kyfohatl

Yes... IT WORKED! Finally. Thank you very much ArmAIIholic. :notworthy: Hehe... from now on, I don't think there will be a single mission made by me that does not have WICT involved in some way :D. ...or should I wait till v4.5 is released? (I think I red somewhere in the wiki that v4.5 will not be compatible with 3.5) Cheers

Thanks for that. Now WICT.utes works just fine. Interestingly, I managed to get my mission half working: Now the east base (b_1) is created and works fine, but for some reason the west base (b_0) is not created, and when I run in debug mode it says "West base: none". I don't know what's happening there. Maybe I'm initiating WICT wrong? WICT_init = false; WICT_control = "no"; WICT_state = "stop"; {call compile format ["%1 = false;",_x]} forEach ["trig1"]; _null = [] execVM "WICT\start.sqf"; I don't see anything wrong with it. Any ideas? Oh, and it's worth saying that I'm running ArmA 2 v1.07 (I don't have OA). Maybe other people with ArmA 2 only are experiencing similar issues? Request: Would anyone of you experienced guys be interested in taking a quick look at my basic mission to find the error? I'd really appreciate it. Maybe send me an email adress via private massage and I could attach my mission to my reply (or whatever other method you prefer). Thanks for the help.

Yeah, DAC is an absolutely amazing tool. In fact, all of my missions now involve DAC very heavily (like the only editor placed unit is you, and sometimes even you are a part of DAC!) and I can't play the vanilla/non-DAC missions anymore (DAC spoiled me). Their alright missions, but I don't release them because they are quite buggy, and I'm not that good to give proper technical support, so I would just end up frustrating the players, and generate heaps of flame posts. furthermore, I ususally don't have a very efficient method of keeping the player busy whilst DAC is initiating. However, I could try and release one (I'll try to make it less buggy) if you like. Just a question: Would it be alright if it uses WICT as well? I love combining both tools together, makes the mission incredibly dynamic.

Thanks for the support. Okay, maybe this will help: I just realised that in the mission WICT.utes (the one that worked) the enemies wont shoot at me (!!!). Even if I go stand if front of them, or even shoot them in the legs to make them notice me, they still wont shoot at me. So I thought that maybe there is a problem with the way I was running it (I was running it as a singleplayer mission), so I placed both WICT.utes and WICT_demo in my multiplayer folder this time, but just like last time, WICT_demo didn't work and the enemies in WICT.utes wouldn't shoot at me (I tried both Russian and American). So I though maybe I've installed the whole mod wrong, but the instructions are pretty straightforward. Put the folder @WICT in the ArmA2 root directory and run it via the shortcut; am I right? Oh, and I made another mission from scratch, exactly following your instrcutions in the youtube video, but it still fails to recognise bases. I've also tried playing around with the F2 frame work, and disabling scripts that are unecessary (such as the one that disables saving). I honestly can't think of any other way around the problems I'm facing (it's a bit frustrating). So I guess I'll just have to wait for v4.5... Looking forward Thanks

Sorry, I should have made that clear: WICT_demo did not work for me (there were no hints running, and I didn't get the massage, "WICT initialized" at the start of the game). On the other hand the mission "WICT.utes" worked fine, and it uses "b_0 and b_1" which is what I'm using. Also, I seperated the two bases with variying dstances (1000m, 800m, 500m, etc.), still no luck.

