Home   Help Search Login Register  

Author Topic: (Review Completed) [SP] Un-Impossible Mission  (Read 69759 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Planck

  • Honoured
  • Former Staff
  • ****
  • I'm never wrong ....I'm just not always right !
Re:Un-Impossible Mission
« Reply #330 on: 04 Oct 2004, 20:10:22 »
Yes I completed this harder version first, and as has been said probably it took me the longest.

But, I only lost 2 men, also I imagine I got the biggest score.

Just glad that THobson has managed to complete it now.

That jeep at the Ammo dump.......I know ther eis a jeep there already, I remember killing it when I did the mission.

I did that part at night and whilst I was dealing with that jeep, I noticed there were headlights out in the countryside further north.
It turned out to be another jeep, I killed this one also.

Thats how I knew to check for it because it seems to get stuck in places.

What is a jeep doing up there anyway?


Planck
I know a little about a lot, and a lot about a little.

Offline THobson

  • OFPEC Patron
  • Former Staff
  • ****
Re:Un-Impossible Mission
« Reply #331 on: 04 Oct 2004, 20:10:34 »
@Planck

Thank you so much I never would have found them.  When I replied this morning I had in mind a different ammo dump.  As you said they are oblivious to the Abrams, so I got out to see how they would react.  The gunner started shooting, but I think at the tank not at me (either that or I was so close the bullets were going over my head).  Anyway I shot them both and the mission ended.  You are a star. :thumbsup:

@macuguba

You said you would like my comments on the Outro.  

Very funny.  I loved the music, it was just right.  No prizes for guessing which country you come from.  It was totally fitting, had it been the Stars and Stripes instead of the Cross of St. Andrew the whole thing would have felt quite futile.  As it was it was funny.

You said it was screwed up but you had fixed it.  I am not sure what you had in mind.  A couple of things I saw were:
- I had a squad of 9 at the end of the mission, but I had 10 in the Outro - was one of them the female civilian? - I think they all looked like soldiers but it was very quick

- punch macguba has a bit of a white border (Oh and I wasn't able to get my mouse over to that option either  ;D)

A suggestion:
I have seen some posts about transferring data from the mission into the Outro, I did not read them closely so I don't know if this is possible.  Instead of showing graves and a dead Spetz Natz is it possible to show the actual dead members of the squad in the place they actually died?

The debrief told me I had taken 25 hours and 14 minutes - but I had left it run overnight to see if the recalcitrant loon would turn up.  14 hours would probably be a better guess.  It also said I had killed 2 friendly Urals - that was when I was looking for the last loon when I was shooting everything - even long dead snipers!

Thank you.  I have really enjoyed this and I loved the sense of humour.  Even though I now cannot look at a computer screen for more than a few minutes without getting a headache!


Different subject:
Based on your earlier post where you gave a statistical analysis I thought you would appreciate being able to do the simulation with both normal and antithetic random numbers to compare the results, so the program I sent to you has that feature.  Near the top there is a line:
int Antithetic = False;

Just change False to True  (note: this is case sensitive) and you get antithetic random numbers.

That, anyway, was the theory.  I have just tried, and the program gives exactly the same results whichever value I set for Antithetic.  This is marginally less likely than Guba wearing a skirt!  I have found the problem, one more small change I am afraid.  

In the random generating routine (near the bottom of the listing)  there is the line
   if (Antithetic = True)
This needs to be changed to:
   if (Antithetic == True)

That fixes it.


I am now going to have a rest

« Last Edit: 04 Oct 2004, 20:39:50 by THobson »

Offline macguba

  • Former Staff
  • ****
    • macguba's operation flashpoint page
Re:Un-Impossible Mission
« Reply #332 on: 04 Oct 2004, 20:35:51 »
Quote
You said you would like my comments on the Outro.   Very funny.  I loved the music, it was just right.  No prizes for guessing which country you come from.  It was totally fitting, had it been the Stars and Stripes instead of the Cross of St. Andrew the whole thing would have felt quite futile.  As it was it was funny.
Glad you like it.  :)  Even more glad it worked ok.

