Voyage 34

Well, making them not return fire would be already a good (and cheap) step forward: after all that's what suppression fire is intended for, right? next cheap step could be simply avoiding the "pop out of cover" movement, just to make them stay in cover a little more. With that we could have already a somehow-raw-but-decent suppression model.. EDIT: written in the CIT, this post seems to be really old..

Thanks for your response. Yes, the undo action works, and you are right about the not known source of the unit. But I was specifically talking about a 3d editor (MCC) created unit, whose "spawn code" is in the clipboard when saving the mission. Isn't there a way to delete the part of the code who spawn the unit? i don't know, just asking...

3. Well, i think the game host in a dedi server is nobody; for example i log in MCC when playing mp in my clan, but i'm just a client. 2. in SP you're absolutely right. sometimes even in MP, i don't want to find myself locked out because i was switching between different units (hijacking), or something like that. Just opinions, anyway. Hey shay, i have a bug report (i suppose). First of all congrats again for your great work! When i delete a unit in the 3d editor (the default one, not the RTE), the deletion isn't updated when the mission is saved, and the deleted object is loading again the next time. For example creating a bmp, then doing something else, then "that bmp is wrong!" deleting it and recreating it in another position, will have 2 bmps spawning the next time i load the mission. So i should go in the saved text and find it out by myself the line about the old bmp and deleting manually, but it's not so easy. It also make saved missions write-only. Do you think you can fix it? tested on takistan with only ace. Thanks!

Well, first of all i want to thank you for this great addon, i'm having so much fun creating things on the fly and the results are always brilliant! in the next days i'll try to implement it in the clan i'm in, like a sort of "classic roleplay" gamemode, with one master and the players. Anyway, about your quote, i tried it recently in mp, and i found that - not tested completely though - it works even without the client having it. Not sure if some features could be missing / not working. As a last question, I have some problems when creating cities and FOBs: -the city generator doesn't work always, sometimes it just gives me the "marker created" blink (without the "there's not enough space" message), but no city appears. Don't know if someone have this similar problem. -and when I try to create FOBs or a group of buildings in the 3D editor (in the d.o.c. section), they doesn't show up neither on the pointer, nor on the ground after pressing space. As before don't know if someone have a similar issue. Last question (sorry :D): is there a way to disable the upsmon script (i suppose) on units created and put under your high command? because they keep moving around and changing the orders i give as they wish. EDIT: just found the answer in the changelog, just spawn them with the default bis behaviour. Thank you in advance for the replies. Keep up the great work man!

Great AI improvements ...gonna check these out ASAP

If it is on your plan, re-editing of ArmA 2 vanilla scenarios for coop would be very nice too ;)

Sure, I'll do it as soon as I have some time. I'm also thinking that - due to squad leader often moving again before all units have moved on into the new formation position - there could be the problem of ''lateral'' units forced to cover a 2x distance to catch up with the newer formation. Btw I noticed from recent tests that a unit doesn't completely follow the preceeding everywhere, but only when moving forward. If the preceeding unit strafes left/right, or moves back, the current unit stays where it is. Just some ideas, nothing important.

Right. While the movement order (1, 2, 3, ..) is ok in my opinion (i remember time ago, when - as soon as leader moved on - almost all the squad followed him immediatly in a rushy and disordered way), the problem is - as you said - that when they move, the position to reach should be relative to the leader instead to the preceeding unit. Due to this now squads tend to remain back on the flanks and formation gets somehow "stretched" forward)

