dynamic mission objective multiplay - Page 2

Fish · 11-25-06, 06:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by suBB

Quote:

Originally Posted by suBB

Question:

Can you spawn a destination trigger using dynamic location? :hmm: Something tells me no but it never hurts to ask.

Answer:

No... but you can use dynamic group to do it

Good to see your still on the job.

suBB · 11-26-06, 01:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fish

Quote:

Originally Posted by suBB

Quote:

Originally Posted by suBB

Question:

Can you spawn a destination trigger using dynamic location? :hmm: Something tells me no but it never hurts to ask.

Answer:

No... but you can use dynamic group to do it

Good to see your still on the job.

It’s good to be back on the job, Fish, not so long ago I even talked myself into scratching it and starting anew with the newfound knowledge and understanding of editing, but we’ve come too far and learned so much in the process - it just doesn't make sense to give up now, i'd say .

It’s a job all right… one doctrine and script at a time.

I’m really thankful for the learning experience behind it all. That should make the next go-around less painful. And man I can’t wait for next go-around.

After this I think I’m going to enjoy the fruits of hard labor for a bit. But ideas and layout on the next map based on the criteria as well as some newfound tricks with dynamic group are already in place / WIP.

Fish · 11-26-06, 05:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by suBB

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fish

Quote:

Originally Posted by suBB

Quote:

Originally Posted by suBB

Question:

Can you spawn a destination trigger using dynamic location? :hmm: Something tells me no but it never hurts to ask.

Answer:

No... but you can use dynamic group to do it

Good to see your still on the job.

It’s good to be back on the job, Fish, not so long ago I even talked myself into scratching it and starting anew with the newfound knowledge and understanding of editing, but we’ve come too far and learned so much in the process - it just doesn't make sense to give up now, i'd say .

It’s a job all right… one doctrine and script at a time.

I’m really thankful for the learning experience behind it all. That should make the next go-around less painful. And man I can’t wait for next go-around.

After this I think I’m going to enjoy the fruits of hard labor for a bit. But ideas and layout on the next map based on the criteria as well as some newfound tricks with dynamic group are already in place / WIP.

The workarounds, when they work, are the best, give you a good feeling.

Palindromeria · 12-02-06, 12:00 AM

i think you have alot of good ideas and wish you luck.

my comment on the following point is a general observation with regard to mission briefings, ]

<< how many times people asked me “what do I do now? What’s the mission objective?” during beta testing – its right there in tasking – read it! >>

i recently played a stock mission in which the pre game briefing was some 5 paragraphs long. start and i come up to comms depths. got 2 more paragraphs of info regarding world politics and finally a smidge of enemy pos.

the entire 7 paragraphs could have been reduced to

"locate and sink 3 enemy ships that are currently heading your way from the SE."

SeaQueen · 12-02-06, 08:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Palindromeria

"locate and sink 3 enemy ships that are currently heading your way from the SE."

That's pretty typical in my experience. Something I read once in a Marine Corps publication about how to write good orders struck me as really important. They should be extrordinarily succinct and unambigious. All of this talk of world politics is interesting, but it belongs in the scenario notes or scenario description.

suBB · 12-02-06, 01:37 PM

We really appreciate your feedback – thanks a lot!!

Believe me when I say I am taking your concerns to heart and radio messaging / tasking is not nor will it ever be a 300 page novel received from a floating wire or antenna or ELF messaging.

We share the same concerns and since this is intentionally for multiplayer, as well as single player capable, I rather keep tasking / intel updates brief and to the point minus all the extra fluff. For a couple of reasons: It provides just enough information you need to get the job done and less writing on my part.

I don’t know if anyone of you have been following that thread, Tales of Danwat, but basically I posted an A.A.R. of the akula there. I’ve had previous experiences in the akula where I failed to intercept the 688, or even when I intercepted and destroyed the 688, I managed to make it within a few hundred yards of securing general quarters over distance and high speeds - I was somewhat in a hurry. Getting there however involved dodging torpedoes and buoys to the best of my ability until it finally caught up with me. I also owe the author of the thread an A.A.R. of the 688, basically the flip side of the akula’s perspective. I’ll post that one when I reach a stopping point in editing.

