mission maker wants, but manually developing map information takes time and quickly becomes obsolete after the mission has been running for a while. For example, the mission maker places a bunch of objects down to make a base around the LeaderHQ with according map markers. Without the debug options turned on, the player has no convenient way of know the LeaderHQ has driven off the base to a new position. I don't know. Maybe I'm way off.

I never said they were the same and I know they are not, but I have been seeing missing markers, missing side chat, and AI not engaging on my local host which means HAC experiences problems in a multiplayer environment, regardless of the locality. However, I was unaware that the problems are worse on a standalone server. Hopefully, Rydygier can identify necessary changes to HAC without an entire overhaul.

So if the number of units is reduced, do you still see CPU overload?

But do you have ai engaging targets?

It should not need a dedicated server. Merely hosting the map in MP on your LAN will reproduce the issue. Maybe the rpt would give you some clues?

So, the latest version can be played in multiplayer as long as RydBB_MC is manually defined?

Thank you. Can the shape be a rectangle, or must it be a right-angle square?

Rydygier, will you please make a demo mission on how to use "RydBB_MC"? If I understand the idea of the variable correctly, the user can tell BB where the battlefield is located. So, islands that may be difficult for BB to read are easier to play with HAC if we can see a demonstration of MC. Thank you Rydygier.

Thank you Rydygier.

I have noticed this as well, but I never thought anything about it because I figured there was less to do. After about and hour, orders become less frequent until HAC stops issuing me orders completely, even though I'll have full health and full ammo (sometimes I like being a sniper). I constantly use ACE and other mods, so in my case, orders dropping-off could be the result, but EMOD said he was vanilla.

You just made my day. Thank you. "if(!isServer) exitWith{};" goes in the start of the init.sqf correct?

HAC is not meant for multiplayer. The script will likely run in multiple instances on the server and clients causing overlapping in the issuing of orders.

What do the numbers mean on the debug? I know this may sound trivial, but even the report of losses is a little confusing. Do the numbers represent how many units I have placed on the map? Can you explain the output of the debug mode so I can determine issues and problems HAC may have with the map I have designed? I am not looking for a thorough explanation of the exact numbers on the debug, just a short description of each line in the debug report.

Yeah, that is the problem. I fixed it by syncronizing leaderHQB to all his units and leaderHQC to all his units, but is there anyway to avoid this? I thought about creating a third BB, but even if he was friendly toward one side, wouldn't it try to capture all objectives of all sides?

I'm having an issue in which BigBoss B gives its leader units waypoints. I have relocate turned off, but they move around after BB-B issues orders. Any ideas?

With the debug on, would it be possible to have the side chat report low morale levels? I don't mean specifically, such as the exact number, but something simple, like "LeaderHQB's morale is low." Maybe that's not a good idea, but as I was reading the manual about morale, I realized that either I'm missing something, or I there's no way for me to know if any leaders are about to give up (besides losses).