Re: The CoC Command Engine for ArmA

**Dslyecxi** · 08-21-2007, 02:32 AM

A few new shots from the latest version.

There's a lot of great new functionality in this one, and it seems to be getting very close to a public release. I don't know how much TG may utilize this tool, but I do know that it's going to redefine how ShackTac works.

**Barnaby** · 08-21-2007, 04:32 AM

Very impressive presentation.
But that's it for me this is great for planning, briefing or as part of an AAR debrief but I feel that's too much, certainly for me as an in battle tool.

I tend to lean towards WWII more rather than Star Wars.
I can see that this displaying while engaging would deliver a max of information I'm just worried this would out think the ArmA stategies and destroy the ArmA experience some what.

How have you found it when you have tested it Dslyecxi does it add to the experiece or does it allow for a quick defeat of the Ai's.

Mnnnn maybe this could work more in the T-v-T environment.

Praise be for all the effort.

I'm more used to a blood stained, crumpled and creased, ripped tea ringed covered map scenario with grunts fully engaged in the fighting decissions.

I'll be interested in seeing it in action.
Regards

Now where's that Pigeon gone.................

EDIT
OK I've gone back and read through a little more carefully and I can see if I have understood correctly that you can contol the level of detail showing ie you can drill down to show everything or pull out to just show the Squad location.

**Dslyecxi** · 08-21-2007, 09:26 AM

I cannot speak for how other groups will use it or how it might affect them, but I can tell you what it means for ShackTac.

CEX allows us to take our standard platoon organization (described on http://www.dslyecxi.com/armattp2.html ) and put it in a form that can be controlled robustly by any leader in the game. It allows us to visualize our movements in a fashion that is above and beyond what is possible with just in-game tools - instead of dorking around with clumsy map markers to give a path to a unit, we can now have the appropriate leader give a detailed pathing of the element, which the element leader can then modify as they see fit based on their assessment of METT-T factors. We can give sectors of observation down to the element level, use the CEX functionality to allow for all sorts of mission-specific functionality (ie calling in support), use it to coordinate the loading of helicopters or vehicles, and so on and so forth.

Additionally, CEX allows us to command any number or type of AI elements. This includes having one or more people acting as OPFOR commanders who can maneuver the enemy forces and act as an intelligent, thinking foe.

I can see that this displaying while engaging would deliver a max of information I'm just worried this would out think the ArmA stategies and destroy the ArmA experience some what.

I don't believe this is the case at all. There is very little different in this from how we normally play (meaning, ShackTac - if you've played a ShackTac mission on TG, you've seen the default ShackTac BASf fireteam markers), it's just an extra tool for visualization and communications. Considering the very real and restricted comm issues present in ArmA, this is a needed tool for a group of our size.

OK I've gone back and read through a little more carefully and I can see if I have understood correctly that you can contol the level of detail showing ie you can drill down to show everything or pull out to just show the Squad location.

It's all configurable.

CEX is the future for us, no questions asked. Whether that is the case for TG is questionable and out of my lane.

**jex** · 08-21-2007, 09:37 AM

Great work, this will make it so much easier for the CO to organise large scale battles (and even small ones). I see this as the CO drawing lines on a map and telling the army to get going.

Presumably these waypoints won't show up on the map and we'll have to actually use the map to get to our destination?

**Shiner** · 08-21-2007, 10:11 AM

I see how you can control AI very accurately with this, but how does it work if you have an entire team of players? Does each player "join" a fireteam and then one is designated as a fireteam leader?

**Barnaby** · 08-21-2007, 10:51 AM

Dslyecxi thanks for the link I already have that as a favourite and visit regularly.
The strength of your explanation is moving my tipping point to more in than out of favour with CEX. What does CEX stand for I don't think I've read that anywhere.
I have asked on our TG forums for a standard/unification with Icons etc so this could be a step in that direction.
Something else I was asking for was a more emphathetic approach ie a set of pre-rendered icons around the map that you could just point and position a copy down onto the map.
Have you got any short vids that show CEX working.

By the way this is just my opinion and in the world of TG that is very small beer indeed.

