A bunch of bones for y'all

[juan_gigante]

Originally posted by fytinghellfish:

Good thing I remember my radio procedures. Break.

They might come in handy during coplay games, over.

And if anyone gets mad at me while playing for NOT using the correct procedures, I'm calling arty on their men.

[Battlefront.com]

Works fine if the guy is Syrian, but otherwise it is a hollow threat. Blue Force Tracker won't allow that

Steve

[hellfish]

Originally posted by juan_gigante:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by fytinghellfish:

Good thing I remember my radio procedures. Break.

They might come in handy during coplay games, over.

And if anyone gets mad at me while playing for NOT using the correct procedures, I'm calling arty on their men. </font>

[Dirtweasle]

Originally posted by John Kettler:...and I can cite recent ones such as the screwup in Evan Wright's OIF book GENERATION KILL who failed to order batteries for his units NVGs and other night vision gear...[/QB]

Hi John,

Oddly enough in the book by Atknison I mention above he describes the 101st battery requirements, and sites the Division CO Gen. Paetrius (sp?) being accutely aware of the logistical / supply requirments of small batteries. A "Devil in the Details" sort of thing. ...is there other sources that cooraborate this unit did not pack enough batteries?

[undead reindeer cavalry]

CMSF sounds extremely good so far. very exciting system. i am a bit worried about all the added complexity: will AI be able to handle all the stuff? in my opinion the single weakest part of CMx1 is the relatively weak AI of the units, which often leads to lots of micromanagement. i hope things will be better in CMSF, especially considering it has real-time play.

[Battlefront.com]

As for the batteries... this is a HUGE problem the military is struggling with. At one point I heard that they were burning through 9000 batteries a day. And that MIGHT have been only 9 volt (I can't remember exactly). Standardized powerpacks or a universal charging system is in the works, but it is going to be a long time before it works. I know the Stryker Warrior program involves recharge stations being added to Strykers for the dismount FBCB2 system, but that doesn't do squat for NVGs and the various doodads attached to weapons.

URC,

The Editor doesn't introduce any problems in and of itself. It only solves them. Having a clear chain of command is actually beneficial to the AI, not something that makes its job tougher. One of the major problems with CMx1 is that the AI had to create Task Forces on its own. This is VERY difficult to do. Additionally, it had no real concept of hierarchy, which the new command structure fixes. Other things will, of coruse, make AI programming more difficult, but nothing in this thread will (and should do the opposite in places).

One other bone...

The new AI allows for pretty powerful AI "hints". These are things that the designer puts down on the map and instructs the AI how to go about using them. For example, identifying the primary defensive points or the best avenues for advance. These are things that the AI had to figure out on its own. While I think it did a better job for a game of its type than any other generic AI ever has, it certainly wasn't as good as any of us would have liked. Now the designer has the ability to help the AI figure out stuff and therefore sculpt the AI's behavior to a fairly significant extent.

Note that this is not the same as scripting the AI. The AI will still be able to use its judgement to do or not do something at a given time or later. The difference is that it doesn't have to figure out as many of the basics that are relevant for evaluation. For example, if the designer specifies 3 possible routes of advance and 4 strong points and 2 important objectives, the AI can weigh all of these things to determine which route/s to take, which strong points to focus on, which objectives to bust butt for and what NOT to do. It also has the ability then to better evaluate unexpected stuff along the way, such as "I've been told this is a VERY important thing to take, but some enemy is peppering me with light fire. I'll ignore it" vs. "I've been told this is a minor objective and I wasn't all that interested in taking it, but I am very interested in shutting down that annoying fire I'm getting on my flank!". That sort of stuff.

This ties into the new Editor interface because without the new UI I'm not really sure how easy it would be to do this sort of stuff. With the UI in place, it's a piece of cake. Charles can then focus on the "hints" instead of how the user makes them known to the AI.

Steve

[Michael Emrys]

Steve,

Re your initial post: Sounds good. Now, making it all actually work as promised...

Michael

[Michael Emrys]

Originally posted by Battlefront.com:

As for the batteries... this is a HUGE problem the military is struggling with. At one point I heard that they were burning through 9000 batteries a day. And that MIGHT have been only 9 volt (I can't remember exactly). Standardized powerpacks or a universal charging system is in the works, but it is going to be a long time before it works. I know the Stryker Warrior program involves recharge stations being added to Strykers for the dismount FBCB2 system, but that doesn't do squat for NVGs and the various doodads attached to weapons.

I saw something interesting in the store the other day, a self-powered flashlight...sort of. The guy in the store said that you shake it for several seconds and it will burn for half an hour. I don't know how well this works or what its useful life is, but I wonder if the Army has looked into it. Seems like with all the moving around soldiers do, it would be building up some kind of charge most of the time anyway.