I remember a long time ago playing a mission in COD 2, in which you were a part of a "large battle", although tipical of most stimulated "large battles", it was simply a compeliation of respawning AI's that followed the same path. As I liked the idea of being a part of a large battle (but not the centre of it), I decided to participate, despite the fact that it wasn't particularly relevant to the mission of my team (go behind lines), and after some good positioning, we managed to kill many enemy units, only to find out that didn't matter how many we killed, it did not have ANY effect on the future missions or that mission itself as the AI's would respawn infinitely. It was then that I thought, "wouldn't it be awsomn if there was a game that stimulated a battle, in which you could be a part of, but it would continue regardless of your actions?". Of course those games existed, but the battles involved infinitely respawning AI with few goals, or AI that is predictable, respawns at the same spot and follows the same path. I think this mod is what I've been really waiting for, and it is indeed excellent. The battles are dynamic, the unit spawn are dynamic, the AI paths are unpredictable, and most importantly the battle progeresses (they actually capture bases, its not an endless stream of respawning AI that contineously meet at the same spot, die then respawn). Very well done ArmAIIholic and thank you for making this great tool. Question: I'm running v3.5, and I played through the WICT.utes mission which worked fine. Then I tried to make my own mission on Chernarus, and it didn't work. I really don't understand why. I've placed the "functions" module, a game logic with the name "server", another game logic named "auto_start" with the init line: "null = [] spawn {sleep 5; WICT_state = "start"; publicVariable "WICT_state";}", a marker named "b_0" with two triggers (one set to "OPFOR" and "PRESENT" and the other set to "BLUFOR" and "PRESENT"), and both set to "REPEATEDLY" with an init line of: "null = ["east","b_0"] execVM "WICT\flag.sqf";" (and similar process for west base, and base b_1). I've also set up the "F2" framework and set parameters in the "UserSetting" folder. Just like what the manual says. In fact WICT initializes, but it tells me that both east and west have "NO BASES". Any ideas why? I even tried copying all files from the demo mission folder (WICT.utes), except for the mission.sqm of course, and yet I still get the error where the game fails to recognise any bases, so I get the hint: "east base: none, west bases: none". I really don't know what I'm doing wrong. Please help. Thanks

Yeah, company of heroes AI is not bad. Though, has anyone else noticed that the AI becomes "inactive" in long games? I mean kind of like the old Command and Conquer: Generals' AI, where they play full on for the first 20 minutes, and then completely stop afterwards (i.e. don't produce units or attack or etc.). Of course CoH AI last much longer than that (maybe even a couple of hourse), but in very long games against the AI, the AI seems to eventually stop producing units, or spam just one unit which make them very easy to defeat. Anyone else notice that? (By long matches I mean like when you play for an hour and a half, save, come back another day and continue for another hour or so)

Ok, you've figured it out for the weapon, heres how to check to see if a unit is in a vehicle: Its pretty simple <Name_of_unit> in <Vehicle's_name> e.g. S1 in myVehicle If unit "s1" is in "myVehicle", then the expression returns the value "true". Also, you can use the syntax below to see if a unit has a certain weapon: <Name_of_unit> hasWeapon "Weapon class" If the unit does posses the defined weapon (if you put just two "" with nothing inbetween, it should check to see if the unit has no weapons), then the expression returns a value of "true". Just one thing: I'm not sure if the weapon class should be in single quotes ('') or doule quotes (""), but I'm sure you can just test that quickly.

Try this: http://www.armaholic.com/page.php?id=12078 It's a good tool.

Maybe you're setting their skills as too low? You know, the skill bar for every unit... maybe your setting it to too low? Becuase this doesn't happen to me. Also, one more thing that I've noticed: The higher the rank of the squad leader, the more effective everyone in the squad fights. Maybe their squad leader is a "private"? I'm not sure if this is actually a feature, but I've found that I have a much harder time defeating a squad lead by a liutenant than a private (once I remember an OPFOR squad, lead by a major, and whose members were all sargents [about 6 of them] manged to hold out agains the assault of my entire unit, consisting of one APC, one armed car and 25 or so infantre units.

You need to put it in a notepad, and save it as an sqf file. For example "AT.sqf". Then put the file in you mission directory (usually in mydocuments/Arma2/missions/your mission's name. Then, say your using a trigger to cause the AT soldiers to fire (for example by setting the conditions to "OPFOR" and "PRESENT"), in the onActivation box of the trigger put: MyProcedure = [ATsoldier1, ATsoldier2, Truck1, Truck2] execVM "AT.sqf" Where ATsoldier1 and ATsoldier2 are the names of your anti-tank soldiers (or whatever else you have named them), and Truck1 and Truck2 are the names of your two target trucks. Hope it helps EDIT: Check out this video. Take a good look at the anti-tank comparison part. You'll see what I was talking about:

