Jump to content

Photo
- - - - -

Interface discussion


  • Please log in to reply
310 replies to this topic
Thread Starter
Nyles
Nyles

    Master Sergeant

  • Members
  • 748 posts

#1

Posted 25 April 2003 - 13:36

One thing that I always found irritating in OFP was the way you give orders and talk with each other. Selecting your squad individually and assigning orders is not a bad thing, but if OFP2 will indeed be with Marines, the F1 - F12 keys might seem a little few sometimes, especially during Nam and earlier.

Recently I played that Vietcong game and I was really surprised how they implemented the way to give commands. It's all very intuitive there. Okay, you only have 5 guys or so with you, but even with larger squads like in OFP something like this would out. Basically, you yell the name of one of those team-mates and then he comes to you and does whatever is needed. You can really concentrate on playing the game, while the rest of your squad adapts to your movement.

The other thing I really liked was the fact, that unlike in OFP, you communicate with your squad not via radio but with normal talking. However, you have that radio operator with you, which hands you the radio if there are any orders from command, or when you have to report in. I really really liked this, as it gives the whole atmosphere a great increase in terms of realism and accuracy.

Sure, you can't simply adopt that very same system to OFP2, but you could create one by yourself that includes a lot of these features. I had some ideas about this, so I started to work the whole thing out a little more in detail:

At first you have to see what's needed. In OFP2 there will most likely be many different branches present, like airborne units, armour and infantry. In some way or another they have to be able to talk to each other. So, at the beginning, we have to define channels. Like in OFP, communication should be possible on different levels. But unlike the unit-based structure (vehicle -> squad -> side -> ...), I'd prefer a system that allows for a more dynamic communication. In OFP for example, you can't talk to a nearby squad, without radio in on the side-> frequency. Sure, there is that nice direct talk option, but it's only useful for scripted sequences and thus doesn't offer much options to interact with the AI, and even in multiplayer it is almost never used.

I would base the OFP2 way to communicate more closely on distances than group affiliations. That way, within the squad level and between nearby troops, you would mainly just talk and yell orders, while you would have to use the radio to reach tanks, aircraft and more far away units. Of course to work such a system out in detail would really cost some time, therefore I just want to show the direction.

The basic structure in the game would be that if you want to talk to someone, be it AI or human, you have to come to a certain range and then aim at that person until a mouth-icon apears, which let's you initiate the talk when pressing a key. The icon could be colored to show in which radio channel you then would talk to the person. (We will come back to those channels later on, but they basically are similar to the different colored channels like the yellow vehicle chat in OFP) The range for that could be let's say max 50m, where commands are yelled and so even the enemy can hear them when in range and react to it, down to normal speaking (~10m) or even whispering. Whisper should only be possible when very close and requires a unit to be on something like a stealth mode. Otherwise, even at that close distance, people should normally talk to each other. A nice effect would also be that your voice signal is kinda pointed at the direction you are looking. This means that the sonic waves are sent so that people in front of you (meaning where you look at) can hear you up to 50 metres, while people behind you could maybe hear you only from a distance up to 25 metres. Outside of this talking range, you would have to use the radio (if you have one ;-) hihi) for communication. You could make it so that there are different types of radios in the game. a small walkie talkie style radio, a standard radio like there is in most infantry squads, a vehicle based radio, tank/aircraft radio with internal channel, and a stationary radio. The walkie talkie would be used for very close ranges only, and should only be accessible by special forces or some civilians. The idea is NOT, that every soldier carries one of these, like it seems to be the case in OFP. The standard radio should be present in almost every infantry squad and thus makes it possible to communicate with other units, including command&control. The vehicle radio should be included in most vehicles (except most civilian ones and some smaller cars like jeeps or even some trucks). The vehicle radio could be heared from - and used by - any person within the vehicle. If the vehicle is open, a nearby person should also be able to hear the radio up to a small distance (5-10m) The tank/aircraft radio with internal channel basically is a vehicle radio, but differs by the fact that every crewmember can only talk via that radio to each other, while in other cars, people should be able to talk to each other the normal way. It's just so that in closed vehicles, the talk should not be heared from the outside if someone stands beside the vehicle.
Lastly, the stationary radio should work exactly like the vehicle radio in an open vehicle, meaning that up to a certain distance, you can hear and interact with it.