Michael

[Michael Dorosh]

Originally posted by Michael Emrys:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Battlefront.com:

As for the batteries... this is a HUGE problem the military is struggling with. At one point I heard that they were burning through 9000 batteries a day. And that MIGHT have been only 9 volt (I can't remember exactly). Standardized powerpacks or a universal charging system is in the works, but it is going to be a long time before it works. I know the Stryker Warrior program involves recharge stations being added to Strykers for the dismount FBCB2 system, but that doesn't do squat for NVGs and the various doodads attached to weapons.

I saw something interesting in the store the other day, a self-powered flashlight...sort of. The guy in the store said that you shake it for several seconds and it will burn for half an hour. I don't know how well this works or what its useful life is, but I wonder if the Army has looked into it. Seems like with all the moving around soldiers do, it would be building up some kind of charge most of the time anyway.

Michael </font>

[ParaBellum]

Vewwy, vewwy nice!

The more I read about CMSF the more interested I get. I really like the idea of "helping" the AI during scenario creation. In CMx1 one could already improve the AI through careful placing of flags, avenues of approach etc., but it was a real pain.

[kipanderson]

Steve,

All sounds great to me.

“The new AI allows for pretty powerful AI "hints". These are things that the designer puts down on the map and instructs the AI how to go about using them.”

This is particularly good news. BTW one of the problems with the otherwise great AI in CMX1 was that it tries to do too much, in my view . It tries to be too cunning and reactive in defense, to give one example. The AI ambushed very successfully but often over reacted by rushing troops to fill gaps in the line but ending by simply rushing defending troops onto the guns of the attacker.

A very difficult judgment to make but better the AI does less… well, than does too much moderately.

Greatly looking forward to CMSF,

All the best,

Kip.

[c3k]

Steve,

Excellent news. Thanks for the bone(s).

Regards,

Ken

[Dirtweasle]

Originally posted by Battlefront.com:

As for the batteries... this is a HUGE problem the military is struggling with. At one point I heard that they were burning through 9000 batteries a day.

Yep, that's what a lot of people are saying, the problem is huge no doubt, and so that also makes me question how it got screwed up.

Originally posted by Battlefront.com:

One other bone...

I must say that bone has a good bit of meat hanging on it.

[flamingknives]

Originally posted by Michael Emrys:

Hmmm. That would pass a rattle test. Not

[Michael Emrys]

Originally posted by flamingknives:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Michael Emrys:

Hmmm. That would pass a rattle test. Not </font>

Have you tried it? I didn't, so I don't know if it made noise or not. In any event, even if it does in the present model, I wonder if that couldn't be engineered out if there was enough reason to do so.

Michael

[flamingknives]

I've bumped into some that are pretty much that description. It works by having a magnet inside the grip that can travel back and forth in the handle, generating eddy currents in wiring around the outside. Something like having only one cell in a two-cell torch.

It would be pretty difficult to engineer out, AFAICT - easier to do something else, perhaps. Clockwork? Rechargable batteries? LED torches for less power drain? A flexible tube incorporating piezoelectric fibres?

[Christian Knudsen]

My co-worker has one of those self-powered flashlights, and they are really neat - A relatively strong LED that will shine with only a few shakes.

They are too loud, however, to pass the rattle test. The actual movement is quiet, but they make a good thump hitting the ends of the unit.

I have not tried to see how long they hold a charge, however. Could you shake the crap out of one, then immobilise the moving part, then turn it on and have power hours later? I'll have to ask my friend. The other thing is that while it might be good for flashlights, I can't see the tech being used for other battery powered things that armies use - NVGs, Rangefinding Binos, Radios, etc. I can at least make a joke about shaking the bejeesus out of a flashlight, but that joke probably wouldn't translate around shaking a pair of NVGs, or a manpack radio.

[YankeeDog]

I've seen 'em and tried one. Neat little piece of gear for a power outage kit. As noted, tho, probably some shortcomings for military gear, and higher drain stuff than an LED flashlight.

There are more powerful ways to generate electricity in a pinch through human muscle power, though. Better choice for military would be a good old hand crank generator charger and/or solar charger, I would think. They make 'em nowadays no larger than a deck of cards, to be used when you cell battery is dying. I would think a similar device could be very handy for the military, at least as a back-up.

Even better might be the small solar charging arrays they have these days.

I've seen both in use on African Safari, where plug-ins for grid juice are few and far between, and it isn't always convenient (or cost-effective) to start up your vehicle when you want to charge your camera batteries or commo gear.

