Simulating lack of Radios

[Unnamed]

I think your idea for hand signals is sound. From what little knowledge I have about real life procedures, if your moving in formation would it not be the guy up front who gives out the hand signals?

Once you stopped in formation, then I would be happy to assume the AI would look to the commander for orders. Even if, you never actually see the AI doing it.

What I liked about the idea was using more primitive ways to communicate when out of sight or earshot.

When preparing an ambush in the jungle, the SAS used string to communicate, not string and paper cups But a couple of sharp pulls on a piece of string would signal the arrival of their target.

But things like flares and beacon fires as signals could spice up a mission.

I must admit, I did panic a bit when you said KnowsABout would not work with trees and bushes e.t.c As I use it quite a lot

But if you can detect when your in a Forest, you could just reduce the range of your hand signals. So if you move to fast, your guys might miss the orders?

[Drozdov]

The problem is that when a unit is running in front of you in formation, he will never be facing you. Therefore you couldn't signal them.

Yeh, well, you couldn't signal someone that wasn't facing you, could you? You could use the 'dowatch' command to make them look at you but that would be cheating.

[Komuna]

Chough :joystick:, excuse me. I have a few doubts.

How do you detect the player's orders? Only the 'stopped' checks if the doStop command has been issued.

combatMode would return the behaviour of each unit... However it's impossible (well, at least improbable) to issue a different order for each unit of the group through a hand signal... and we know the player can select which units to set a different behaviour.

And actions? The player has control over the group's actions, but you can't figure what actions have been activated (maybe only a few, such as 'eject').

Oh... And getting into a vehicle? Which signal? Which spoken order? Can you detect which vehicle has been assigned to a certain unit?

Hey, I'm just thinking about a full realism and low lag campaign...

But nothing is lost. What about a script which orders a bunch of units to follow the player orders through actions and dialogues, without being in the conventional F1~F12 group...? You could have even more soldiers per group.

[General Barron]

Grrr...... I just wrote a big long reply, but got an error when I submitted it, and lost it! When will I learn to write it in notepad? Anyway, here's the gist of it:

@Komuna:

What about a script which orders a bunch of units to follow the player orders through actions and dialogues, without being in the conventional F1~F12 group...? [quote/]

That's what I'm talking about; in my mission, you have 13 men under your control, in 4 different groups, but none of them are "in your squad". You would control them with hand signals accesed through the "radio" menu. See my posts above. To simplify things though, I'm not including any vehicles that the men could get into.

@ Drozdov:

Yeh, well, you couldn't signal someone that wasn't facing you, could you? You could use the 'dowatch' command to make them look at you but that would be cheating. [quote/]

As far as I know, the dowatch command won't make a unit run backwards. I stick by my assertion that a unit cannot be moving ahead of you in formation and also be facing you.  

@ Unnamed:

From what little knowledge I have about real life procedures, if your moving in formation would it not be the guy up front who gives out the hand signals?[quote/]

Sometimes. But the squad leader is almost always going to be in the middle of the formation (in a column), or behind the formation (in a line). The squad leader is obviously going to be doing a lot of signalling to give orders to the squad. Once a squad member sees a signal, he then passes the signal on. Every four or five paces, a squad member will look behind him for signals.

The pointman will signal a halt if he sees something up ahead, such as the enemy or a "danger area" (an open area such as a road or field where the squad would be exposed while they are crossing it). Then its up to the squad leader what to do after that. Really any squad member can signal a halt though, if they see the enemy.

All of this goes out the window once contact with the enemy is made, though. Then its back to good old fashioned shouting, and for the most part control is passed from the squad leader to the fireteam leaders.

[Komuna]

The problem here is not having 2 firetams, 3 firetems or 10 fireteams (pfff... 10?). The problem dwells on the way that orders are issued and how to detect most of them.

Indeed, the 13men squad is a nice idea... besides, I'm writing a dialogue system which controls an entire platoon (general movements and orders) and the command squad (your squad - specific orders and movements).

Your script set must be nice... Can you show us how it works and how to solve the 'signal and comunication within squads without radios' prob.

[General Barron]

Like I said... its a work in progress. I've got a bunch of halfway-done parts, but not much of a whole to show yet. I'll post something when I'm a little more completed.

[ACF]

OK, I'm thinking out loud (at least, I think I‘ve thought about this):

Remote detonators for satchel charges have a finite range, but I've not experienced a maximum range with unit radios.  IF they were limited there might be some possibility of reducing the range to simulate voice contact, but it seems unlikely. The scripting required to disable/avoid the radio comms and then to substitute a [possibly horribly complex] alternative seems, er, possibly horribly complex.


Th best I can offer at the moment is to float a couple of off-the-cuff concepts . . .

Idea 1:
?(Ready unit && unit Distance Leader unit > voicerange):  unit stop true

?(unit Distance Leader unit < voicerange):  unit stop false

?(Not Ready unit < voicerange):  Leader unit Say "something audible so he can be detected"

Pros:
Still uses the game's interface, but its effects are overridden.
Units should complete tasks beyond voicerange before being stopped.
Within voicerange, ‘radio' commands should be executed.
Should work for AI leaders and units.