Such a complex radio architecture of course needs a coresponding hierarchy, so you know who you can order around, and who not. This is very important for controling AI. In the editor a mission maker should be able to define such a rank overlay, similar to the one currently in use. Within a unit, the rank of the solider decides the hierarchy, but in addition it should be possible to define the hierarchy between different independent units. So, for example, you could define that unit A is in command of unit B, C, and D. Now this allows the leader in charge of unit A to access a wider range of commands/orders when talking or radioing to one of these units. Such orders of course have to be predefined for each unit in the editor. The idea is that they somehow replace the current "0-6 actions" and the "0-0 radio". For example, when you talk to your radio operator that way, a SMALL list with default commands should appear, like 'use radio', 'movement', 'behaviour', etc.. Just not that monster construct of a command menue we have in OFP right now. The 'movement' menue for example could simply consist of entries like 'return to formation/spread out' or 'halt/move'. Personally, I think that being able to assign formations is overkill. Instead, the soldiers should automatically use a formation based on the unit size, terrain and behaviour. For example a fire-team sized unit (~4 soldiers) would automatically use the wedge formation, while a standard rifle squad (~9 soldiers) would prefer a staggered column. The more AI does things on their own, the more increase in atmosphere you will achieve. Together with those basic commands, mappers should be able to define custom, mission-specific commands for units. So for example you could order unit B to "seize the town center and get the documents" instead of simply using a general order like "behaviour/engage enemy". It should also be possible to draw a recticle on the screen and thus select all units within it, and which are in range. That way, you can move more than one soldier/unit simultaneously.

There would be space to include tons of nice little (but realistic) features in such a system. For example: You are squad leader of an infantry squad, with a friendly tank close to your unit. Now if you want to talk to the tank, you could simply call your radio operator to you, select the tanks frequency from the list that pops up when you 'use' the radio, or simply target the tank while using the radio (mouth icon appears), and then talk through your microphone (if the tank is human, only) or choose from available orders (general ones and custom ones for that specific tank). Another option would be to walk directly to the tank to let's say a range of roughly 10 metres and aim at the tank, until the mouth icon
shows up. An AI commander would then automatically open the hatch and turn out, so he could talk to you. Yet another choice could be that on some tanks there are external 'telephones' which allow infantry to talk to the crew. If you aim at that telephone, the mouth icon would appear in the color of the tank/aircraft radio channel, showing that you are considered part of the crew and also receive radio transmissions directed at the tank, while you 'use' that telephone thingie. Once the tank speeds away, the connections automatically get's cut, and you would have to move in range again.

One major advantage of this system would also be that units would no longer have to be limited to 12 soldiers. In theory, you should be able to make units with a size of 50+ soldiers, which however would almost never be used. Instead the forming of 2-3 smaller, squad-sized (9-15 soldiers) units under the command of a hq-section with the player being leader would be the more common thing. With such an organisation, it would be easy to order individual squads around, making it possible in theory that a single player could coordinate a whole company with ease, as he would only directly command the leaders of the lower group. For example: An infantry platoon, consiting of 3 riflesquads and one weapons squad, all under the command of the platoon-hq, would have the following command structure: The platoon leader, as being the leader of the platoon-hq, would be able to command every soldier in all four squads under his command by directly talking to them (if in range). However if he radios on of the squads, he will only be able to talk to the squad leader via radio and thus can command the squad as a whole. Of course he could also do so by directly speaking (mouth icon) to the squad leader when in range. The squad leaders themselves, are in control of their squads. The squads again could be divided into fireteams or machinegun crews, or whatever else, which the squad leader could either command as a unit by giving an order to the team leaders or by talking to the other soldiers directly and assigning orders, individually. There is one obvious problem here, though: When you select a leader of any kind, the people he commands will follow him wherever he goes. Only soldiers that do not control anyone else can be individually send to positions etc. So in the case of a simple soldier, both the team leader and the higher squad, and even the again highter platoon leader are able to command him. This can lead to confusing situations where people are send somewhere, only to be called back by another person on half the way. A solution would be that a higher rank can terminate an order (call the grunt back even though the order is not fulfilled), while a lower rank must wait for the order to be fulfilled, like that specific soldier having reached a certain location, etc..). If you want to select multiple units under your command by drawing that recticle on the screen with all units you want being within it, it should work so that if one of the selected soldiers is a leader of any kind, the men under his control are automatically selected as well, even if they are not within the recticle. For vehicles the whole system has to be slightly modified. Here, a tank platoon leader would be able to command all tanks seperatly, while the tank commander would be something like a squad leader, who has his crew under his command. The tank platoon leader would not be able to talk to the gunner of one of these tanks for example, while they in the tank and not turned out. A funny option would even be that the platoon leader would be able to move beside on this platoon's tanks and talk to the commander (or any other crew) of that tank directly, while they have their heads turned out.