Check it out here: http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=101338

Also be aware that ROE is in effect on this map and conditions are provided in mission tasking for all controllable platforms at time of spawn and not in briefing when you are selecting platforms.

We’ve also decided that ROE will be apart of a new standard for more maps to come from us, as well as some other features we think are key to the experience. So in that regard, if ROE is violated intentionally or unintentionally it will result in mission incomplete for both sides.

suBB · 01-08-07, 11:25 AM

Does anyone know of an absolute limit to how many triggers and scripts you can use on a map, I’m exceeding 500 triggers now and scripts at over 350.

suBB · 01-27-07, 11:25 AM

:hmm::hmm::hmm:

The more I keep thinking about this, the more it keeps making sense now.

In light of 1.04 and lwami 3.04 I’d say we’ve reached a stopping point and the map is pretty much finished, and working, i should say i can't find anymore bugs at this point

But after what we’ve been through in the learning process of editing, things didn’t turn out the way we expected them to this time around, but still with the right idea and timing it will fly.

Almost a year ago I knew what I wanted to see come into existence, but wasn’t really sure how to put it into words, or if it even made sense then. Now when I think of dynamic mission objective, ‘on the fly tasking’ comes to mind, like in fleet command, where platforms will receive basically an additional set of orders at any given moment based on the situation.

I want to say we will deliberately miss the mark on this note, because now that I know what to look for, I could code D.M.O. into this map, but I rather not because I feel something like that needs to be accounted for in the front end of the design, and not at the finish line or midstream so to speak. However that could change once 3.04 comes out because I need to see how the map will react to the new patch and mod. In the same token D.M.O does exist in the form of random intelligence that affect standing orders of playables sent by either AI or human players when / if the opportunity permits, once again as the situation changes.:hmm:

Interestingly enough, it seems we ended up creating something we best describe as ‘dynamic situation objective’. The tasking(standing orders) remain the same, but based on what happens between start in finish, under the conditions of ROE provided in tasking for all playables, the current state of the situation, and level of intelligence gathered and shared with allied platforms, those factors will affect the chances of more than one possible outcome for all platforms involved. We’ve made it as such where if ROE is violated it will result in mission can’t be completed by either side, and a message is sent globally to all playables.

In this case, mission outcome isn’t just shooting at any and everything with a tonal or an emission, although that is one possible outcome. The outcome is also destination sensitive, such as a 688 trying to reach dive point with FFG / helo escort, while RU tries to intercept. Or if RU forces manage to infiltrate the helo and ffg and intercept and sink the 688, will either the akula or kilo, or both, make it out alive... or not. OR any other possible outcome depending on the design.

Right now, all playables are spawned into the scenario with enough information to work with, and based on the choices made by players, and AI, will affect the chance of more than one possible outcome. Coding AI has been a job in itself, but we've made it such where AI will pretty much think and act as a human would, meaning checking sonar baffles, comms check intervals and link promotion if contacts are made, not reacting in haste to active sonar, provide long range support, etc. Sometimes, AI will even violate ROE.

The big question I had then was does dynamic mission objective on MP level exist? With the right planning and idea – most definitely

And this thread is long overdue for a revision, now that we know exactly what to do - and what not to do. Plus so much has changed since then.

BIG THANKS to those who helped us reach this point and acquire this level of knowledge, wisdom and understanding.

suBB · 02-15-07, 03:08 PM

UPDATE: 2-15-07

We are now entering session 5 of MP testing and the results (re: dynamic mission objective MP) are quite amazing.

I was kidding myself thinking we missed the mark in achieving in-game dynamics on the MP level, but actual data is indicating otherwise.

In short the map is highly sensitive to change of events and there is just no telling how things will pan out at any given moment, or how things will end up. More importantly everyone(AI & humans) are affected by it at the same time, and by that point it's really up to how they both (ai or humans)
react to / handle the change of events. Sometimes AI won't even follow the scripting made for it, and for what we are trying to do, that's a good thing.

