kavoriken

Sorry if this has been asked before, but is anyone working on a propper CTI mission using alive? Or would that be impossible? I know how you can set up a CTI'ish mission very easily with alive, and ive done that for myself on a very basic level with a couple of vehicles respawning in my base, VAS for gear, AI recruiting and some player respawning script i found which teleports your AI teammates to your base when you die. The thing is that my scripting knowledge ends when it comes to basebuilding, ai commanding, some sort of currency system and markers on the map which indicate what towns your side has captured. Basically my dream is either crcti (kb edition) or becti with alive`s profiling system, otherwise untouched in its functionality.

Sounds like a pretty good idea. But i agree: Performance is the most important thing. And it's not really the civilian module i care about that much when it comes to TPW, i care much more about the ambient cars and planes, as that helps a lot with immersion on my side. But of course the civs driving the vehicles have maps/compasses/gps`s as well.

About the map: I love playing with TPW enabled. Is it possible to remove the map/compass/gps from the TPW spawned civilians as well?

Good stuff, gonna check it out right now. One more weird thing i noticed when i just started the game: Whenever i play a fresh game it starts off with very low fps that drop even more when i move. Got like 36 fps when standing and 20 when walking. Saving and loading the game always fixes it for me and then i usually get 45-55 depending on the location i started at, so it`s not really a gamebreaking problem, just a weird thing happening on my side. Mods i play with: TPW and a couple of weapon mods (FHQ, NATO_RUSSIANS, FHQ M4). No AI mods though (AI functions of TPW disabled). Caching method used: D-R.

Wow, thanks for fulfilling my request so quickly. All items can be found only in houses now?

Hi and first of all: Great mission, i'm having a blast playing it. Got some suggestions regarding hardcore though: I prefer playing hardcore, mainly because of not having a map at the start. The problem is that getting a map is very easy by just murdering a random civilian. Is it possible to remove maps/compasses/Gps from all or at least some of the civilians inventories? Personally i think hardcore would make a lot more sense if a map is obtainable by looting houses but rather difficult to find. If removing maps from the inventory is impossible, maybe add at least add some sort of consequence for killing civilians like either the military being alarmed and starting to look for you in that area or some sort of insanity "debuff" that makes your sight blurry for a couple of minutes. Edit: And btw. everytime i spawn with the mk20c my sound is gone entirely. Tried it with all mods deactivated, but keeps happening.

Yeah, i kind of agree, keeping up "late game" control in this mission might be the only "weakness" of it, just because it pretty much becomes a nightmare with stuff spawning behind your defensive lines and whatnot. My dream for this mission would be some sort of late game territorial gameplay with borders shown on the map expanding or contracting depending on the camps/guardposts controlled by each faction. Within the borders spawn rate should be very low with only camps/guardposts close to the border getting attacked on a frequent basis. Might be difficult to implement, but that would be incredible. As for an idea that might be easier to implement: Maybe just give each camp an invisible circular zone around it with a specific size depending on the camps defenses. Within the zones spawnrates could be lowered or have "cooldowns".

Yup, still one of my favorite missions, great job. Do you have any plans to port this over to any other maps like Chernarus/Takistan with A3MP when you are satisfied with the content? Btw. Soldiers who surrendered seem to cause problems. I just captured a camp near a town but it was still tagged as a CSAT camp. Got a mission in the town to clear a building which instantly succeeded without me doing anything. When i checked the house there was a CSAT soldier in there who had surrendered. When i killed him the camp switched over to blufor.

Is it possible that probability of presence breaks Alive right now? I wanted to set up bases for factions and have randomized civilian objectives all over the map using multiple markers and civ placement modules with probability of presence on. Didnt work. Then i tried placing only one civ placement module for the whole map and as soon as i gave it a probability of presence it refused to work until i restarted the editor, not even setting it back to 100% fixed that.

Why would profiled units be influenced by the skill setting? I don't know how fights between profiled units are calculated, but in theory different skill levels would only lead to longer fights, not really different outcomes, so i assume the skill setting is ignored for that entirely. And why would you want to use the AI skill module with bcombat? Doesnt make sense to me. Just use Bcombat and modify the skill via its settings. Of course some settings will be overwritten if 2 mods modify the same thing, god knows which will get more priority.