Cons:
First guess is a script per unit with the two conditions.
voicerange needs to be great enough to allow groups to move with leader in formation, otherwise units will get left behind.
It may not work.

Idea 2:
Commander is on his own and bimbles around with a big trigger attached around him (or maybe SetPos'd out in front of him so there's a bit of selectivity, he'd have to face the unit(s).

Friendly units in his trigger list Join him.

Commander (now Leader) can issue ‘radio' commands as we all know and love, and units should execute them.

Outside his trigger, units Join GrpNull (or their original group could be archived and retrieved, I suppose)

Pros:
Not much (maybe ‘no') scripting.
Be your own Field Marshal - control anyone and everyone.

Cons:
New minions may run after you rather than carrying on with what they were doing.
Don't trust that GrpNull much - will orders continue to be executed after the Join GrpNull?
This may not work either.

Any thoughts on the prcticality of these,anyone?

[General Barron]

Idea 1:

I think it would work, but you would have to be doing a lot of looping and such to make sure units stay where they are when they are out of voice range. And this would cause a lot of radio chatter ("2 ready"), but I guess you would disable the radio, right?

Part of the problem with this though is that units can't act on their own, since they are basically frozen in place when the leader is out of range.

And I don't understand this part:

?(Not Ready unit < voicerange):  Leader unit Say "something audible so he can be detected"

What does that mean?

Idea #2:

The problem here is that your group would CONSTANTLY be changing size, so you would lose #2, then gain him back as #8, and so on and so forth. It might be a pain, but it would be worth trying.

Actually, I really love this idea though.  I think the part about wandering around and controlling ANYBODY that you come in range of is a very interesting concept. It would be awesome in a very large battle to just run around, grab a group of soldiers, whoop it on until half your squad dies, then retreat and grab some more soldiers that aren't fighting right now. This would be especially cool if the enemies and friendlies respawned.

[ACF]

Idea 1 - 'stopping' units out of range:
The practicality of this one pretty much depends on the AI keeping the unit where it was last sent - there would be enough checking of the position of units relative to the leader.
My worry is that the units will literally 'stop' out of range and just stand about waiting to be slotted - much what you've implied.  Having thought about it a bit more, wouldn't the stop be overridden by the next order anyway?
The 'say' bit was just a thought  that the AI might usefully react to the 'noise' of leaders passing verbal commands.  That idea would have withered on the vine because of the extreme effort in getting them to say something useful instead of just 'noise'.

Idea 2 - dynamic group (can I TM that?):
It's not a problem - that's the simulation!
The group you [would] control [in real life] effectively does change size as units move (or are moved) in and out of earshot.  If he can't hear you, you can't call him to you, you have to go to him (that's partly why proportionately more junior officers and NCOs become casualties). And, within a little, one bundle of DPM, webbing, weapons etc. looks much like another so the who's who issue is also an inconvenient consequence in the real world.
I may have misread him, but I think Drozdov's aim is to mimic the pain/difficulty/lottery of verbal comms.

Anyhoo, it's all really down to whether or not AI units maintain their 'orders' once they've been GrpNull-ed.
Hmm - what if they weren't GrpNulled - could a single unit be defined as a group with it's own name? But it still comes down to whether the unit a) sticks with the order you gave it or b) makes up its own mind because it's now the leader of its own one-man group.

I'm just going to have to try this now, aren't I?  Anyone available to pack for my holiday???

[ACF]

Idea 1 Update
Given up with that one. If you issue order A, ‘stop' the unit, issue order B then un-‘stop' the unit, order B gets executed.  They still hear you.

Idea 2 Update
OK - something to play with  . . .

Two triggers: ‘inearshot' to list who's in earshot and ‘updatepos'  to update both triggers' positions - and the arrays of who is in and out of earshot - when the player moves out of the updatepos trigger

Problems to be overcome (that I've noticed so far) are:
Men and groups of men work fine, vehicles don't.  Could be overcome in a script and building an array of men and crew from the trigger's list of men and vehicles. (What happens if only vehicle commanders Join the player, I wonder??)
Group size may need to be limited by scripting.
When the player approaches ‘free' units, the Join order overrides whatever it was they are doing - perhaps a default halt (DoStop?) command for joiners would be less disruptive - needs to be automatically cancelled by the next order you give?
If the player doesn't move, units can be controlled as normal - i.e. anywhere on the island.
If the player moves and a unit is GrpNulled before it completes its order, the unit halts - but at least its 'Behaviour' is preserved.
The two issues above could be countered in a script - triggers could only update when all player's units are ‘ready'.
Earlier idea to record joiners original group seems unworkable as ungrouped units would disappear over the hills and far away to rejoin their lost comrades.
Haven't EnableRadio false'd - not sure you need to?

On the plus side: it does promote battlefield confusion/chaos and you could dispense with the updatepos trigger if it's scripted!

Does it seem workable?

Now I'm going to execute me AssignAsCargo bed.