I'm / I've generating / generated test session AARs as data and after reviewing them I still see evidence where an ever-changing 'small change' will affect the chances for everyone else, mission tasking of platforms and / or lead to one of several possible outcomes. One of those outcomes include 'staying alive', where ownship must survive.

How does that differ from anything else? from personal experience, most mission objective MP I've played with others are pretty much limited to one approach, one outcome, always in favor of success, omitting the chance of failure, other than being destroyed, among other things.

The presence of LWAMI 3.07 has introduced some new tricks for AI, as well as new features that are also in place and available for the next map design.

Things are looking pretty good... Let's continue on.

Short-term objectives:

1.. Conclude preliminary MP testing / tweaking

2.. Finalize Features list / new standard, credits, file for distribution.

3.. Final MP testing @ 'full tilt' / last minute changes.

4.. Final version release.

That's all for now.

suBB · 02-18-07, 04:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by suBB

UPDATE: 2-15-07

We are now entering session 5 of MP testing and the results (re: dynamic mission objective MP) are quite amazing.

I was kidding myself thinking we missed the mark in achieving in-game dynamics on the MP level, but actual data is indicating otherwise.

In short the map is highly sensitive to change of events and there is just no telling how things will pan out at any given moment, or how things will end up. More importantly everyone(AI & humans) are affected by it at the same time, and by that point it's really up to how they both (ai or humans)
react to / handle the change of events. Sometimes AI won't even follow the scripting made for it, and for what we are trying to do, that's a good thing.

I'm / I've generating / generated test session AARs as data and after reviewing them I still see evidence where an ever-changing 'small change' will affect the chances for everyone else, mission tasking of platforms and / or lead to one of several possible outcomes. One of those outcomes include 'staying alive', where ownship must survive.

How does that differ from anything else? from personal experience, most mission objective MP I've played with others are pretty much limited to one approach, one outcome, always in favor of success, omitting the chance of failure, other than being destroyed, among other things.

The presence of LWAMI 3.07 has introduced some new tricks for AI, as well as new features that are also in place and available for the next map design.

Things are looking pretty good... Let's continue on.

Short-term objectives:

1.. Conclude preliminary MP testing / tweaking

2.. Finalize Features list / new standard, credits, file for distribution.

3.. Final MP testing @ 'full tilt' / last minute changes.

4.. Final version release.

That's all for now.

MUCH THANKS guys…. for helping out in testing right now and your suggestions in making things better.

Changes have been made and they checked out in base-line tests. Also, it can be triggered by either human or AI controlled platforms, and is currently in place on main map. Shouldn’t be any problem in MP tests since it’s more of the same of what is currently in place and functioning. Also I made some slight changes in mission tasking and made triggering more robust.

There is one small change I need to make but it isn’t a showstopper. So let me worry about that, you just concern yourselves with testing.

I can do that in downtime.

I’m expecting more people to pour in next week, probably to the point of multi station dives, which is definitely on the agenda.

See ya soon guys.

suBB · 03-09-07, 09:38 AM

The map has been finally released and made available to the public, however this thread is out-dated and is no longer accurate in description of the map.

Please visit the following link for the most accurate information regarding this map.

http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=107019

Thank you

suBB · 04-20-07, 09:56 PM

by advised:

we found some issues in v1.0 and v1.01 will be released shortly.

Thank you.

suBB · 05-21-07, 01:07 AM

done..

v1.01 is available for download, view readme for list of changes.

Mirrors:

1.. http://subb.bravehost.com/ConflictingInterestsv1.01.zip

2.. http://www.commanders-academy.com/fo...0&postcount=81

We hope you enjoy!!!

