Second

Basically selfcofidence-boost is applied only when they suffer from casualities (and it doesn't affect to their actual skilllevels, they remain novices). if group has lost ,lets say, half of it's men, it is possible that they sort of "forget" their casulities (or part of them). But it's highly unlikely that they "forget" casualities compelitely: It requires lots of incoming fire and recovery cycles. Still they can be suppressed by bullets and shells as earlier: They just forget those casualities. There are three ways to increase suppression of group: Shooting at them or causing them casualities or both. Hopefully this covers what you are after... I have massive headache at the moment. Incoming fire and recovery cycles are like this: 1. group has been fired 2. group haven't been under fire in about one minute 3. group recovers (and selfcofidence is raised a bit aka forget that johnny boy was good guy when he lived ) that was one cycle. 4. group has been fired 5. group haven't been under fire in about one minute 6. group recovers (and selfcofidence is raised a bit aka forget that johnny boy had wife who waited him to come home ) that was second cycle. 7. group has been fired 8. group haven't been under fire in about one minute 9. group recovers (and selfcofidence is raised a bit aka "who's johnny?" ) that was third cycle.

Okay now... Version 1.25 has been released. First post edited acordingly. Here's quotes: Example missions don't hold briefings or anything. They are usersmissions so that player can watch things from different angles.

No...it isn't. Confirm that. Boyscouts might be using it. But armies uses bit more preciser ways... They are not expected to play capture the flag in warzone. Ofcourse i don't know what all armies in world use as trainingmethods... Maybe someone uses capture the flag too? But is it for cohesion building training or tactical training?

I wouldn't consider that platoon (or 1 1/2 platoon to me as i've used to smaller sizes) sized force is small... But not big either. Ofcourse lot's of things is upto "tactical" squads playingways. Is it: This is my tactic and by this i will "die". Or something that has evolved into teamwork where space is left to individual warriorism. Plus many weeks/mouths/years of playing ArmA or OFP has affect. I'd still wouldn't keep it sure that platoon sized force (not armors or choppers involved) is enough to bring team-work to so important level that it beats experince and knowhow of the fundamental things of the game. Winning coop usually comes from many reloads and getting knowing the mission... But i don't deny your saying: AI can't fight against humanteams which practices teamworking... Which is sad and also reason why i left coop out.

And with small units... as almost all MP-forms. Understandment of basic fundamental things in ArmA or OFP is main requirement for succesful match. I don't think that RL tactics have much meaning. how well guy uses his virtual weapons and controls + which side has lady fortuna's favor has bigger impact than tactics or should it be said combat-techinal things...

If i remeber this right, in chess there's saying: 10 warriors can defeat 100 soldiers. 100 warriors has change against 100 soldier 1000 warriors can't defeat 100 soldiers. Warriors are just guys who know how to use their weapons. Soldiers knows more about teamwork and standart procedures. it's has worked in many other things than chess by my experience... Bigger the organization then there's bigger need for organization and rules how to act and work. And yes there has been conseguenses with laser-simulators that our finest young active-officers lose to our finest young polices or our finest young firemen when fighting with simulators in squad level (let's put batallion for both sides with simulated-artillery and such things and let's look at it again ) EDIT: Ofcourse most polices and firemen have complited reservist NCO or reservist officer training and rank, so result still would be somewhat unpredictable. But i would bet my money on active-officers (bigger the operating unit, more money i would bet)

There is simple explanation for "red"-combatmode: Whole idea of suppression scrpts is ruined if "red" is changed "yellow" when they should act like under suppression. Scripts will reset groups combatmode to "yellow" when they recover from suppression. And by my experience problems are quite rare. I've been running big scale test-battles in biggest cities and no pathfinding errors or stuckings haven't happened. @Ofpforum: That config-thing works nice