Quote
You said it was screwed up but you had fixed it.  I am not sure what you had in mind.  A couple of things I saw were:
- I had a squad of 9 at the end of the mission, but I had 10 in the Outro - was one of them the female civilian? - I think they all looked like soldiers but it was very quick
This remark is more interesting that it looks.   When I watched the Outro the player was dead, which screwed it up.  Obviously for you he wasn't, which confirms a suspicion of mine which I'll come back to in a minute.   It wasn't the female civvy (at least I hope not) it was Nicolai.    The 10th was an extra loon you never got because you didn't take any casualties before visiting the civvies.    He is supposed to be deleted.

Quote
- punch macguba has a bit of a white border
I know, I have no idea what causes it or how to get rif of it.  It seems to happen on my titlersc for no particular reason.

Quote
A suggestion:
I have seen some posts about transferring data from the mission into the Outro, I did not read them closely so I don't know if this is possible.  Instead of showing graves and a dead Spetz Natz is it possible to show the actual dead members of the squad in the place they actually died?
In theory, we have figured out how to transfer information from mission to outro.   However, it is at best combersome (using setDammage levels of gamelogics to transfer numbers for example) and it is extremely temperamental.    Just getting the information of which of your loons are alive and which dead is hard enough, and although it currently works for me, I am not at all convinced.    I suspect previous runs disturb the savefile where the information is kept.

Quote
Thank you.  I have really enjoyed this and I loved the sense of humour.  
I'm sure some people won't but hey, sod 'em.

Quote
Even though I now cannot look at a computer screen for more than a few minutes without getting a headache!
I'm not surprised!


I haven't looked at the stat analysis for the opening yet, I've been fixing the other things.   Thanks for all the stuff on that, it's going to be handy.  

It turns out you can't (or at least it would be hard) to have the loons facing all round at the start of the mission.    In Formation overrides the setDir commands and I can't use None because then the whole multiple start location thing begins to unravel.    I daresay it could be done, but not by me for this mission.   ::)
« Last Edit: 04 Oct 2004, 20:36:10 by macguba »
Plenty of reviewed ArmA missions for you to play

Offline THobson

  • OFPEC Patron
  • Former Staff
  • ****
Re:Un-Impossible Mission
« Reply #333 on: 04 Oct 2004, 20:51:50 »
Quote
I can't use None because then the whole multiple start location thing begins to unravel.
So your squad start where you put them in the editor but you start at the random locations?  I bet that could be embarassing.

Quote
In Formation overrides the setDir commands
What about a setDir a fraction of a second after the start of the mission?  The player would never see it.

Quote
I haven't looked at the stat analysis for the opening yet, I've been fixing the other things.  Thanks for all the stuff on that, it's going to be handy.
You are more than welcome.  Let me know if you would like some changes made to it.  I could easily get it to do all the locations at once rather than one at a time for example.


Just downloading 0-64 now.  I will probably play with it a bit but I will only make a concerted effort to complete it again when you have absolutely the last final, final, ultimate, never to be changed version.   I got my son started on 0-63 yesterday.  0-64 is for him once he realises that his current tactics are bloody useless and he needs to start again.

« Last Edit: 04 Oct 2004, 21:15:45 by THobson »

Offline THobson

  • OFPEC Patron
  • Former Staff
  • ****
Re:Un-Impossible Mission
« Reply #334 on: 04 Oct 2004, 21:38:09 »
Just read the readme for the new mission.  I saw it was longer than the one for 0-63 so I thought I would have a look.   Loooong list of beta testers - one interesing name:
macguba


My son has just got the first radio save available (~30 minutes in?) - he is approaching the summit and is down to three men.  He is hooked.

Offline macguba

  • Former Staff
  • ****
    • macguba's operation flashpoint page
Re:Un-Impossible Mission
« Reply #335 on: 04 Oct 2004, 22:05:25 »
Quote
I got my son started on 0-63 yesterday.  0-64 is for him once he realises that his current tactics are bloody useless and he needs to start again.
And people call me evil.   ;D  

Quote
So your squad start where you put them in the editor but you start at the random locations?  I bet that could be embarassing.
It is.    I'll look into the millisecond later thing:  I'm not convinced it will work very well, not least because there is an awful lot of init stuff already.