Just got the Iron Front mod for A3 to work with Alive and wanted to check out the Alive "The Grind" sample mission. I do get an error for deleted content though when trying to open the mission in the editor: "lib_core_eventhandlers". Everything else seems to work fine.

Will do as soon as the hotfix is out, the Mission is on Altis :)

I dont really understand the buzz here.. where is the news? This is a known issue of the arma series, and the single threadedness of the AI has been confirmed for Arma 3 by server admins when the first ever dedicated server binaries came out. Lots of people were screaming "Alpha" or "Beta" back then in belief that it might get changed, but to anyone familiar with the arma series or basics about the engine it was instantly clear that Arma 3 will not resolve that problem... EVER. The AI would have had to be rewritten entirely which is a major MAJOR thing you don't do once a beta or even Alpha is released. So all i can say is: Welcome to Arma and you better start accepting the single threadedness of the AI because it's here to stay. The only hope right now is ALiVE with their profiling system. It's the only way high numbers of "AI"(virtualized in profiles) will ever be possible in Arma 3. I just wish BIS would come up with simple and genius ideas like that. In addition to that even SP games could perform way better if they ran on a dedicated server exe in the background. Hosting a mission with lots of AI on a dedicated on your own machine can triple your FPS compared to hosting it ingame or playing SP as long as youve got a quad core system. It can't be THAT difficult to make things like that happen in the background. So that's what you should really be complaining about: The lack of solution ideas BIS comes up with. Complaining about the single threadedness is pretty much pointless.

Just tested it. Opfor and Blufor choppers definately work. Independant definately dont, they never moved. The Independant buzzard starts driving off into the wilderness like it's an infantry unit, albeit having no opcom command to move anywhere and the profile icon on the map didn't follow it. Also, once spawned, none of the manually placed choppers ever despawned again.

Alright, thanks. Gonna test that out later on, although i'm pretty sure that after 90 minutes of playtime opcom should have detected at least 1 vehicle.

You can limit the max number of spawned profiles in ALiVE. The only problem with that is that right now there is no sophisticated system in dealing with the overflow profiles. They simply get deleted once you are in range and are then placed at one of the reinforcement spots. You'd need something like a limit-per-player that adds up when more than 1 player is in range. Or something based around server FPS. ALiVE profiling would definately help, but i doubt that it's easy to implement in its current form. I guess Benny would have to directly work together with their dev team, especially because modifying ALiVE for the purposes of your mission is not allowed.

Yes to all. All mil and civ placement modules have to be synced 1. to the opcom taking care of defending- and 2. the opcom taking care of attacking its objectives. If you only want a pure invasion scenario with one side attacking and one side defending it might be better not to sync the attacking side's placement modules to both opcom's. The attacking opcom will still take care of the units placed there, but will ignore defending the objectives that noone is set up to attack. Got another question: I can't for the love of god get manually placed choppers to get commanded by the opcom although they clearly get profiled. I don`t know how the opcom determines on when to use air units, but in my mission ive got 3 sides set up with 3 manned choppers each (+1 jet for the AAF) and in 90 minutes of playtime with debug on i didnt see them move once. Tried syncing them to opcom as well without success.

Yeah, keep in mind that it's groups that are getting placed by the module, not individual units. Some groups are significantly smaller, like the sniper group with only a sniper and a marksman. So with a randomized platoon of 30 you still might end up with much more than 3 groups. OPCOM should then balance out the groups between the towns depending on priority, I THINK.

Do player missions have any impact at all yet, like slowing enemy reinforcements? Or are they just more of a to-be-expanded thing right now? Just set up a big 3-sided war OP vs. Blu vs. AAF with around 2000 units on Altis. Going behind enemy enemy lines to do the missions felt so satisfying because you knew everything around you was 100% dynamic and actually mattered. So much better than just scripted stuff with triggers. The only thing i didnt really like so far is the intelligence module. Not sure exactly on how it determines what intel youre supposed to get, but for example i think that information about captured bases from your team should never fade until recpatured by the enemy. Also the troop movement arrows are way too rare imho. They only get drawn on the map when 5+ groups move towards an objective or so. Most of the time i'd be completely lost if it wasnt for the military sector display, which of course feels kind of cheaty because it gives you way too much information about enemy troop locations... What im also dreaming of is a dynamic ambient radio module which generates accurate radio messages of stuff happening on the map. Imagine leaving a base and after 5 minutes of driving you hear a warning about that particular base being attacked and the remaining groups there calling out for help. I guess that will never happen as it would be way too much work, but let me keep my dreams :)

