Autonomous Ground Force Tasking

[IAF.AssafB]

Gromit,

Great script, thanks a lot for sharing!

I've already implemented in my "Operation Safe-North" and it feels like a major addition.

Thanks!

Assaf.

[gunterlund21]

Gromit

A little confused on this

 

autogft_TaskForce:addGroup(count, type)

Adds a group specification to declare which units the task force shall consist of.

If no count or type is specified, an empty group is added. Units can be added to the group with autogft_TaskForce.addUnits. See "unit-types" for a complete list of available unit types.

Parameters

 

#number count : (Optional) Number of units for the group

#string type : (Optional) Type of unit

Return value

 

#autogft_TaskForce: This instance (self)

autogft_TaskForce:addUnits(count, type)

Adds unit specifications to the most recently added group (see autogft_TaskForce.addGroup) of the task force.

Parameters

 

count :

type :

Return value

 

#autogft_TaskForce:

 

they appear to do the same thing. I can to

TaskForce.addGroup(4,"BMP-1")

or

TaskForce.addGroup:addunits(4,"BMP-1")

[gromit190]

Gromit

A little confused on this

 

autogft_TaskForce:addGroup(count, type)

Adds a group specification to declare which units the task force shall consist of.

If no count or type is specified, an empty group is added. Units can be added to the group with autogft_TaskForce.addUnits. See "unit-types" for a complete list of available unit types.

Parameters

 

#number count : (Optional) Number of units for the group

#string type : (Optional) Type of unit

Return value

 

#autogft_TaskForce: This instance (self)

autogft_TaskForce:addUnits(count, type)

Adds unit specifications to the most recently added group (see autogft_TaskForce.addGroup) of the task force.

Parameters

 

count :

type :

Return value

 

#autogft_TaskForce:

 

they appear to do the same thing. I can to

TaskForce.addGroup(4,"BMP-1")

or

TaskForce.addGroup:addunits(4,"BMP-1")

 

Hi,

 

You're right, the two functions (almost) does the same thing. Let me try to rephrase it.

addUnits adds a number of units of a certain type to the task force.

addGroup adds a group and (if you've specified the optional count and type) it will also call "addUnits" to add units to that group.

 

So if you want a group of some units of the same type, you don't have to invoke both functions. You can create the group and add the units by one command instead of two.

 

So, these two codes does the exact same thing

 

autogft_TaskForce:new():addGroup(4,"BMP-1")

autogft_TaskForce:new():addGroup():addUnits(4, "BMP-1")

 

I've made it this way for backwards compitability (there was no "addUnits"-function before, only "addGroup"). But now that I think about it, and from your feedback I realize it does more harm (confusion) than good.

 

So "addGroups" will take no parameters starting from the next version, so this will be the only correct way to do it:

 

autogft_TaskForce:new():addGroup():addUnits(4, "BMP-1")

 

Thanks for the feedback :)

Edited January 10, 2017 by gromit190

[gunterlund21]

Hi,

 

You're right, the two functions (almost) does the same thing. Let me try to rephrase it.

addUnits adds a number of units of a certain type to the task force.

addGroup adds a group and (if you've specified the optional count and type) it will also call "addUnits" to add units to that group.

 

So if you want a group of some units of the same type, you don't have to invoke both functions. You can create the group and add the units by one command instead of two.

 

So, these two codes does the exact same thing

 

autogft_TaskForce:new():addGroup(4,"BMP-1")

autogft_TaskForce:new():addGroup():addUnits(4, "BMP-1")

 

I've made it this way for backwards compitability (there was no "addUnits"-function before, only "addGroup"). But now that I think about it, and from your feedback I realize it does more harm (confusion) than good.

 

So "addGroups" will take no parameters starting from the next version, so this will be the only correct way to do it:

 

autogft_TaskForce:new():addGroup():addUnits(4, "BMP-1")

 

Thanks for the feedback :)

 

How bout having group hunt for a pre-designated group that exist on the map. I know you have the pre-fix function but how bout looking for the whole group name?

[Pikey]

After spawn they change names. I've asked that we keep the prefixes so we can track them in game with many different tools and scripts.

How bout having group hunt for a pre-designated group that exist on the map. I know you have the pre-fix function but how bout looking for the whole group name?

[Spanker79]

Any news regarding the ships?

[EasyEB]

For me, spawned units do not disperse and stop for a few minutes when they come under fire, is it possible to enable dispersion?

[Pikey]

Apart from them not working with the code, no.

Any news regarding the ships?

[Pikey]

You can check it, if you put ground units vs ground units both travelling towards each other, when thery fire at each other they do not disperse either. Dispersal is reserved for air attack I believe. Smoke still comes but if you shoot an armoured column with another one dispersal shouldnt happen.

For me, spawned units do not disperse and stop for a few minutes when they come under fire, is it possible to enable dispersion?