I think too that it's AI's hardcoded fault... There's not such thing in script (v1.1) that would affect to that. Even if there would be issues in ArmA's "scriptreading" capacity. Example: I have one script structure which requires 20 scripts as those are ment to run something like dynamic war... Not a single issue (besides my brainfarts which need to be corrected) with it either... But pathfinding, only rarely, can cramp it's working too: They simply get stucked sometimes expacely in urban areas but i've seen it happen in woods too... If they have "red" combatmode, which suppression script uses lots. With tensily build areas and ArmA's pathfinding it can be trouble (once leader caught stucked near trashcan without visible obstacles! )... And same applies to fleeing, they don't act same as in OFP anymore it seems: they seek fleeing spots acording to situation and only sometimes flee to previos waypoint... New advanced AI seems to bring some troubles as AI isn't as predictable as in OFP. Combined with pathfinding... Hints are reliable, but ofcourse they're displayed only for players group

Yes they act weird. The leader stays porne without and ordering single units to engage targets. The squad quite widely spreaded when the recovery hint appears but the squad does not fall into formation agian. I'm going to test it again to feed you with more details if possible. Hmm... That is weird indeed. I haven't had troubles of anykind with recovering, after running up against that earlier bug you mentioned... Has this happened only once or many times? Did they reach panic or broken statuses, or were they just in pinned down or shot at statuses? But AI seems to have bad habit to ignore or not be able to move to/from some locations. Or then it's problem with hard-coded fleeing values: they sometimes (rarely) didn't recover from it atall in OFP, they just got "stucked" to their last waypoint. I had to replay bunch of missions because of that. That atleast sounds same that what you have withnessed, more than it fits to script's mechanism... Well thanks again, i'll keep eye on that aswell. @Ofpforum: That seems simple! Thanks!

Glad to hear... Unfortunately i don't have time to mod it in near future and i don't understand a bit about that thing... Dear Ofpforum maybe or someone else? I would be very glad too if that would be possible That 'cover' thing seems to work better than default in urban areas, but it might be that locations where i've tested it just are good for AI: Lot's of natrual cover like bushes and trees

What do you mean with that? Do they act weird? Couple of things which i'm thinking: They are set to yellow-combatmode and aware behaviour after recovery (which is going to get changed)... Or are you meaning that when leader shouts default-"clear" they still remain under "broken" or "panicking" statuses and do not recover instantly... I will probably do next version of it and then halt because i'm trying to prevent from over-doing it too much... Anyways next version takes time and i'm waiting response from one guy who hopefully can light up more about realistic suppression and it's effects... + some kind missiondesigner's hintlist, because there are some thing which have to be done differently.

Most likely because Leclerc's autoloader, it might have "isolationboxes" too like with new russian magazine-autoloader, heavily modernized T-72 looks quite fresh with that . Because if magazine-autoloader gets hit/ignited and blows up, crew shouldn't die... Most likely be seriously injured (broken bones etc) but still alive.

I'm off the track here (don't understand a bit what you say)... Have to study that config thing, maybe it brings some light to issue.

Next version is on it's way (example mission isn't finished yet), i added new take cover methods, as ArmA's default isn't most suitable for panicing and broken down units as they like to move too much in default and it's dependant of range to next waypoint: if distance less than 100-200 meters they try to get there instead of hiding. I'm testing it in urban enviroment, although i doupt that it works any better... BIS did great thing when it added possibility to toggle off default take cover! @Ofpforum: Did it work so that script is terminated if unit isn't leader of it's formation? I might do it as well to my PBO... kinda frustrating to add it to all units in all missions. @Nepumuk: It must be perfect then... ( )

No. shells fly there... They are created let's say forexample 500 meter before impactzone: if we want them to fall down in 45 degrees, then they are created to spot 500 meter high and 500 meters away from impactzone to direction where firing units are... then setting with 'setvelocity'-command their velocity to right values. i converted one script to work that way in few hours (made it for three different angles), someone from BIS could spent a day or couple in calculations for more realistic values than i used and add somekind "mountain detector" so that shells aren't flying thru mountains... If it's fake then it's damn good fake, i would say. That vest thing is a good point thou... But still i would have properly working AI in defence before ballistics... It takes hours in rural terrain with platoon sized force to do that, and they are only positioned to their correct spots, not even fortification-works are done yet. Infact BIS could present us foxhole-kit covering desert, woodland and mountain terrains, as at the time there are nothing but lousy sandbags... So not many realistic infantry-missions out there...