Regards

PS I also have an interest from reading your webby for the ACE mod, how advanced is that now, I have never operated under that but it does sound superb.

EDIT
Are there any later updates for ACE & CoC as both seem to refer to OFP???

**mingmong** · 08-21-2007, 02:32 PM

Originally Posted by Shiner

I see how you can control AI very accurately with this, but how does it work if you have an entire team of players? Does each player "join" a fireteam and then one is designated as a fireteam leader?

It's down to the mission maker - If he had three five man teams called A, B and C then he would tie that into the CEX engine and they would come up as A B and C on the map. The CEX engine is actually a part of the mission. You've played MOUT movement, and the way it is divided up into fireteams and squads - a map of MOUT movement would look similar to the screenshots dsl showed, as they both use the standardised framework of fireteams, squads and platoons. It's up to the mission maker how he sets up the ORBAT for CEX.

**Shiner** · 08-22-2007, 10:34 AM

Originally Posted by mingmong

It's down to the mission maker - If he had three five man teams called A, B and C then he would tie that into the CEX engine and they would come up as A B and C on the map. The CEX engine is actually a part of the mission. You've played MOUT movement, and the way it is divided up into fireteams and squads - a map of MOUT movement would look similar to the screenshots dsl showed, as they both use the standardised framework of fireteams, squads and platoons. It's up to the mission maker how he sets up the ORBAT for CEX.

Ok, I see how this will work well for preplanned sessions, but what about the typical day? The problem with "preset" squads in TvT is that outside of "events", you can't know if you will have 30 people on a side or 5 and it will likely vary even during the execution of a mission. For my 2 cents, I would want a completely different squad structure in those two situations and all the granularity in-between.

**Dslyecxi** · 08-22-2007, 11:16 AM

Originally Posted by Shiner

Ok, I see how this will work well for preplanned sessions, but what about the typical day? The problem with "preset" squads in TvT is that outside of "events", you can't know if you will have 30 people on a side or 5 and it will likely vary even during the execution of a mission. For my 2 cents, I would want a completely different squad structure in those two situations and all the granularity in-between.

The types of mission you're thinking about are a pretty dramatic departure from the types of missions that a team like CoC is interested in and developing towards. Is there a chance that they'll develop features towards what you're talking about in the future? Possibly, I'm sure, but I know their priority is focused elsewhere. I suppose they're more aligned towards the ShackTac style of gameplay than the current TG one.

**Shiner** · 08-24-2007, 09:06 AM

Originally Posted by Dslyecxi

The types of mission you're thinking about are a pretty dramatic departure from the types of missions that a team like CoC is interested in and developing towards. Is there a chance that they'll develop features towards what you're talking about in the future? Possibly, I'm sure, but I know their priority is focused elsewhere. I suppose they're more aligned towards the ShackTac style of gameplay than the current TG one.

Do you guys run a preplanned event every night or just a few nights during the week? What do you do on those nights were you don't have 60 players on the server?

**mingmong** · 08-24-2007, 12:40 PM

Saturday evening is our major game, where we would have those sort of numbers. On those other nights where we've got 20 max players on, we would either play "non-serious" missions, Battle Drills, or small one/two squad coops.

**Dslyecxi** · 08-24-2007, 03:54 PM

Originally Posted by Shiner

Do you guys run a preplanned event every night or just a few nights during the week? What do you do on those nights were you don't have 60 players on the server?

A platoon breaks down logically, so whenever we have less than that, we just fill up by squad. The CEX stuff still applies to those situations - instead of a PltCo leading three squads, we may have a SL leading three fireteams, or whatever. It all scales.

**alexandermottram** · 08-25-2007, 03:37 PM

Seems to me that this program isjust a little bit of overkill.

**Dslyecxi** · 08-25-2007, 04:10 PM

Originally Posted by alexandermottram

Seems to me that this program isjust a little bit of overkill.

For you, perhaps. For us, it's a huge deal and perfectly supports the way we organize and play.

**Shiner** · 08-25-2007, 05:11 PM

Dys when can we start getting the code for this? I'm interested in incorporating this into Domination to supplement/replace the Command and Control interface I have been developing.