Quote
Loooong list of beta testers - one interesing name:
macguba
Lol at one point I needed one more name for the balance in the credits in the mission accomplished, and since I have done about ten times as much testing as everybody else put together ... the beta testers go back two years, which is partly why there are so many.

Longest readme you ever saw for a mission.   ;D


Plenty of reviewed ArmA missions for you to play

Offline THobson

  • OFPEC Patron
  • Former Staff
  • ****
Re:Un-Impossible Mission
« Reply #336 on: 04 Oct 2004, 22:26:28 »
Quote
Longest readme you ever saw for a mission.
Well actually...nearly.
Quote
From the description THobson gave of his mission I thought it sounded like the same old storyline, I was not wrong. But the unoriginal storyline is made up for by the great gameplay of this mission (despite being a bit hard) One thing that greatly impressed me about this mission was the readme included, it was head and shoulders above most.

http://www.ofpec.com/missions_depot/index.php?ID=1061

It scored an 8!  mostly thanks to your help and advice.  If he thinks mine was hard wait untill he sees yours!!  He also clearly did not figure out the easy way to do it ;)

...and another thing...  I completely agree with Planck:
Quote
What is a jeep doing up there anyway?
« Last Edit: 04 Oct 2004, 22:54:20 by THobson »

Offline macguba

  • Former Staff
  • ****
    • macguba's operation flashpoint page
Re:Un-Impossible Mission
« Reply #337 on: 04 Oct 2004, 23:17:03 »
Hey, congratulations!    It was about a 4 the first time I played it, but I knew it had potential.  Well done.  :thumbsup:   *goes to nick good ideas from readme*

I have no idea what the jeeps are doing out there.      There is a jeep group that has a guard waypoint southeast of that little ammo dump, and the other jeep group is supposed to drive along the road, but that's it.   What I suspect happens is that they flee there.     The old ending triggers made them allowFleeing 0, but I always suspected them of fleeing again anyway.   The new script loops the allowFleeing 0 command.
« Last Edit: 04 Oct 2004, 23:17:36 by macguba »
Plenty of reviewed ArmA missions for you to play

Offline THobson

  • OFPEC Patron
  • Former Staff
  • ****
Re:Un-Impossible Mission
« Reply #338 on: 05 Oct 2004, 08:02:41 »
Actually I need a 4 and a 7 to get a run!

I will be having another look at that simulation program in the next few days.  Improvements are:
- Run for all starting locations, not just one
- Output the results to a file that can be imported into a spreadsheet.

Offline macguba

  • Former Staff
  • ****
    • macguba's operation flashpoint page
Re:Un-Impossible Mission
« Reply #339 on: 05 Oct 2004, 12:34:43 »
Right, well I've been looking at the start positions.

First off, I played them all.  Including the results already posted a couple of days ago, the results are given below.  (I was tired for the second session, and not playing quite so well.)  As before everybody had bizons and it was hit the dirt time.     Easy/Medium/Hard refers to the state of things before the changes.


Old Base - Easy

1) Killed - bizon   (1 casualty before I went down)
2) no casualties
3) no casualties
4) 1 loon injured
5) 1 casualty
6) 1 casualty

Slighty increased loon probs in the 90% group and improved waypoints of the two 75% groups


Field Hospital - Easy

1) 1 casualty
2) 2 casualties
3) Killed - M16 (sixth casualty)
4) no attacks

Increased left attack group from 75% to 80% and reduced individual probs.     Reduced placement radii of other two groups, which means they don't start on top of you, but do get there quicker.   The original result surprised me - I thought it was medium.

Edit: also reduced radius of left attack group


Truck - Medium

1) 3 casualties
2) 2 casualties
3) 5 casualties
4) no casualties

No changes.   The only one where everything panned out as I expected.

Edit:  put one group back slightly


Ammo & UAZ - Easy

1) Killed - M16 (I was first casualty)
2) no casualties
3) no casualties
4) no casualties (but this is the third time in a row the rear attack group (70%) has not appeared)
5) no casualties (ditto)
6) no casualties (ditto)
7) 2 casualties (attacked from the rear at last)

Increased group probs from 70% to 75% and increased all 33% loons to 50%.   This start position was clearly missed out on at least two rounds of general difficulty-increasing.  