And what would that loader do? Press "r"-button, so that gunner can have his Sabot/HEAT-shot? That would be tiresome thing to do... Result: "Oh noes! our loader is sleeping or having smoke!" Think that in MP + Platoon has only 3-4 tanks... And as Beagle just said: it's still the ultimate combat simulation aka game on the markets... ArmA is not military software or even better: military hardware simulator (turret of MBT attached to computers, laser-transmitters to rifles/AT-launchers etc...) So no problem with what Suma said... Or do you know anybetter game-simulation, i'm going to try that game-simulation imediatly if there is... But remeber: you cannot compare it to ArmA if it just one-trick-pony like flight sims. ArmA is something like: flight-halfsim + Tank-halfsim + infantry-almostsim. Steel Beasts is only (by my knowledge) which has those three in same package, but infatry- and flight-parts are very-very marginal in terms playablity in Steel Beasts...

Artillery-ballistics has been made by COC or create-shells, i've made one create-shell script that roughly calculates trajectory of shell/mortar and creates shells to fall down in ceratin angle. So no problem there. If 5.56 hits a guy, most likely guy is no longer in fighting fit, even if distance is long. I don't see a point in that kind of minor ballistical effects... There are better things to add to ArmA, like defence-formations and tactics. Which both aren't present in ArmA's waypoints or in AI, they have to be made by missioneditor and because of that nearly nobody makes them: i haven't seen but couple of mission which uses them... and digging foxholes is missing. Suppression is thing that has major effect on battlefield and it's missing from code.

Sorry, i typed it wrong: i ment RPG-20 (place some number in place of 0 or keep it as it is ) Thanks for correction. General mumbling: That bounced off thing could have been tail of missile... And there is ERA in Merkava... And projectile was coming in steep angle (~45 degree), so it was not 90 degree hit. And let's remeber that T-80 had to be shot average 6 times to destroy it with PRG-7... When 90% of those hit T-80's weak points without ERA-elements! So modern tanks are tough in general. @INNOCENT&CLUELESS: You must be last person who knows that M1A1 isn't realistic in game... btw: Neither is T-72. No, go and have fun with Steel Beasts to get picture of how arcade ArmA is in area of armored combat. btw: You'll love that infantry part in Steel Beasts

New version (1.1) released. Topic's first post has been edited accordingly. Those two bugs, or brainfarts actually, has been corrected. Suppression made by ammos and shells, has been reduced to half as well as dead groupmembers effect... Read the first post, i'm going to sleep now.

I've heard same conclusions conserning Merkava's toughness against infantry AT-weapons and sources were pretty much reliable... i don't remeber what missiles and RPG-models, but it was quite new quality stuff they had there. RPG-2-something and was there used Konkurs-missiles? Then again, i don't know terrain and possibilities of infantry-AT in there (Video wasn't there ), as they have to get hit to sides of MBT... And i doupt that Israelis gave much changes to do that.

Usually sharpshooters were big units (regiment-batallion sized) armed with long accurate rifles at that time, almost all countries had them. They weren't that type of snipers or designated marksmens of these days, but let's keep in mind that i'm not expert. (mostly stick in 1900-1999 although someones say that i'm still living in trenches of -39)

The syntax is nearly the same, so I don't see why you should need years to get it Been writing scripts for three years now, and i still seem to mix 'and' & 'or' together (excuse me: ) ... I think it would take a decade atleast with my skills and talents to learn... We will see And if someone wants that this should be writen in function he may do that, i'm not against it... And those scripts should be quite easy to read: i've seen much more complicated scripts and functions.

I found reason for it and it's been taken care of... Shall i do it again? Oh yes i will:

I found it... Wasn't nearobjects, but simple word 'and' when it should have been 'or' I'm doing last checks to new version should be out today, with some new features and with tweaked suppresion-values. Yeah, i know that funcitions are better. When i have more time to actually start to learn writing functions, then i might convert this. Until that day (or year?) this my version of suppression is made by scripting...

Who knows, there's not manuals to be had anymore for it, so i don't know much about that system as it was trained/used in other brigades than TOW. But it isn't normal, something has to been happened inside guiding unit... And by my hearing it was only case, other times they just crashed ground.