Of course, the Pentagon will proably come up with some $10,000 high-tech charging system that will sound great on paper, but take 5 years to develop, and then never works as advertised. . .

[Peter Cairns]

I saw a design a while back for a plan to put air filled pipes under roads. As cars drove along the pipes would be compressed to pump air into micro turbines that would create power for street lights etc.

It might be possible to use the system in the torch (flashlight), in other ways, if you put one in an M-16 or the bars of a backpack frame, then in theory troops could recharge as they walked.

Another possible might be in shock absorber. I 'd think that a Stryker going across rough terrain could with eight magnets bouncing up and down might create a fair bit of power, and I doubt you'd here the rattle over the sound of the engine.

Peter.

[Peter Cairns]

Steve,

Any word yet on the issue of movie playback, will playback even be in now that we have "Real time",game play.

Peter.

[hellfish]

Originally posted by Peter Cairns:

I saw a design a while back for a plan to put air filled pipes under roads. As cars drove along the pipes would be compressed to pump air into micro turbines that would create power for street lights etc.

I've seen that for highway exits. I think they're gonna start implementing them soon, too.

It'd be neat if the landwarrior system had something like dynamos (or whatever the term is) that convert's a dismount infantryman's kinetic energy (running, sprinting, crawling, etc.) into some kind of charge without being too bulky or restrictive.

[Moronic Max]

Steve, regarding Coop/multiplay, any idea what the upper limit on human players in any given battle will be?

[Peter Cairns]

I stillhave a worry about all this electricity on a man. I know that a JSTARs can detect a car ignition at something like 25 miles, so at some point a guy carrying lots of batteries etc, is going to show up on screens somewhere.

If i've got my right hand( or left hand) motor rule like, moving a wire in a magnetic field creates a current in the wire. Thats how a metal detecor works, it creates a magnetic field and when it passes over a metal object it creates a current that sets off a buzzer. (If always wondered why they don't put a magnet detector in every tenth mine to deter mine detection).

Now if a person generating a magnetic field moves by by a wire he should in effect create a current, which if linked to an IED, could be a way to take out US troops but not your own, who don't have anything elec tronic...

Peter.

[C'Rogers]

Any word yet on the issue of movie playback, will playback even be in now that we have "Real time",game play.

I was going to put a thread up today about movie playback being it will be the best part of the game (ok, a bit of exaggeration, but the feature I have been looking most forward to since my first game of CM:BO). Then I thought, nah of course it will be in, how could they leave out something so amazing.

Either way real time should not be an issue. Despite being revealed late I imagine real time was always in the concept, it isn't like something they decided to jam in at the end (I hope).

Steve, regarding Coop/multiplay, any idea what the upper limit on human players in any given battle will be?

For this game it will still be 1 vs 1. For others, good question and I am very curious as well, though I am pretty sure the answer will be 'not certain, will see what we can do'.

Alright, that's my attempt at speaking for BFC.

[John Kettler]

dirtweasle,

In GENERATION KILL, the screwup was a sergeant or 2nd looey; I forget which. Either way, Evan Wright conveys the clear impression that the batteries were available but that this miserable excuse for a soldier couldn't be bothered to do his job properly. This wasn't some general's massive error.

BTW, I hope the situation's improved, but when my dad was working on the Thermal Weapon Sight, the Army was insisting on very dangerous batteries, the kind that go Boom! when hit.

Steve and Troops,

Being able to in a sense brief the AI strikes me as being a major improvement over the current "having everything be of equal priority is the same as having no priority" approach. Ought to result in a several factor improvement in AI combat performance, especially if you could (hint, hint) provide some sort of check off list describing the commander's guidance and intent.

Defensive example options (very rough)

1. Avoid decisive engagement? Y or N

2. Defend in place? Y or N

3. Stick and move? Y or N

4. Adopt rear slope defense when doable? Y or N

5. Allow unit skylining? Y or N

6. Deny high speed routes? Y or N

7. Preferentially target HQs and HVUs? Y or N

8. If losing locally, bug out en masse? Yor N

9. If losing locally, exfiltrate in small

groups, leaving behind a rearguard? Y or N

Obviously, this is by no means definitive, but it should serve to illustrate the basic concept, which is loosely borrowed from TacOps. A similar list could be constructed offensively, too and would, I expect, differ markedly for the two sides. Belt-hugging a la Korean War ChiComs and Vietnam War VC/NVA wouldn't do anything for the U.S. but might be an important tactic for the Syrians. I would expect that offensive U.S. guidance to the AI would have a lot to do with how much firepower to use and when and where, not capriciously blowing up mosques, route clearance criteria, etc.

That's my idea. What do you think of it?

Regards,

John Kettler