I remember watching a youtube video comparing ARMA 2 and OFPDR. For most things, OFPDR failed (things such as AI, tactics and etc) whilst ARMA preformed very well. The only time arma failed was the comparison between the anti-tank troops (when the arma anti tank unit failed to destroy the target within a very large given time). So I think it may just be due to the fact that the ARMA 2 anti-tank AI is a bit "slow". Have you tried giving them more time? One more thing: Why don't you use private ["_ATsoldier1", "_ATsoldier2", "_Truck1", "_Truck2"]; _ATsoldier1 = _this select 0; _ATsoldier2 = _this select 1; _Truck1 = _this select 2; _Truck 2 = _this select 3; _ATsoldier1 doTarget _Truck1; _ATsoldier2 doTarget _Truck2; _ATsoldier1 doFire _Truck1; _ATsoldier2 doFire _Truck2;

Why wouldn't we be? I mean, gaming is not all about seeing who can get the most headshots. Its also about interactive sotry telling, and tell me, how are you going to tell a story in multiplayer? (not coop, because that involves bots/AI as well). Besides, there are so many things about multiplayer that a game can't help. One example is its servers turning into ghost towns three moths down the line. Just cause people still play OFP doesn't mean that every game has a running multiplayer for more than a year or so. Besides, a game's multiplayer can only get as good as its community. Good community = fun multiplayer, lots of cooperation and etc. But a bad community means servers full of people who for example silently watch while you spend all your resources/power intro defeating one enemy, then all of a sudden deliver the final blow, steal youre reward for killing the enemy and then say, "HAha I P'wnd you noob... go suck d***". Also, you have the 12 year olds that play the game 24/7 and learn to exploit all of the games issues and ruin the game for everyone, and believe me I saw A LOT of that in BF2, especially during its initial realease. Furthermore, not everyone sees gaming as some big comptetition in which you have to be better than everyone else. Some people have too much on in their lives, and simply cannot dedicate too much time to gaming. So playing in servers where everyone is way to good for them can be nothing but frustrating. The advantage of the AI on the other hand is that you can adjust their difficulty. Not that I'm saying multiplayer is a bad thing... all I'm saying is that singleplayer is in my opinion a very important part of a game, which why you need a good AI. Also I don't get what you're talking about when you say "2010". Yes... the year is 2010... and your point is?

I havent tested to see if this works, but try this: [i]myPlane LandAt 0;[/i] Where "myPlane" is the name of your plane, and 0 refers to his home airport. I think if there is just one aiport on the map, then you identify it by 0, otherwise you can also use 1,2,3,4,... to identify other airports. Then, use the commands "addWaypoint" after the plane has landed (you can check this by say putting a trigger that is activated by "PRESENT" to see if the plane has landed in the area). I think you can only assign waypoints to groups. So you must set you plane as a group. Just type "grp1 = group this" in its init box. Then: _myWatpoint = grp1 addWaypoint [<[i]the position that you want the pilot to get out at>, <placements radius (e.g. 0)>[/i]]; then set the waypoint type by: [_myWaypoint] setWaypointType "GETOUT"; This may not work due to possible syntax errors. Check out the links below for a better description: http://community.bistudio.com/wiki/Category:Command_Group:_Waypoints http://community.bistudio.com/wiki/addWaypoint http://community.bistudio.com/wiki/setWaypointType

I have given a reletively complete (I hope) and quite simplified answere on how to use the ACM module, and how to define parameters for it in this thread: http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?p=1770977#post1770977 Just remember, to use ACM, you need to place one on the map and Synchronize it to a unit. To define the parameters or do other stuff, just check out the thread that I provided the link to. Cheers