To make things even more complex (hihihi), you could even make it so that together with giving orders like return to formation, the player automatically gives hand signals. In case stealth mode is active he could even use hand signals only when there is visual contact between the player and the soldier/unit and they are too far away too whisper.

There are lots and lots of things such an easy voice system would offer, while being more efficient, more flexible and more realistic at the same time. Of course when you first read through the above text, you most likely will get confused a little bit, but trust me, it's all very logically and intuitively structured, and so once you would be using such a system in-game, you will understand how it works in no-time. It's just how you would communicate in real-life, therefore players will get used to it, pretty fast.

What do you think? Posted Image

LT.Schaffer
LT.Schaffer

    Staff Sergeant

  • Members
  • 257 posts

#2

Posted 25 April 2003 - 17:52

Good Idea Posted Image
Yeah just to add to your idea i also think a Radio Command where if i'm playing with friends i could order the squad to split into two teams and half follow me and the other half follow my friends! Posted Image  Posted Image
Also i think in Civil Cars the radio should have music you could select or news broadcast station. that way if your driving a jeep down the road and a Civilian car drives past you would hear the music Posted Image  Posted Image Great ideas!!! maybe you could even add your own music into a custom folder and play your own tunes through the radio!!!!




\"Armed Assault Coop Rig\"
CPU:Intel Core 2 Quad Q9450  Quad Core
MOBO:Asus P5B Deluxe Wi-Fi Edition
GPU:Evga GTX 260 896MB
Sound Card:X-FI Fatal1ty FPS 64MB XRAM
PSU:GamerXtreme 700Watt
RAM:2GB Corsair [2X1GB]
Monitor: X2 Viewsonic 22\" LCD Widescreens

Hellfish6
Hellfish6

    Moderator, ret.

  • Members
  • 5950 posts

#3

Posted 25 April 2003 - 21:22

Good idea. I'd love to see OFP become more vocal. Right now, it can be eerily quiet sometimes. Firefights tend to be really loud from both the weapons and the commands being shouted on both sides.

Schoeler
Schoeler

    Master Gunnery Sergeant

  • Members
  • 1287 posts

#4

Posted 25 April 2003 - 22:31

I'd like to see intermediate stages of AI awareness. Units should have weapons at the ready when walking, its really lame to have a patrol walking with weapons shouldered.

Better animations for relaxed postures are a must too. Soldiers should cradle their rifles, sling machine guns over their shoulders. We need a smoking and joking animation. Soldiers don't just sit about boy scut style during breaks, the stand around smoking and telling stories.

An ability to lean out around a corner and fire a burst or lob a grenade. Low crawling on hands and knees and then lobbing grenades into bunker apertures.

Better get in/get out animations so soldiers don't just pop up 10 meters from a boat when they exit.

Realistic injuries, including severed limbs when a mine is stepped on. Actual pain for hit soldiers, instead of crawling silently to a medic, writhing on the ground and screaming for help.

Soldiers with low expereience levels should panic under heavy fire and hug the ground, or freeze up.


Animations, animations, animations! I can't stress this enough. We should have an easier animation editor to make the game more realistic.
\"My guard stood hard when abstract threats too noble to neglect, decieved me into thinking I had something to protect.  Good and bad I define these terms quite clear, no doubt, somehow.  Ahh, but I was so much older then, I'm younger than that now.\"  -The Byrds 'My Back Pages.'

Posted Image

In Memory of David Albert Schoeler, 1974 - 2003.