01-27-07, 11:25 AM	#23
suBB Chief Join Date: Dec 2005 Posts: 326 Downloads: 5 Uploads: 0	you betcha :) :hmm::hmm::hmm: The more I keep thinking about this, the more it keeps making sense now. In light of 1.04 and lwami 3.04 I’d say we’ve reached a stopping point and the map is pretty much finished, and working, i should say i can't find anymore bugs at this point But after what we’ve been through in the learning process of editing, things didn’t turn out the way we expected them to this time around, but still with the right idea and timing it will fly. Almost a year ago I knew what I wanted to see come into existence, but wasn’t really sure how to put it into words, or if it even made sense then. Now when I think of dynamic mission objective, ‘on the fly tasking’ comes to mind, like in fleet command, where platforms will receive basically an additional set of orders at any given moment based on the situation. I want to say we will deliberately miss the mark on this note, because now that I know what to look for, I could code D.M.O. into this map, but I rather not because I feel something like that needs to be accounted for in the front end of the design, and not at the finish line or midstream so to speak. However that could change once 3.04 comes out because I need to see how the map will react to the new patch and mod. In the same token D.M.O does exist in the form of random intelligence that affect standing orders of playables sent by either AI or human players when / if the opportunity permits, once again as the situation changes.:hmm: Interestingly enough, it seems we ended up creating something we best describe as ‘dynamic situation objective’. The tasking(standing orders) remain the same, but based on what happens between start in finish, under the conditions of ROE provided in tasking for all playables, the current state of the situation, and level of intelligence gathered and shared with allied platforms, those factors will affect the chances of more than one possible outcome for all platforms involved. We’ve made it as such where if ROE is violated it will result in mission can’t be completed by either side, and a message is sent globally to all playables. In this case, mission outcome isn’t just shooting at any and everything with a tonal or an emission, although that is one possible outcome. The outcome is also destination sensitive, such as a 688 trying to reach dive point with FFG / helo escort, while RU tries to intercept. Or if RU forces manage to infiltrate the helo and ffg and intercept and sink the 688, will either the akula or kilo, or both, make it out alive... or not. OR any other possible outcome depending on the design. Right now, all playables are spawned into the scenario with enough information to work with, and based on the choices made by players, and AI, will affect the chance of more than one possible outcome. Coding AI has been a job in itself, but we've made it such where AI will pretty much think and act as a human would, meaning checking sonar baffles, comms check intervals and link promotion if contacts are made, not reacting in haste to active sonar, provide long range support, etc. Sometimes, AI will even violate ROE. The big question I had then was does dynamic mission objective on MP level exist? With the right planning and idea – most definitely And this thread is long overdue for a revision, now that we know exactly what to do - and what not to do. Plus so much has changed since then. BIG THANKS to those who helped us reach this point and acquire this level of knowledge, wisdom and understanding. Last edited by suBB; 01-28-07 at 07:12 PM.

03-09-07, 09:38 AM	#26
suBB Chief Join Date: Dec 2005 Posts: 326 Downloads: 5 Uploads: 0	The map has been finally released and made available to the public, however this thread is out-dated and is no longer accurate in description of the map. Please visit the following link for the most accurate information regarding this map. http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=107019 Thank you __________________ Dynamic Mission Objective MP / Download Available Freelancers’ guild / DW mission objectives MP

04-20-07, 09:56 PM	#27
suBB Chief Join Date: Dec 2005 Posts: 326 Downloads: 5 Uploads: 0	by advised: we found some issues in v1.0 and v1.01 will be released shortly. Thank you. __________________ Dynamic Mission Objective MP / Download Available Freelancers’ guild / DW mission objectives MP

05-21-07, 01:07 AM	#28
suBB Chief Join Date: Dec 2005 Posts: 326 Downloads: 5 Uploads: 0	done.. v1.01 is available for download, view readme for list of changes. Mirrors: 1.. http://subb.bravehost.com/ConflictingInterestsv1.01.zip 2.. http://www.commanders-academy.com/fo...0&postcount=81 We hope you enjoy!!! __________________ Dynamic Mission Objective MP / Download Available Freelancers’ guild / DW mission objectives MP