Here's a quote from the wiki: AND: About your second question: Do you mean you want to customize the ACM? If so, here's how you do it: BIS has created some predefined functions that you can use to customize the module. What you have to do is call them, for example via you init.sqf. Basically, what you have to do is to copy and paste the stuff bellow into your init.sqf: First you need to wait for the module to initialize. To do so use the script bellow (assuming you've named your ACM as myACM): waitUntil {!isNil {myFirstACM getVariable "initDone"}}; waitUntil {myFirstACM getVariable "initDone"}; This basically checks to see if the variable "initDone" exists in inbetween the variables that are associated with your ACM. "initDone" will exist when initiation is done (I think). Now, the customization: To define the factions that you want to appear: [[[i]An array of the factions that you want to have[/i]], [i]youre ACM's name[/i]] call BIS_ACM_setFactionsFunc; for example: [i][[GUE, USMC, CDF,RU], myACM] call BIS_ACM_setFactionsFunc; [/i] To set the skill range: [[i]min skill, max skill, youre module's name[/i]] [i]call BIS_ACM_setSkillFunc;[/i] for example [i][0.2, 0.9,myACM] call BIS_ACM_setSkillFunc;[/i] Note that the minimum possible skill is 0, whilst the max is 1. To set the intensity (how many troops spawn, how quickly they respawn and etc.) [[i]Intensity[/i], [i]youre module's name[/i]] call BIS_ACM_setIntensityFunc; for example: [i][0.5, myACM] call BIS_ACM_setIntensityFunc;[/i] Note that the intensity, like the skill range, can be between 0 and 1 To set the spawning distance: [[i]Minimum spawning distance[/i], [i]Max spawning distance[/i], [i]youre module's name[/i]] call BIS_ACM_setSpawnDistanceFunc; for example [i][350, 700, myACM] call BIS_ACM_setSpawnDistanceFunc;[/i] The distances are in meters (of course). Also note that this is only for gorund units. I don't know how to change the settings for air units. Also I'm a bit confused by how you are supposed to define the gorup types. However, for further reading you can look at the following wiki pages (which are actually quite good): http://community.bistudio.com/wiki/Ambient_Combat_Manager http://community.bistudio.com/wiki/Ambient_Combat_Manager_-_Functions The link above shows you all the parameters you can use, including group range. http://community.bistudio.com/wiki/Ambient_Combat_Manager_-_Group_types This one gives you the groups types that you can use for ACM. Hope it helps. Cheers

Mount and Blade is a great game :D. And I agree with you froggyluv. Mount and Blade's combat is very well done. The best part is when you take part in a cavalry charge at the enemy formations... it feels very real. Besides, back in the medieval times, it would have been very difficult for one commander to command a large army, and keep them highly organised like they are in Total War. Most tactics and formations were worked out/set up before battle. In total war, say all of a sudden you realize that an enemy force is flanking your formations. Then you can dragg half your army (who are in the middle of battle) very quickly to go and encounter that army. Now this is something that realisticly one man would not be able to do, or be fast enough to respond to the falnking army in time. Of course you'd have certain ways of communication, such as displaying certain flags or etc, but you have to much control over you troops in the middle of battle in Total War (though this is not necessarily a bad thing). So M&B combat isn't all together that unrealistic. Furthermore, there are many mods (I'd imagine there are very few people who play the game without mods) that give more formations options. Though as I said, you can set up formations before bettle, but doing it in the middle of battle is not very easy (which I think is more realistic). Oh, by the way, has anyone played Bladestorm: The Hundred Years War? I have a feeling that its kinda like M&B, though I'm not sure as I haven't seen much of the game, and nor have played it.

No thanks. I liked the song (sadly it was too short), but I don't think I'm going to buy OFP just for that. Besides, I'm saving the money for OA.

It works fine for me. Are you sure it doesn't work? Sometimes the vehicles spawn some distance away from the depot. I have ARMA 2 version 1.07 (NOT OA). So, if you wanted to know if its a bug or not, then no. I think it may just be a problem with your game, unless you have OA, which is a completely different story. By the way, on the topic of warfare (since you seem to play it as well): Have you noticed that after a while, the AI completely forgets about using infantry, and spams APCs and tanks? It gets a bit annoying cause after a while the only weapon I use is the SMAW. Do you know anyway of fixing this? Or perhaps some community made mission that doesn't have that problem. I was going to take a good look at using the warfare module, but I'm waiting for Mr-Murray's guide to come out before learning about warfare instead of waisting my time with the wiki (the wiki is ok, but sometimes it is very noob unfriendly).