Third World Explosion Team

Crassus
Crassus

    Gunnery Sergeant

  • Members
  • 427 posts

#5

Posted 26 April 2003 - 22:13

<moved to AI Thread>




"We gotta go to the crappy town where I'm a hero!"

Heatseeker
Heatseeker

    First Lieutenant

  • Members
  • 5191 posts

#6

Posted 26 April 2003 - 23:53

Yes, the tactics used by the a.i. in opf are far from acurate/realistic, i dont like how the comander says "2, engage soldier" and we see a teamate soldier running alone against a enemy squad only to get killed, a squad should engage has a whole keeping formation, and i also would like to see the radio thing replaced with voice comands, that would be much more realistic and natural Posted Image .

The RADIO idea i find trully awsome, we would have a infantry squad that comunicates between themselves with voice commands and one soldier would carry a radio that would allow comunication with other squads (air/armored support) and comunication with HQ, calling reinforcements, receiving new orders, receive coordinates for extraction zones, etc. Posted Image .

While playing squad leader i would like to see much improvement also, the current interface is efective but not very user friendly nor fun, i dislike those litle icons (F1/F12) at bottom of my screen, most commands are rarely used has i always like to keep my squad in formation and pick up targets using binos, we should also call our soldiers by name, calling them "1" or "6" sounds a bit weird, how bout "Bruning, get in that jeep" or "Miller is down!!!", something more natural maybe? Most ppl dont like to play squad leader cause it aint much fun, i personnaly prefer blackop. missions cause im on my own, and i dont have to hear all those anoying comands.

Steameh
Steameh

    Private First Class

  • Members
  • 13 posts

#7

Posted 27 April 2003 - 00:22

Also how about more emotion, i find it quite odd that after all you've been through together your best m8 thats just been killed gets the emotion, " Damn 3 is down " How about, "Oh my god they killed Fred, THEY WILL PAY" or something a bit more animated, it would certainly add atmosphere.

DayGlow
DayGlow

    Master Gunnery Sergeant

  • Members
  • 1328 posts

#8

Posted 27 April 2003 - 22:03

The only cavet I'd like to see is that I don't want a mouse driven interface like RvS, or at least the option to hotkey the coms. I hate the mouse interface because I use GameComander to give voice commands to my men. It works great in OFP right now, but for RvS I can't tell my men to gernade a door anymore, etc. Voice is a lot smoother and should be considered.

COLINMAN




"It takes a big man to admit when he is wrong...I'm not a big man." Chevy Chase, Fletch Lives

gameworx
gameworx

    Private First Class

  • Members
  • 22 posts

#9

Posted 27 April 2003 - 23:05

I'm also a user of Microsoft GameVoice/ Game Commander. I bought this tool especially for using it with OFP. It works damn nice.

So I only have to say "one, two, four - flank left" and they'll do! Posted Image

But I also like the mouse interface from Ravenshield! It's nearly perfect because it is very fast to use. But it has to be said that Ravenshild doesn't contain as half as many possible commands than OFP!

What I'm in need of is the replacement of the lousy action menu from the original OFP. It has to be replaced by a better and faster to use mouse-interface. Posted Image

By the way: switching between weapons like M16/ M203 was solved nicely in Novalogics Deltaforce BHD! I switch to the M203 instantly as long as I hold down the ctrl key. By releasing the key I return to my primary weapon (M16). It's much faster than pressing spacebar first time for switching to "burst mode" and pressing spacebar a second time for switching to the M203. After launching a grenade I have to press space first time for switching to handgrenades and a second time for switching back to the M16 in "single shot mode". Posted Image

I'm sure BI will do another great job with OFP2 and they'll find the best way for the user interface. Posted Image





PitViper
PitViper

    Sergeant Major

  • Members
  • 1524 posts

#10

Posted 28 April 2003 - 17:52

I like the idea of voice commands within a certain distance and using an RTO for support and/or communication with other squads.

and oh yes.. I'd like to see a hierarchy of command up to company and possibly battalion levels. Naturally, the radio would be very important for multilayered command and control.
-----------
Former maintainer of "Dynamic Range" soundpack, Operation Flashpoint: Resistance.

dkraver
dkraver

    Master Sergeant

  • Members
  • 703 posts

#11

Posted 30 April 2003 - 10:30

First of i like you idea but i think if you introduced it like you wrote it would only make commanding much worse and on some points less realistic. Also i really dont think the system that is in OFP 1 is that bad. Its only a question about remembering the different commands. When you known them you can give your orders in a split second. The only thing wrong is that it is to limited.