Edit: put 3 in each group back to 33%


Main Junction - Hard

1) Killed - M16 (first casualty)
2) no attacks
3) Killed - M16
4) Killed - M16

Reduced loon probs in all 3 groups, particularly the two jeep groups.  Changed attack angles slightly.   The problem here is that the player is in the open and on point.    Tougher than I thought it was.


Bikes - Easy

1) 2 casualties
2) 2 casualties
3) Killed - M16 (first casualty)
4) no casualties

Rearranged probs and angles slightly.


BMP Ambulance & BRDM - Medium

1) Killed - G36 (first casualty)
2) 4 casualties.  never saw the enemy myself
3) Killed  (third casualty)
4) no casualties
5) 7 casualties

Moved rear attack groups back slightly.   Another surprise - I had this one down as hard.


Ammo & motorbikes - Hard

1) Killed (bizon)
2) 5 casualties
3) 3 dead + 1 injured.  Never saw the enemy myself.
4) 3 dead + 1 injured

Changed tank waypoint, reduced probs of infantry attack group and changed start position of infantry group to make it easier.

Edit: adjusted waypoints to make it slighter harder again


Using THobson's most excellent little programme, I was able to spot a number of mistakes in my probabilities and also see that difficulty and number of loons were not closely correlated.   This is exactly what you would expect given the different start positions and attacks.     I also used it to check the new probs:   in general it smoothed things out in the 10-20 loon range, making it less random.   Tended also to reduce the tails, which has the same effect.

I was happy with the start positions till THobson pointed out the problems .... these changes make me fairly happy again, or at least it will till I test them .....

There is probably a tiny increase in overall difficulty because you can no longer get the easy-peasy start at the UAZ.    For the other start positions I would say the overall difficulty is roughly unchanged.


Thoughts?



Edit:  that was 38 attempts.    In 10 I was killed (twice by my own men), in 21 there were acceptable casualties (<2) and in 7 I survived with heavy casualties.      It's true that I know what do to, but I'm not a particularly strong player and still managed a decent start more than half the time.    


Second edit:  I've been testing the new starts.   Early indications are that the changes have been too big.


Third edit:   I now added small placement radii to most of the attack groups' first waypoints which are usually very close to the player's group.   This just mixes up the angles a little on retries.   Latest results - these were being tweaked as I went along.   As you can see it's more even now.    The "optimum" result would be 1 killed and 6 dead over four tests.


Old Base
1) 1 dead
2) 1 dead
3) Killed through a wall
4) 1 dead

Field Hospital
1) 2 dead, 1 injured
2) 4 dead
3) 3 dead
4) 2 dead

Truck
1) 2 dead
2) no casualties
3) 3 dead
4) Killed - hand grenade

Ammo & UAZ
1) Killed - M21
2) Killed - G36
3) Killed - M16
4) 1 dead
5) Killed - M16
6) Killed while reloading - G36
7) 1 dead
8) 3 dead
9) Killed - M16
10) 3 dead
11) 1 dead
12) 2 dead

Main Junction
1) 2 dead
2) 2 dead
3) Killed - jeep/mg
4) Killed - jeep/mg
5) 2 dead

Bikes
1) 2 dead
2) no casualties
3) no casualties
4) no casualties - but two of these three n/c were hard

BMP Ambulance & BRDM
1) 1 dead
2) 1 dead
3) Killed
4) 2 dead

Ammo & motorbikes
1) 1 dead
2) 1 dead
3) 4 dead
4) 1 dead
« Last Edit: 05 Oct 2004, 17:58:39 by macguba »
Plenty of reviewed ArmA missions for you to play

Offline THobson

  • OFPEC Patron
  • Former Staff
  • ****
Re:Un-Impossible Mission
« Reply #340 on: 05 Oct 2004, 20:41:33 »
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gee mac that is alot of work.  

On the new results:
Ammo & UAZ seems to have gone from easy to pretty d**n difficult.  Overall the number of 'No casualties' has come down significantly.