Yeah, deffinately V2. It makes it easier for people who just have A2 and not OA, like me. Thanks

I have a simpler solution for you. use DAC. Here's the link: http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?t=99753 You don't need to know much at all about editing to be able to use DAC. Once you read the readme (you don't have to read all of it, just read the first ten pages or so, which takes less than half an hour), then create two VERY large DAC zone, each spanning over something like 1/3 of the the map, placed on the two opposite sides of the map. Make sure to set the identity of both zones the same (e.g. [1,0,0]). You'll know what I'm talking about when you've red the readme. The identical identity causes the units of both zones to travel to each other's zone. The advantage with DAC is that DAC units act as a whole, rather than individually placed units. They come to each other's support, are unpredictable and call for things such as artillary. Want the battle to be contineous? Just add camps to both zones, and the units will then repawn. Another advantage is that you dont's have to manually place 500 (or 1000 if their 500 on each side) units on the map, you just type 500 in the DAC init line. Also, DAC units will opcupy buildings and man static defences. So if you place some unmanned machine gun nests or etc. on the map, they may man it. I personally like the artillary on battles; it makes large scale battles feel very "explosive" and huge. If you like to make the battle very dynamic, so that both sides capture locations, advance/retreat (so it feels more like a real battle), I've written a script for that. Though I recommend you just produce the scenario produced in the above paragraph. Also, there is WICT: http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?t=103360&highlight=WICT WICT excells at producing a dynamic battle and is quite custimizable, though it is not as easy to learn/use as DAC. After you gained some experience, I highly recommend you using it. It is indeed an excellent tool. Hope this helps Cheers

Thanks. I was hoping to find a longer version of it. Its a good song though.

You might not agree with me, but I was very impressed by the Counter Strike: Condition Zero AI (not the overhaul version where everyone looks like a dwarf [which was in my opinion a failed attempts at a new engine], I'm talking about the initial release that was pretty similar to Counter Strike 1.6). The AI used the right radio chatter just at the right time, making you feel they are actually humna. They were pretty smart too: -When too many of us encountered few enemies, the enemies retreated (whilst calling for help to allies), randomly firing in our direction to keep us back. -Used corners well. They would come out of the corner, shoot a bit and run back behind the corner. -Flanked well. If they saw you, they wouldn't necessarily attack straight forward, sometimes they took a detour and came up from behind you. This was especially effective on me when I started playing. For example, I would see and AI around the corner, and would immediately retreate back and crouch behind some creates, whilst aiming at the corner, and waiting for the AI to show up. I remember being confident that the AI couldn't possibly be smart enough not to follow me around the corner, and when I got shot from behind (because they flanked me) the first few times this happened, I thought that it was just a coincidence. -Cooperated very well, both with the player and each other. Responded to each other's calls for help and suppot, covered the bomber/hostage rescuer and etc. -The difficulties were balanced well. The expert difficulty was the only one where it seemed like they were cheating (insane accuracy and etc.), but I guess it was there to challenge people who played the game non-stop. -Displayed many human like behaviour, most notably unpredictability. Sometimes they were skilled, sometimes they were not so skilled. Sometimes they (usually) would come to help you when you called for help, sometimes they would respond, "No sir" and go rambo style. ARMA 2 AI is quite good as well, but there are some really annoying problems. The major ones for me are getting them in a vehicle (can be a real pain sometimes) and the medic AI.

You mean this?: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xqjb5KTXHj4 No, not this one. It plays a little after this one (sorry, I thought it was all one song, didn't realize it was two, because I haven't played OFP). It plays when the "Guba" guy is talking.

Man are you serious? DAC's readme couldn't have been possibly more detailed. Just create a folder named @DAC, create another folder in it called "addons", then put everything you extracted into it. Goto the games shortcu and add "-mod=@DAC;" into the "Target" line. Though if you're playing around with configs and settings, you'd have to move a few files around. Just read the readme, its has everything in it (Silola wrote it especially in noob friendly format; thanks Silola :)).