Displaying objective status

  1. 8 years ago

    Hello AliVE community!

    I am quite new to the AliVE-scene but I love it a lot. I've made a mission with asymmetrical warefare and everything seems to work just fine. One thing we've noticed, is that we tend to get disoriented. For example, our mission has 40 civilian objectives. OPCOM captures three adject to eachother. We assaulted one of them and cleared the whole city center and nearby patrols, but we did not know if we captured the city or if it was still OPFOR territory.

    We'd imagined that you should have a team do scouting with helicopters/patrols to check whether cities are occupied ore not; but we do not have a big squad so we cannot do ground and patrol ops at the same moment.

    Question 1: Is there any way to have the map display which objectives are in BLUFOR and OPFOR hands? I tried the C2ISTAR but thought it only showed where enemies were spotted and not which were actually under control.

    The second question I have is with the occupation of cities. We would love to have something with BLUFOR reinforcements coming to 'hold' a town once we've cleared it; but we do not want lots of BLUFOR squads clearing towns for themselfs. Could it be possible to have BLUFOR occupy a town after we've cleared it? Or something where we could play the role of BLUFOR-commander.

    Question 2: Is it possible to have BLUFOR troops occupy ('hold') the town after we have cleared it?

    Thanks in advance!

    Wouter

  2. Something I've just thought of: the best solution might be an BLUFOR-AI commander set to "defend only". This would probably do what we want to accomplish, but I do not know if this is currently possible with the AI-commanders.

  3. Edited 8 years ago by SavageCDN

    #1 - yes it's a bit of a trick but it shows the AI objectives on the map. Go into both AI Commander modules and turn on debug. The only downside is that sidechat will be spammed with OPCOM orders, but you could possibly disable whatever sidechat channel it uses (probably global or system)

    #2 - if it's an objective that is recognized by OPCOM then it will send group(s) to defend it. The number of groups will depend on the size (and priority?) of the objective.

    Set the AI Commander to Occupation - this will spread out the groups over all objectives at mission start. Set it to Invasion and all groups will spawn near the MP module (or perhaps it's the HQ.. can't remember ATM).

    ** OOPS I AM WRONG!!! **

    Only difference between Occupy and Invade is the number of groups left to defend vs attack the next objective. Occupy leave most in defence, Invade will send most to attack

  4. Thanks for the quick reply. I will try to turn debugging on to see if it is what we are looking for.

  5. Edited 8 years ago by BlackAlpha

    I'd like to make a suggestion to include functionality that the OP is asking for. In my community we run into the same issue.

    There should be more tools available that inform you on the current status of the war.

    On that note, intel generated by C2ISTAR disappears too quickly. If you are busy fighting and don't check the map for a few minutes, you will probably miss a bunch of important markers. Would be nice if you could choose how long those markers last.

  6. Yes, it would be very nice if something like this could be implemented. For example, last night we had cleared out a few towns and spotted two recruitement HQ's. We called in CAS and bombed it with GBU-12.

    We were unsure if the town was 'safe' now so we enabled OPCOM info, and the base was still marked on it; even after 10 minutes. We had no idea if we could leave the area now or not. Would be nice if there was an option to inform you of the status.

  7. Friznit

    29 May 2015 Administrator

    We're considering it. ALiVE is built from the ground up to have the minimum amount of gamey 'magic' as possible - information gathering, int analysis and decision making should be up to the players using the tools available (advanced markers, sitreps, UAVs, recce parties etc). However, we are aware that not all players want to put this level of effort into the strategic side of the game and are considering developing the autonomous ISTAR module further in future.

  8. I wouldn't necessarily call it "gamey" at the moment. In my experience, generally desiring as realistic a game as I can get, I have been routinely frustrated by how ALiVE tags buildings themselves as objectives without giving me any indication whatsoever that that building is the objective.

    The most recent and facepalming example was a Chernarus factory chimney tagged as a weapons factory. Not the factory building, the chimney next to it. Oh sure the little village had defenders in it, so certainly we were clued in that there was something there. But it wasn't until a dozen players made multiple full circuits that we finally gave up and toggled on the momentary objective markers to find out what we'd missed. Sure enough, a chimney was the factory building. And here we are trying to win over the populace against an Asymmetric OPCOM and our only method of success is to level their infrastructure.

    There was absolutely no way we could have ever determined that chimney was the key building, and had we not toggled on the momentary intel overlay we'd have been facing endless reinforcements despite our having done everything within our power without resorting to "gamey".

    Until ALiVE can more reliably select filter to only reasonable buildings as objectives, or better still not make it buildings but merely objects thereby separating destroying objectives from destroying map objects - which isn't likely soon I imagine - I don't think it is particularly "gamey" to have a workaround for ALiVE's own shortcomings.

    ----

    Please don't misunderstand, ALiVE has provided me with some fantastic Arma sessions. I criticize because I enjoy it and want to see it better, that is all.

  9. Friznit

    6 Jun 2015 Administrator

    What you are criticizing so eloquently is not actually what the OP asked and is not a military intel function, it's user feedback which is a different matter entirely.

    You have a valid point which is that we are wholly reliant on map objects to determine the existence of civilian infrastructure using procedural scripts despite the many and varied contexts in which those building types could be used by different map makers (as an aside, this is also what makes indexing maps so challenging). As in your example, this can lead to some less than ideal situations where it's really not obvious what the target object is.

    We've only recently been able spawn generic object groups in game on the Objective locations so it's conceivable that we could script the objects to be the determining factor in completing relevant tasks (e.g. blow up IED making equipment as opposed to blow up building that it's in).

  10. @Friznit We've only recently been able spawn generic object groups in game on the Objective locations so it's conceivable that we could script the objects to be the determining factor in completing relevant tasks (e.g. blow up IED making equipment as opposed to blow up building that it's in).

    With ACE3's interfacing that would be freaking awesome.

 

or Sign Up to reply!