Some time ago I tought about opening a ticket for that but I never done it. Can you please tell me what you think about these ideas? (they're not written in a ticket form) I think the main point for that could be: -subordinates AI in delta and column never take cover, but just follow the expected position in formation (just like a cat follows the mouse), sometimes watching random directions. In this sense staggered col. works a lot better. About that I'm not sure: since subs in delta and column are supposed to stay close to the leader and follow him pretty quickly, going prone is a real obstacle: sometimes all the squad goes prone after a few sec, and since the movement is leader moves, 2 moves, then 3, then 4, etc, by the time each soldier have waited for the previous to stand up, when the last one arrives the war could be over. Plus goind prone in urban ambient is unrealistic for many reasons that in the game are not calculated (worse peripheral vision, worse turning speed, etc). So, IMO a squad should not go prone, but act more like (for ex.) in close combat: first to fight: or at least go prone not so often, maybe after some longer time standing (and obviously when under fire). Finally, combined with the "follow the position" bad behaviour sometimes really gives you the feeling you are commanding a squad of worms. Sorry for being so long, and thanks for your replies.

The work on the best mod to come resumes! hooray Keep on this way..(and don't forget your family eheh) btw did you liked the AI improvement in beta 77706? I think they have a "cleaner" behaviour now when moving, and they also take cover better. Last question: does your mod improve somehow even the delta and column behaviour (in AI leaded squad obviously)? because the idea of differentiate them from the rest was great, but practically as they are implemented now they are unusable.

Well, talking about AI, I made some test on it this evening, and I feel that IMO that patch is by far a step forward from 77159. Generally speaking, the AI is a lot more ordinate when moving, doing bounding overwatch correctly (and not almost randomly), and moving in sequence (1 advance, 2 covers; 2 advance 3 covers; and so on). As fabrizio said it seems less rushy and more coordinate. On the CQB side I feel the "Ai using corner" thing was what the AI was missing too much (I really hoped for it, but didn't knew it was a wip). Too many times the AI was passing through some taki villages with lot of walls around houses (I usually use feruz abad for CQB testing) running around a lot, without caring if there could be an enemy behind the corner they are turning, or passing by small gates or lateral streets without caring to look there, etc. Now they seem IMO a lot more efficient in CQB, they act better, and 2 teams of US soldiers can now clean a village pretty well, without being intercepted oftenly one by one and being killed while running around in a strange "cat and mouse game" logic. Well, maybe there could still be some space for improvement on the delta formation.. The corner thing even helped somehow on this problem, because taking more often cover behind corners means turning more often around, and so having a better peripheral vision. But I still agree with you that the AI needs a further better PV. Anyway, really good work BI! the AI seems almost like a new one :D. EDIT: another suggestion: another problem for the AI is the fact that sometimes, when they are in prone position, they stand up just to move 1 or 2 meters away (due to formation/position reasons), and then they lie down again. Well, for a soldier standing up when under fire (or generally in combat) means exposing himself to enemy fire, so it should be done only when you really decide to move somewhere "strongly" (or when you notice you are lying on some poo :D - sorry about that). My suggestion is: make a series of small "filters" about the movement from prone position. Example: moving just 1 mt away? stay prone; moving - don't know - 5 or 6 mts away? stay crouched; 30 mts away you can stand up. But I don't know if it can be done.

Great, man! thanks for making that...

Downloading the update right now. Anyway I have another question. Do you think it could be possible to set the vehicle crew class (/pilot class) with a very low courage value, to make them retreat when the tank is destroyed, instead of continuing the assault? (that is the most logical/realistic behaviour for a crewman). Hoping they don't start to flee with the tank at the start of the mission lol.

Wow! this is REALLY great!

Really nice work! anyway the skill level you set in the mission editor still affects the unit's skill, right? (at least (obviously) when going over the minimium unit value). Do you think there is a way to always keep a pre-defined skill (or pre-defined skill classes) for every kind of unit, even in third party missions? I mean to override the editor skill set (for example: I want every SF man to have always a 1 skill level, and every paesant with AK to have a 0.1 skill level, in every mission and every campaign I can play). Because sometimes things can be kind of unbalanced, imagine maybe the mission maker used to play with precision 0.25 and set all units to skill 1 in the editor because he tought they behave well that way, and I play with precision 0.8 and I find myself kicked in the ass by a group of idiot paesants with AKs. Exagerating with numbers obviously - was just an example, anyway that's the idea. Do you think it is possible?