On balance I wish I had never complained - the starts now seem tougher!  I suppose I will just need to get over it.  

I see you have already done a lot of work, so I hope this in not too late.  Attached is revised program that outputs its results to a text file that can be imported into Excel (and I presume other spreadsheets) to make further analysis easier.  Obviously the probabilities contained in it are the old ones, so if you want to use the program you will need to change them.  There are instructions in the readme file on how to run the program and how to import the results into Excel.
« Last Edit: 05 Oct 2004, 20:42:22 by THobson »

Offline THobson

  • OFPEC Patron
  • Former Staff
  • ****
Re:Un-Impossible Mission
« Reply #341 on: 05 Oct 2004, 20:48:30 »
Editing posts with attachements seem to wrong for me, hence the new post:

I suggest what is needed are some design criteria.  What is an unacceptable start:
- Too many 'Killed' that is for sure,
- also too many 'No casualties'
but how many is a reaonable number of casualties?

I suggest a target of most outcomes in the range 0 to 2 casualties at the start (or 3 if you must!).  If you are getting 4 or more right at the outset it would seem a bit unfair.

Once you have a reasonable set of criteria then I guess it is just experimentation to get there.
« Last Edit: 05 Oct 2004, 20:57:20 by THobson »

Offline macguba

  • Former Staff
  • ****
    • macguba's operation flashpoint page
Re:Un-Impossible Mission
« Reply #342 on: 05 Oct 2004, 22:15:06 »
Ah, into Excel, that's just what I need.    Yes it has been a lot of work but I think I'm getting there.    The UAZ results are worse than they look:  a total of 9 loons went from 50% to 33% over the course of that dozen trys and if you look at just the last four results they are ok.

Also, today the game was harder than yesterday.    The bare figures cover a multitude of sins.    What's really important is that the two really hard ones - Main Junction (jeeps/mg) and the Abrams start at the wee ammo dump are both now playable rather than virtually unplayable.  

0 casualties is a highly undesirable result.    Up to 2 counts as 0 because you get replacements for them.    On the other hand more than 3 is bad because this is me playing, knowing exactly what's what.   I must try testing them standing up with crappy weapons.  ;D
Plenty of reviewed ArmA missions for you to play

Offline THobson

  • OFPEC Patron
  • Former Staff
  • ****
Re:Un-Impossible Mission
« Reply #343 on: 06 Oct 2004, 09:02:44 »
Thinking about the directions your guys are facing at the start.  I can now see setDir will not work, even just after the start, as they all start to move back into formation so the setDir instruction will be lost.  Toadlfe has a 'watch' script that enables individual units or groups of units to be told to watch specified points of the compass.  Might be worth looking at that.

I was rude about my son's tactics the other day.  Perhaps I was a bit unfair.  What he does at the start is to get everyone to hit the deck, stop and scan the horizon.  I had completely forgotten about the scan the horizon command.  He is still using noisy weapons though!

0 and 1 casualties are the same as one of the replacements are conditional.  It's at 2 or more when you feel the pain.  More than 3 and really the mission becomes more of a one player affair with the squad providing a bit of back up.

Anyway as I have said before I am providing only one data point.  Others may have differnet views and the only view that counts is yours.

Bye the way I asked my son what he thought of the start.  He thought it was 'good, realistic to be attacked soon after you land'.  So there is another data point.


Offline THobson

  • OFPEC Patron
  • Former Staff
  • ****
Re:Un-Impossible Mission
« Reply #344 on: 06 Oct 2004, 20:58:41 »
Being quite new to this site I am not sure if it is considered bad form to poke around using the editor in other people's missions.  If I shouldn't be doing it let me know and I will stop.  

I was intrigued as to what you had done to make capturing the tank more difficult.  Two questions:
- Is a unit on Guard if it is on its way to a Guard waypoint or does it have to get to the Guard waypoint first?
- when using setWPPos is the index number used to identify the waypoint the same as the index number you see when looking at waypooints in the editor?  (if so should the trigger at Cj46 refer to WP 6 & 7 rather than 7 & 8?)

Very neat by the way.
« Last Edit: 06 Oct 2004, 20:59:42 by THobson »