Names
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Basically, you yell the name of one of those team-mates and then he comes to you and does whatever is needed. You can really concentrate on playing the game, while the rest of your squad adapts to your movement.
[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
I can see that it makes it more realistic calling names and it can prolly be integrated easy and i also think it would be great to have it like this but in the end does it really matter if its 1 do this or johson do this??? Also in military ranks, when communcating on radio all people have a radio callsign not only the leader. Example taken from the recon group i where driver in when i where in the army. In a six man group we had the following callsings
5-1-1 (group leader)
5-1-1-charlie (driver group leader car)
5-1-1-Lima (gunner group leader car)
5-1-2 (second in command)
5-1-2-charlie (driver second in command car)
5-1-2-Lima  (gunner second in command car)
Where 5 is company, first 1 is platoon, second 1/2 are car.

Talk
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">The other thing I really liked was the fact, that unlike in OFP, you communicate with your squad not via radio but with normal talking.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I would base the OFP2 way to communicate more closely on distances than group affiliations. That way, within the squad level and between nearby troops, you would mainly just talk and yell orders[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">The basic structure in the game would be that if you want to talk to someone, be it AI or human, you have to come to a certain range and then aim at that person until a mouth-icon apears, which let's you initiate the talk when pressing a key[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">A nice effect would also be that your voice signal is kinda pointed at the direction you are looking. This means that the sonic waves are sent so that people in front of you (meaning where you look at) can hear you up to 50 metres, while people behind you could maybe hear you only from a distance up to 25 metres.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
First of the inside unit communcation in OFP is like radio talk which isnt realistic unless its special forces who have a radio each. That could be changed simply by changing it to a  shouting/talking to the units instead, that others could hear aswell. Dont know if its possible to make AI enemies react by it and if you say that it should be heard up to 50 100m there little chance of them hearing it since most combat in ofp is made at further distance unless its in urban or forrest area. Only thing i can see it do to a ai enemy would be to make it aware of you like footstep and shot can do. But think about it if you had to walk around aiming at people and wait to you get a icon to give them a order. You would prolly get killed before you find the guy you wanna give order in a firefight also in reallife you kinda know where people are since you placed them yourself and people are trained to know where they should be in a given situation, so you would know in which direction to shout. Also soldiers are trained to pass information down the lines so everybody hears it and that is in either shout talk or whisper depending on the situation, so in that way the "radio" thing works like in real life.
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">down to normal speaking (~10m) or even whispering.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">In case stealth mode is active he could even use hand signals only when there is visual contact between the player and the soldier/unit and they are too far away too whisper.
[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
I dont know if you ever played Americas Army, which have 5 different communications types. Radio, shout, talk, whisper and handsignal. I have never seen anyone use anything other than default which is radio. That game is pretty tactical so i dont see why anyone would use anything else than shout/talk between people and radio between vehicles in a OFP 2. Would it be more realistic. Yes. Would it be used. Dont think so. You could make it so that depending of the awareness you put them on they would shout, talk, whisper or handsignals (where handsignals are shown but you still get a text so you know the message is made and you know what the reply is). But making it so people have to change between them would take to much time in the end so it wouldnt be used.

Radio
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I'd prefer a system that allows for a more dynamic communication. In OFP for example, you can't talk to a nearby squad, without radio in on the side-> frequency[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">The tank/aircraft radio with internal channel basically is a vehicle radio, but differs by the fact that every crewmember can only talk via that radio to each other[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
I agree with you that the radio function should be put more in the game than just the ones that are made by triggers in the mission editor. Would be great to call in air support with out having to either script it or make the plane part of your group with the lead and join waypoints. Or to call another squad or some tanks to assist in a attack. So there should be a way to contact other unit ingame. Also the vehicle already have a internal "radio" with the vehicle chat.
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">You could make it so that there are different types of radios in the game. a small walkie talkie style radio, a standard radio like there is in most infantry squads, a vehicle based radio, tank/aircraft radio with internal channel, and a stationary radio[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">The vehicle radio should be included in most vehicles (except most civilian ones and some smaller cars like jeeps or even some trucks[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
I like the radio idea. About which radios to include and where. I think today and in all modern day armies there are at least one radio in each vehicle and in a infantry platoon there would be one main radio and 2-3 walkie talkie. HQ's and camp site would normally also have a stationary radio or a main radio.