[EasyEB]

You can check it, if you put ground units vs ground units both travelling towards each other, when thery fire at each other they do not disperse either. Dispersal is reserved for air attack I believe. Smoke still comes but if you shoot an armoured column with another one dispersal shouldnt happen.

 

Yeah, sorry I wasn't clear. I meant under fire from air units (me).

[gromit190]

How bout having group hunt for a pre-designated group that exist on the map. I know you have the pre-fix function but how bout looking for the whole group name?

 

Could add that. A task where the target is not a zone but an enemy group.

What kind of mission are you thinking? Perhaps the players must defend ground units, where enemies keeps coming. Pretty interesting, and actually not hard to add this feature at all...

 

For me, spawned units do not disperse and stop for a few minutes when they come under fire, is it possible to enable dispersion?

 

You can check it, if you put ground units vs ground units both travelling towards each other, when thery fire at each other they do not disperse either. Dispersal is reserved for air attack I believe. Smoke still comes but if you shoot an armoured column with another one dispersal shouldnt happen.

 

It could be scripted, but if it's not a built-in feature in DCS then I'm not really seeing a clean way to do it. Is this a popular request?

[Pikey]

Thiks is marginal. If the ground units are moving already, i'm not sure what the difference is in effect. Yes, by air they disperse, then they stop, which I always found ridiculous because then they are easier to kill!

 

I haven't tested it and the effects of putting them under fire yet to see what might be stopping that behaviour. But I'm not sure dispersal is availabkle in code or the smoke generators, if it was we would have gotten smoke generator scripts which I would really like!!

Could add that. A task where the target is not a zone but an enemy group.

What kind of mission are you thinking? Perhaps the players must defend ground units, where enemies keeps coming. Pretty interesting, and actually not hard to add this feature at all...

 

 

 

 

 

It could be scripted, but if it's not a built-in feature in DCS then I'm not really seeing a clean way to do it. Is this a popular request?

[gromit190]

Thiks is marginal. If the ground units are moving already, i'm not sure what the difference is in effect. Yes, by air they disperse, then they stop, which I always found ridiculous because then they are easier to kill!

 

I haven't tested it and the effects of putting them under fire yet to see what might be stopping that behaviour. But I'm not sure dispersal is availabkle in code or the smoke generators, if it was we would have gotten smoke generator scripts which I would really like!!

 

Ah, okay. Sorry, I think I misunderstood both of you before.

 

The units should "disperse" "as normal", meaning that they'll "disperse" just like they would if you didn't use AutoGFT but just gave them a waypoint and attacked while they were moving.

 

Regarding additional dispersion features: I'll write it up, thanks for the tip

[gromit190]

Hello everyone,

 

 

I just wanted to post an update here on the latest changes in the project. The key focus has been making it simpler to use by various means.

 

Firstly (and, perhaps, most importantly) you no longer need to declare the units you want for your task force in the script. If you put units in a base zone, the task force will assume that this represents the unit layout you want for your task force.

 

Also, I've removed the need to manually start the reinforcement and advancement timers in the script. Thus, a complete task force declaration with units respawning and advancing through zones is reduced to

 

autogft_TaskForce:new()
 :addBaseZone("BLUE_BASE1")
 :addControlZone("CONTROL1")
 :addControlZone("CONTROL2")
 :addControlZone("CONTROL5")

 

 

(There are 2 M-1 Abrams located in the base zone, so that'll be the "unit layout" for the task force. This means 2 M-1 Abrams will reinforce the task force when units are killed off).

 

Furthermore, task force units will now always move through the objective zones when advancing. This prevents reinforcements from taking "shortcuts" when moving to the objective. It also enables mission designers to add "intermidiate zones" (see misc example), which the task force will use when advancing (not retreating to these zones if enemies are present).

 

 

Happy hunting! :joystick:

Edited January 26, 2017 by gromit190

[dooom]

hey gromit... have you thought about incorporating your script into some of the MOOSE classes that FlightControl and his GitHub group are working on? I like what you are doing and it would sure be nice to see scripts starting to fall under a central framework ... just a thought.

[Whisper]

Gromit is actively participating in Moose, I think it's in his plans ;)

[gunterlund21]

interesting setup. This is almost identical to what Im doing with MOOSE. Good work. One thing FC did in MOOSE is allow the mission maker to create zones around units so the system will target them as they move.

[IAF.AssafB]

Hi,

I've been trying to incorporate the AutoGFT in a MP mission I've built a while back, that's already running MIST 4.3.74.

Everything seems to run great when I test it on my own PC (either through the mission editor or when starting my server)

However... whenever trying to run on someone else's server, only the MIST functions are working but nothing seems to be happening from the autogft (No error windows appeared).

 

I should point out that I have nearly no idea about scripting...