12-02-06, 12:00 AM	#19
Palindromeria Planesman Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: Brooklyn NY Posts: 199 Downloads: 0 Uploads: 0	i think you have alot of good ideas and wish you luck. my comment on the following point is a general observation with regard to mission briefings, ] << how many times people asked me “what do I do now? What’s the mission objective?” during beta testing – its right there in tasking – read it! >> i recently played a stock mission in which the pre game briefing was some 5 paragraphs long. start and i come up to comms depths. got 2 more paragraphs of info regarding world politics and finally a smidge of enemy pos. the entire 7 paragraphs could have been reduced to "locate and sink 3 enemy ships that are currently heading your way from the SE."

12-02-06, 01:37 PM	#21
suBB Chief Join Date: Dec 2005 Posts: 326 Downloads: 5 Uploads: 0	We really appreciate your feedback – thanks a lot!! Believe me when I say I am taking your concerns to heart and radio messaging / tasking is not nor will it ever be a 300 page novel received from a floating wire or antenna or ELF messaging. We share the same concerns and since this is intentionally for multiplayer, as well as single player capable, I rather keep tasking / intel updates brief and to the point minus all the extra fluff. For a couple of reasons: It provides just enough information you need to get the job done and less writing on my part. I don’t know if anyone of you have been following that thread, Tales of Danwat, but basically I posted an A.A.R. of the akula there. I’ve had previous experiences in the akula where I failed to intercept the 688, or even when I intercepted and destroyed the 688, I managed to make it within a few hundred yards of securing general quarters over distance and high speeds - I was somewhat in a hurry. Getting there however involved dodging torpedoes and buoys to the best of my ability until it finally caught up with me. I also owe the author of the thread an A.A.R. of the 688, basically the flip side of the akula’s perspective. I’ll post that one when I reach a stopping point in editing. Check it out here: http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=101338 Also be aware that ROE is in effect on this map and conditions are provided in mission tasking for all controllable platforms at time of spawn and not in briefing when you are selecting platforms. We’ve also decided that ROE will be apart of a new standard for more maps to come from us, as well as some other features we think are key to the experience. So in that regard, if ROE is violated intentionally or unintentionally it will result in mission incomplete for both sides.

01-08-07, 11:25 AM	#22
suBB Chief Join Date: Dec 2005 Posts: 326 Downloads: 5 Uploads: 0	Does anyone know of an absolute limit to how many triggers and scripts you can use on a map, I’m exceeding 500 triggers now and scripts at over 350.

02-15-07, 03:08 PM	#24
suBB Chief Join Date: Dec 2005 Posts: 326 Downloads: 5 Uploads: 0	UPDATE: 2-15-07 We are now entering session 5 of MP testing and the results (re: dynamic mission objective MP) are quite amazing. I was kidding myself thinking we missed the mark in achieving in-game dynamics on the MP level, but actual data is indicating otherwise. In short the map is highly sensitive to change of events and there is just no telling how things will pan out at any given moment, or how things will end up. More importantly everyone(AI & humans) are affected by it at the same time, and by that point it's really up to how they both (ai or humans) react to / handle the change of events. Sometimes AI won't even follow the scripting made for it, and for what we are trying to do, that's a good thing. I'm / I've generating / generated test session AARs as data and after reviewing them I still see evidence where an ever-changing 'small change' will affect the chances for everyone else, mission tasking of platforms and / or lead to one of several possible outcomes. One of those outcomes include 'staying alive', where ownship must survive. How does that differ from anything else? from personal experience, most mission objective MP I've played with others are pretty much limited to one approach, one outcome, always in favor of success, omitting the chance of failure, other than being destroyed, among other things. The presence of LWAMI 3.07 has introduced some new tricks for AI, as well as new features that are also in place and available for the next map design. Things are looking pretty good... Let's continue on. Short-term objectives: 1.. Conclude preliminary MP testing / tweaking 2.. Finalize Features list / new standard, credits, file for distribution. 3.. Final MP testing @ 'full tilt' / last minute changes. 4.. Final version release. That's all for now.