Existing Menu
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Just not that monster construct of a command menue we have in OFP right now. The 'movement' menue for example could simply consist of entries like 'return to formation/spread out' or 'halt/move'. Personally, I think that being able to assign formations is overkill. Instead, the soldiers should automatically use a formation based on the unit size, terrain and behaviour.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
I couldnt disagree more with you here. With the movement menu you can put out scout in front and flanks and set out a rear guard if you wanted. You can make people go look for cover and so on. Also about the formation menu. You cant really say that a formation fits that thing and so on. It all depends on the situation.

How i see it, it should work out from the existing system (F keys and command line) where you add different things to make it better. Following are based on own and others idea. The way to do this would be in multiple steps.

1. Remove 1 from the unit bar. No need to have yourself on the list, since you dont give yourself orders.

2. Make the vehicle and its crew as one unit alone on the command line and not as 2,3 or 4 people. Exept if you are commander in a vehicle, then the crew of that vehicle should show. When you give the command to one of the other vehicles it would be through the highest ranking soldier in that vehicle. Which it is in real life and pretty much how it is ingame already since you select the leader of the vehicle and left click to make it go somewhere and right click to make it attack. If they dismount they would still stay as group. Which then again would make ai work more independent that again are more realistic. If they are part of your group/platoon and you order them to take a vehicle they will still be a part of the group/platoon with all units showing on the command bar.

3. Have the abillity to select and make premade internal groups like MG team, AT team and others in the mission editor, much in the same way that you put groups together with lines in OFP 1. Should just be in other colors and instead of all parties in that group going to the main group leader they would go to the team leader that would have the main group line to the main group leader so they would still be connected to the main group. Also under that selection menu there should be a selection that tells what the team is. Selection would be everything from MG team and AT team to Platoon and company, so you would be able to have these under your command showing with a group marker instead of every single soldier. Also when selecting the smaller group like MG and AT team, the selected soldier would then stays and work together (new animations).

4. Command struckture improvement to AI so when you give orders to a AI company with multiple unit types, it will know what to do. Wont be a problem with platoons which it already know.

5. Make dynamic radio communication, where dynamic mean a ingame thing that dont need to be scripted or made by trigger but a "real" radio net, and have radios as a working item. Also a radio rank system under the radio command struckture so a sergeant can control a corporal but not the other way around, but still be able to give requests. Same thing with higher ranks.
There would be 4 different radio types. Walkies, Main radios, Vehicle radios and stationary radios. Also define the class for a radio man so he as example will stay close to the leader and come to you when you select radio menu. Also that a soldier need to be alive and hold the radio for the radio to work. Radios would have 3 different nets:
-Platoon Net. This would be used to talk/give commands between tanks/planes or groups if you decide to split up you platoon. This would available by all 4 radio types.
-Company Net. This would be used to give orders to and between the platoons under the company. This would be available for all exept the walkies.
-Command Net. This would be used to give commands to companies and to get in touch with other units outside your company like tank or air support if you are in need of this. This would be available for all exept the walkies.
There should be a radio menu as a top menu or a sub menu under others in the mission editor where you could assign/create Company and platoon nets for units, so these would be shown in the ingame radio menu. Under same menu there should be abillity to add callsigns to those soldiers having radios.
When selecting radio menu ingame you would have to choose which net to communicate on, and work from there.