 

Some details that might be relevant:

In the editor , I load the scripts as follow:

1) Autogft (standalone) starts on mission-start

2) MIST loading a few seconds afterwards

3) Some MIST functions a few seconds after mist-loading

from this point on, there are some triggers that can activate either autogft reinforcements as well as MIST functions - depending on the mission progress.

 

Any ideas?

Thanks!

Assaf.

[Pikey]

A mission runs OK locally but doesn't run on someone else's server? Can you provide the mission? Should be the same thing, I'm not sure what you have done to make it different.

Hi,

I've been trying to incorporate the AutoGFT in a MP mission I've built a while back, that's already running MIST 4.3.74.

Everything seems to run great when I test it on my own PC (either through the mission editor or when starting my server)

However... whenever trying to run on someone else's server, only the MIST functions are working but nothing seems to be happening from the autogft (No error windows appeared).

 

I should point out that I have nearly no idea about scripting...

 

Some details that might be relevant:

In the editor , I load the scripts as follow:

1) Autogft (standalone) starts on mission-start

2) MIST loading a few seconds afterwards

3) Some MIST functions a few seconds after mist-loading

from this point on, there are some triggers that can activate either autogft reinforcements as well as MIST functions - depending on the mission progress.

 

Any ideas?

Thanks!

Assaf.

[IAF.AssafB]

A mission runs OK locally but doesn't run on someone else's server? Can you provide the mission? Should be the same thing, I'm not sure what you have done to make it different.

 

Thanks Pikey,

Attaching a test version of my mission + screenshots to explain where the action should happen.

 

Autogft should be activated in two areas:

1) Blue tanks near the bridge (bullseye) are advancing north and enter triggerzone "BLUE_INVASION_A"

This triggers Red reinforcements (2 tanks, 1 BMP IIRC) a few miles to the North-West at zone "STAGING1A"

 

2) Blue tanks at GH43 are advancing due west on the road and entering "BLUE_INVASION_B", triggering red reinforcement at "STAGING1B"

(See corresponding screenshots for STAGING1A and STAGING1B)

 

MIST is used to clone red ground groups at various zones.

For the testing purpose, I've placed one of those zones near Zugdidi (near the main blue force at GH31).

Once all red forces in that area are destroyed => displays a message that "zone Alpha has been neutralized".

Once a minimum of 4 tanks arrive at the zone=> displays a message "Zone Alpha is secured"

 

Thanks!

Assaf.

Test autogft and MIST.zip

[myHelljumper]

I have got this problem too, in solo and on the server side all is working great but for the clients the units are not synchronized. I don't know if this can be solvable as it look like an engine issue...

[IAF.AssafB]

I have got this problem too, in solo and on the server side all is working great but for the clients the units are not synchronized. I don't know if this can be solvable as it look like an engine issue...

 

Thanks for the input,

In my mission, the activation of autogft reinforcements depends on PART-OF-COALITION-INSIDE-ZONE trigger.

Could there be a problem with this trigger when running at MP? IIRC there's been a similar issue with PART OF GROUP INSIDE ZONE a while ago...I'll try triggering it in a different manner and update.

 

Thanks,

Assaf.

[Pikey]

I should have asked....what version of DCS are you running?

Thanks Pikey,

Attaching a test version of my mission + screenshots to explain where the action should happen.

 

Autogft should be activated in two areas:

1) Blue tanks near the bridge (bullseye) are advancing north and enter triggerzone "BLUE_INVASION_A"

This triggers Red reinforcements (2 tanks, 1 BMP IIRC) a few miles to the North-West at zone "STAGING1A"

 

2) Blue tanks at GH43 are advancing due west on the road and entering "BLUE_INVASION_B", triggering red reinforcement at "STAGING1B"

(See corresponding screenshots for STAGING1A and STAGING1B)

 

MIST is used to clone red ground groups at various zones.

For the testing purpose, I've placed one of those zones near Zugdidi (near the main blue force at GH31).

Once all red forces in that area are destroyed => displays a message that "zone Alpha has been neutralized".

Once a minimum of 4 tanks arrive at the zone=> displays a message "Zone Alpha is secured"

 

Thanks!

Assaf.

[IAF.AssafB]

I should have asked....what version of DCS are you running?

 

The released

(1.5.5.60565.216)

 

(didn't try on open-beta)

[Pikey]

Due to SSD limitations I had to convert live to beta as i was desperate to play Viggen. So, best I could do is test on OB. But that is pointless if you still have to wait another week for a fixed version of live to come out, if there is an issue in DCS World code. There were some changes with it to Beta.

 

Telling you it works/doesn't work on OB might also be pointless for you if you weren't switching.

 

The only really useful thing I could have done, was test in live to see if it needed a config change, other than that I can't help you right now.

 

Looks like this week is an update to NTTR instead of Live according to the changelog. Which isn't great news for you either.

 

The released

(1.5.5.60565.216)

 

(didn't try on open-beta)