KlassenT

Standardizing the Radio Interface Something that I've noticed while trying to implement voice-recognition to trigger radio binds is that while the layout is functional, it's far from standardized. Healing was the first major hurdle I encountered, because while it's intuitive to have the quick-menu "Injured" command to get one of your squaddies to deliver medical attention to the player, AI-to-AI healing is dynamically generated and difficult to account for. Seems that a lot of the radio menus for these purposes are generated from a purely dynamic standpoint, and many of the actions get lumped in to the same "Action" menus, making it unlikely if not impossible to automate. While I still maintain that voice-recognition could be an awesome inclusion for the stock game, I also readily admit it's a very low-priority task on the overwhelming list of things to add. So, that in mind, perhaps a happy medium can be struck, making the interface simultaneously more intuitive and simpler to automate. Give each of the currently dynamic commands their own submenu with a full list of possible targets, with menu options inactive if the order is not applicable. Existing functionality can be found within the "Watch" commands, where ordering a squaddie to look in a particular direction prompts a N/S/E/W submenu. Further suggest utilizing a multi-page system like the general Actions menu to accomodate scenarios with >9 squadmates. I also reference a "Treat All" command, which to my knowledge is not currently integrated, but included for possible implementation (Have your squaddies muck about and let Medics with non-consumable items have priority in treating wounded, defer to FAKs and Field Dressings if no unlimited-use items are present.) Examples Current System: Single-Tier Menu 1. Treat Engineer 2. Treat Self 3. Resupply Rifleman (etc.) Proposed System (With Squaddie #4 Selected in a 5-man fireteam): 1. Treatment [i][Opens Submenu][/i] 1. Treat Leader (Grayed Out, Character Uninjured) 2. Treat Engineer 3. Treat Rifleman (Grayed Out, Uninjured) 4. Treat Self 5. Treat AT Solider (Grayed Out, Uninjured.) 6. (Empty) 7. (Empty) 8. (Empty) 9. (Empty) 0. Next / Treat All 2. Resupply [i][Opens Submenu][/i] 1. Resupply Leader (Grayed Out, Ammo not required) 2. Resupply Engineer (Grayed) 3. Resupply Rifleman 4. Resupply Self (Grayed Out, Ammo not required; Since Self cannot resupply Self, generate "Low Ammo" call.) 5. Resupply AT Solider (Grayed Out, no relevant ammo type carried.) 6. (Empty) 7. (Empty) 8. (Empty) 9. (Empty) 0. Next / Resupply All Final Thoughts: This doesn't address any of the dynamically generated Vehicle lists, simply because I can't think of any concrete methods for improving the system as it is. With squaddies, you already have a numbered list available that can be referenced, but no million dollar ideas on my part for dealing with dynamic entries like nearby vehicles. Still chewing on it, so maybe I'll come up with something.

My personal experience is not an issue accuracy in and of itself; after all, Murphy's Laws of Combat include "If the enemy is in range... so are you." Rather, it doesn't feel like the AI is subject to visual cover like players are. Hard cover, sure. Terrain, junk piles, rocks, and large tree trunks can all seemingly block LoS from AI units, but I haven't found foliage (Bushes, leafy cover, etc) to do squat against them. I often find that I'm taking fire from the OPPOSITE side of a forest where I can't even remotely hope to spot the enemy. The big issue is that that stuff ain't hardcoded, and to my knowledge, the density of which can even be affected by graphical settings, though it's an entirely different gripe when it comes to PvP balancing. I would hazard to say that it's somewhat accounted for, since they seemed to have reduced accuracy in a lot of these instances where there is heavy cover between the two points, but it still seems a touch unforgiving that they can spot me through THAT much visual obstruction in the first place.

The optimizations and improvements would be purely conceptual in nature. As far as I'm aware, DayZ-SA and ArmA 3 are running on two different implementations of the RV engine, and from playing both, ArmA 3's engine optimization is leaps and bounds ahead of DayZ-SA on my machine. I nerfed the crap out of mose of my DayZ graphical settings (No applicable preset, everything was adjusted on a case-by-case basis), whereas I can run the stock Very High graphical settings on ArmA 3 and average around 50% better framerates than my optimized Standalone tweaks. Now, that said, the guys doing Standalone really have made a lot of optimizations beyond the initial Alpha release, so perhaps the things being developed by their branch are being shared at the procedural and handling level (How to handle culling, minimizing input delay within RV, etc.) that can be re-implemented in ArmA 3's development cycle, but with the two games running on fundamentally different architectures, I wouldn't expect any easy copy-and-paste fixes between the two projects.

Looks like a cool little program, currently working on getting a profile built so I can test it before dropping money on the license. How did you configure your command list, out of curiosity? In the Help files provided with VAC Builder, their example looks like it's addressed virtually every possible combination of selection-action groups (Meaning they have provided a separate entry for "One, scout ahead"; "Two, scout ahead"; "Three, scout ahead" and so forth) Seems like there could be a *lot* of potential entries just for infantry radio commands in ArmA 3, is there any merit to breaking out identifiers and actions, i.e. trying to resolve your subordinate (be it "All," "Two," Three") as its own "command" within VAC, then following it with the desired action? I could see it cleaning up the list of possible action phrases, but I don't know if recognition would suffer as a result.

First of all, I realize this is a pretty severe necropost, but board restrictions on new members prevent me from (appropriately) creating a new thread. I had this idea myself the other night, and I started poking around for some applications that might fit the bill to bring the immersion and automation into ArmA 3 that I've been looking for. I love the depth of the radio commands, and the interface gets the job done, but I think even Bohemia would admit it's not the greatest UI for rapid response and managing a fireteam during combat... Hopefully that's not too presumptuous! ;) I tried looking into several of the programs listed earlier in the thread, but so many seemed to have become abandonware or vaporware that I just thought after a year's passing, perhaps someone can share a success story of getting a third-party voice recognition software to work either between or behind ArmA 3's radio architecture. Direct plugins aren't necessary in my eyes, just something that can translate moderate voice commands into mouse and keyboard shortcuts would do the job quite nicely. Thoughts?

Excellent work, SaOk! My friends and I have been wasting a LOT of our time on the WLT/WLS maps! I've had some inconsistencies with some features, but it's still evolving so absolutely no complaints here. :D The most frequent issue I've seen is the High Command Toggle (Ctrl+Space) which works correctly ~75% of the time, but other times it just doesn't seem to want to work, even when I know there is a friendly detachment nearby. Is a "Team Leader" the same as a "Group Leader?" I notice that the High Command structures in the briefing all say 'Team Leader,' so is that a position that's limited to one player on the server at a time, or should it work for anyone that's in command of a squad? All things considered, this is definitely one of the most fun and rewarding MP scenarios we've found. Nothing can really compare with slowly steamrolling your way across the entire island, one hard-fought camp at a time. :cool: Enjoy the rest, you've definitely earned it!