Satmax

I noticed quite a few Urals coming to Paraiso from the south road (somato?). They just seem to drive up and stop. I took a shot at one with my 136 and infantry jumped out. Are all Urals usually carrying infantry? I think Urals would be a better way for the AI to bring in reinforcements with the surrounding cover making it harder to get a good shot on them with 136s or Javelins. I noticed that Urals weren't the only vehicles coming from the south either. Later into the mission before the radio tower was taken down, Barnacle and I took out a UAZ and BMP that were flying up that south road.

I think ground reinforcements would be a lot better than the Mi-17s. In Domination, when that random "Oh crud, counterattack!" happens, they roll in with lots of infantry and armor. If something like that could happen but be toned down a bit, I think it would feel a bit more in place and would probably keep the stat padding down.

tHa_KhAn

I know some individuals will always rather have a vulcan up shooting down the Mi-17's, but we could add it to the SOP's to avoid setting up vulcan's where they will intercept all reinforcements. Stinger's are less of a problem. If anyone is carrying enough ammo to destroy all reinforcements, they are not focused on clearing the tower. Plus one stinger never destroys any aircraft so the troops would still bail.

I think this will end up being one of those problems that really is only caused by nefarious individuals who are think it is a greater accomplishment to clear the city with less resistance as opposed to average game play.

__________________

loyalguard

Ok, here is a progress report.

I have resolved B.1. in single player testing. All players should now have immediate access to all weps in the ammo crates. It just needs testing in MP and we should be good to go.

B.2. I ran a comparison test today of different types of air strike munitions: The hellfire (from the build of the current beta), the GBU-12 (that I inserted after the helfire),and the Maverick (after the GBU-12). I compared explosions and craters and can confirm that last the current beta (that we tested last night) is the Hellfire. I took video of all three tests and can post it later showing the explosions and effects. I even have close up still frames of the missile/bomb right before impact. They are not skinned completely but you can compare shapes and tell that they are the correct munitions. One thing I noticed is that when I turned off MadMatt's ArmA effects the explosions are much easier to distinguish. I am going to consider this one resolved and keep the hellfire in place...big thanks to Insanatrix for his help.

B.3 and B.4 are still an enigma to me. As far as I know, these only affected Gogeta last night so I am hoping it was an isolated incident. I had to kick him at one point so he could reconnect to avoid multiple instances so perhaps this is the root of the problem. I am going to keep this open but inactive to find a solution unless the problem occurs again.

E.1 and E.2 could be caused by numerous things. After we adjust the A.I. reinforcements we'll have a better idea of where we stand.

For S.1 I have some code written and ready to try for a simulated mortar salvo as soon as I can get my wife off my gaming machine (is nothing sacred?). I will video this as well for eval.

Now for the biggie: S.2. As noted above I can confirm that reinforcements arrive by ground in the form of light and armored vehicles and infantry. The also arrive from the MI-17 via paradrop.

I should easily be able to do any of the following:

1) Slow down the rate/interval of arrival of ground reinforcements.

2) Stop ground reinforcements all together.

3) Slow down the rate/interval of the arrival of paradrop reinforcements.

4) Stop paradrop reinforcements all together.

Whatever changes we make I will announce them exactly as to not spoil the mission, but I am looking for suggested guidelines.

In all, I happy so far and will hopefully have a new build (a release candidate: RC1) ready very soon for some longer term testing.

__________________
|TG| LoyalGuard

Barnaby

Good work Loyal it reads well.
Looking forward to some long term exposure in RC1.

__________________
"I like a man who grins when he fights"
Sir Winston Churchill

tHa_KhAn

For stability I say adjust the rates of the paradrops. To me that seems like a more intensive than a small ground force. Maybe adjust the rates of both for stability then tweak the air drops a little more. I would expect air reinforcements to be less regular anyway.

__________________

BarnacleofDoom

I agree with Khan regarding adjusting the paradrops. I don't know for sure, but I suspect that the paradrops may have been a significant part of the frequent CTDs that we experienced last night. If you'd like, we can try to beta a couple versions, one without paradrops and another with reduced paradrops to compare stability.

During the next beta, we'll have to retry Gogeta's SL problems, hopefully both with him and others (I think that others were able to use the slot w/o problems, I'd like to confirm to ensure that the slot working wasn't a fluke).

loyalguard

I am working on a formula for reinforcements and should have it coded today to include in RC1. See also a post from KilJoy in the BIS forums:
I tested the mortar last night and was unimpressed with using the Camel grenade or the M203. Theire respective indirect blast radii are too small. I did try the 40mm grenade (Edit: I meant to say the non-timed hand grenade) which is better (but not quite the same as the blast radius as a 60mm HE mortar shell). I will include it in the disabled "Large Artillery Slot" (renamed as 60mm mortar) for RC1 but will continue to look for a better munition choice. It will have a much smaller overall round distribution radius than the 105mm artillery (I am shooting for 35m) but it will fire 10 shells in 15 seconds and will be available again within 60 seconds of the the last round impacting.

__________________
|TG| LoyalGuard

Gillespie

That's strange. The M203 is a 40mm grenade.

__________________
<ArmA Information/SOPs> <ArmA Admin Team> <TG Req. Reading>

loyalguard

Whoops...I meant to say the non-time hand grenade (used by the SLA) instead of the 40mm m203 or the came grenade. Thanks for the correction!

I will edit above.

__________________
|TG| LoyalGuard

BarnacleofDoom

Is it possible to also have an illumination salvo as well, using the 203 flares?

Also: with both the mortar and arty scripts, would it be a good idea to double the time interval between available salvos, e.g. 5 min to 10 min? That way, rather then having some sort of strike available every 2 1/2 minutes or so it would be every 5 minutes.

loyalguard

I can look into that...I could insert an illumination salvo in the disabled chemical slot per chance. I will experiment. Do we also want the option for smoke?

Regarding the timing, we can tweak this as we go if necessary. From here out all release candidates will have intended time limits (unlike the beta session). So, let's stick with the 5 mins for each right now and see how it goes. If it still appears overwhelming I have no problem adjusting it before releasing v1.0.

__________________
|TG| LoyalGuard

tHa_KhAn

Smoke....now that's a good option. How well does it work on A.I. though? If they see through it, then no don't waste your time. If they don't, then it could be very useful for covering open ground or concealing a tracked tank or something for repairs.

__________________

JAMerica

As far as I remember, they can't see through it...or least it detracts from their uber abilities

__________________

--------------------------------------------
Jamerius (Feral Druid)

loyalguard

I've got smoke and illumination mortar rounds working. Smoke fires 5 smoke shells in a 30 meter radius of the target. Flares are white and right now I have them "bursting" at 100m above ground. Anyone know at what height they should "burst" to be accurate?

__________________
|TG| LoyalGuard

Insanatrix

prolly around 100-150m.

__________________