Good post Nordkindchen, although i disagree with you on 4 things. Mapsize: Big maps are always good as long as that doesnt mean loss of detail. First of all you will play this map for years to come and it's great to constantly have something new and fresh to look at. Also with the recent release of ALIVE and their profiling system, war simulation scenarios covering the entire map are definately a thing now. The only thing i'd say is that the diving aspect of Altis couldve easily been left out. It`s a gimmick barely anyone uses. If instead they invested that development time into more vehicles, or even *cough* furniture, that would`ve added a lot more to the game. Animation system/particle system/sound engine: Don't agree about these ones, they are good enough as they are. Sure, they couldve learned from mods like Blastcore or JSRS years ago, so it's annoying that such essential things still need to be modded, but at least the mods show that the core systems are fine IMO. Or at least they'd be somewhere at the very bottom on my priority list. I doubt we will ever see BIS switching to the Cryengine, it would probably be too much of a risk for them to take. Porting over all the aspects of the Arma series would be an absolute nightmare, if possible at all.

Hm yes, but will it be commanded by opcom and replaced by the logistics module when it's destroyed?

Is there any way to give placement modules and OPCOM more options to place chopper profiles down? Right now you only seem to get chopper profiles on helipads on the map. Manually placed helipad objects of any sort get ignored entirely.

Well how about spawning them in at the border of the spawning radius around you then, instantly followed by a waypoint to their old location?

Thanks for the quick answers :) Point taken about performance regarding terrain and pathfinding calculations. Youre probably right that it's better this way than adding a big performance hog. To be fair i only noticed the teleporting of groups when teleporting myself around anyways. In a non-debug scenario i probably wouldnt have noticed except maybe if there were faulty intel reports. Good to hear about the logistics module, already read about the convoys. That is going to add a lot of potential for tasks behind enemy lines. About the profile limiter: My problem with it is that it deletes profiles it cant spawn, if my understanding of how it works is correct. If i set the limit to 1 and create a huge number of profiles with a military placement module and get close to it so that i am in spawning range, it keeps deleting profiles because it is only allowed to spawn in 1. Id rather have it not delete profiles and instead spawn them in, based on the distance to the player as soon as other profiles that are closer to the player position get eliminated.

Finally got to play with it and made a couple of missions. First of all: congratulations. The profiling system in combination with opcom is such a game changer, wow. The placement modules are great as well, but the profiling system is absolutely stunming, great work folks. I did run into a couple of problems like the previously mentioned malfunctioning of placement modules making it necessary to redo it- and its markers to get it to work propperly again. Then the cqb module's blacklist didnt like me excluding the blufor mainbase marker and made the blufor mainbase placement module place groups all over the map although it only had the mainbase marker assigned. Also i think that some groups move way too quickly when being profiled, especially motorized groups moving through forests. Those motorized groups also tend to teleport from forests to roads when a player activates it. Might be working as intended though? Same thing with lots of groups and water.using debug they are shown moving way too quickly through water and teleport to shores once someone is in range. Gotta admit that i used a couple of 3rd party mods though, gonna investigate it further without 3rd party mods as soon as ive got the time for that. A couple of suggestions for future versions: - Make it possible to sync the military logistics module to placement modules instead of opcom or make it possible to assign markers to it so that you can assign specific zones for reinforcement spawn points. - I'd love to have an option in the profile module that lets you limit the number of profiles that can be spawned at any given time. The maximum could be defined in a static way (max number of spawned profiles) or a dynamic way (dont spawn in new profiles if FPS is < X). I can see how this would be problematic in mp scenarios, but for sp it could help performance a lot when too much stuff is happening around you. Anyways, great work, cant wait to see what youve still got in the pipeline for the future.