6. New commands under the command menu to be used to give orders/request above platoon lvl that recognise the unit asked. Examples could be:
-(after choosing a plane to contact on the command net, as a platoon leader) Request air support at Cordinates (then click at either target or map)
-(after choosing a platoon on the company net, as a company leader) Attack at cordinate (then click at either target or map) or defend and so on.
And many more could be added like the one in use with the waypoints.
This will again lead to the need to have a function under the mission editor where you can set if a unit have a free role (like air support) or if they have a fixed mission they cant go away from so they will accept/denie your request.
Posted Image
Click here to see tag details

bangcraher
bangcraher

    Lance Corporal

  • Members
  • 55 posts

#12

Posted 01 May 2003 - 17:30

What do you think of a voice recognition system in ofp 2?
Then you can really do two things at the same time.
bancrasher

dkraver
dkraver

    Master Sergeant

  • Members
  • 703 posts

#13

Posted 02 May 2003 - 08:07

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (bangcraher @ 01 May 2003,19:30)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">What do you think of a voice recognition system in ofp 2?
Then you can really do two things at the same time.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Not sure i know what you mean about this could you explain it a little more??
Posted Image
Click here to see tag details

Baron Hurlothrumbo IIX
Baron Hurlothrumbo IIX

    Sergeant Major

  • Members
  • 1551 posts

#14

Posted 02 May 2003 - 12:48

like that microsoft gamecommander thing-
you say "2 flank left" into your microphone and 2 gets ordered to flank left.
Banned.

peanuckle_00
peanuckle_00

    Gunnery Sergeant

  • Members
  • 552 posts

#15

Posted 04 May 2003 - 15:14

BIS team, I understand this is your first foray into major gaming so I'm going to be easy here. Let's talk about when a soldier drops his gun during combat. he doesn't just lay it down. He'll toss it. That's with any object. I mean the interface clearly says "drop weapon" so what's he laying it down for? There should be two options for giving commands by the leader. One option should be by his voice. The other option should be over his radio. Now if he's using his radio to give a command then his voice should still be heard. If he's giving a command over a radio then everyone with a radio will hear him. Let's say you do make a pull out radio animation. If you do what Lucas Arts does and have damage zones even on guns then when the radio is shot he loses contact with his squad because the radio is then damaged.




The joy of the Lord is my strength.  God is fantastic.

GoOB
GoOB

    Warrant Officer

  • Members
  • 2819 posts

#16

Posted 04 May 2003 - 18:45

I agree that the whole radio chatter thing should be dumped. Doesn't make any sense using the group talkies when the man you want to give orders to is standing right beside you. And some built in jukebox type of thing would be great too, especially in the NAM setting. Imagine hearing the DJ talk and rack up some nice tunes for ya.

bn880
bn880

    O=FP^2

  • Members
  • 6758 posts

#17

Posted 06 May 2003 - 18:03

OKay I'm going to make one last request for this Posted Image then I give up on it,

Give the commander of a squad another notepad page for vehicles currently in use or "owned" by the squad. This could include a vehicle specs page, and current loadout etc... come on, it's a neat idea. In a way it can be made realistic, vehicle manuals are taken along the ride and you WOULD in real life know which weapons are stored in your trucks. Posted Image

EDIT: Give those vehicle loadout pages the same kind of display as man units have. Only minor changes like if there are 23 A type Magazines just show 1 pic of an A type mag with the number 23 beside.

Okay if not this then let us connect those multiple controllers. Posted Image




"Peace can not be kept by force. It can only be achieved by understanding." Albert Einstein
Posted Image
Please report Arma 3 bugs in the Bug Tracker

CuteQA
CuteQA

    Master Sergeant

  • Members
  • 607 posts

#18

Posted 09 May 2003 - 23:07

it will be cool if we can listen to the enemy's radio transmission from our radio(if we got correct tune) Posted Image
it will be useful in mp mission. Posted Image

Baron Hurlothrumbo IIX
Baron Hurlothrumbo IIX

    Sergeant Major

  • Members
  • 1551 posts

#19

Posted 10 May 2003 - 23:44

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">it will be cool if we can listen to the enemy's radio transmission from our radio(if we got correct tune)
it will be useful in mp mission[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>

nah, it would be scrambled/ encoded and your average footsoldier on the ground wouldn't be able to uncode/scramble it.
Banned.

Sauragnmon
Sauragnmon

    Private First Class

  • Members
  • 12 posts

#20

Posted 14 May 2003 - 13:40

I like the mention of the voice interface idea... but not just for commanding teammates. I'd love to see it so that if you were to be standing near a civilian with a gun, you could say "You, drop the gun" and had your gun pointed right at him, and do things like hold people at gunpoint (I know, I'm a little more intuitive and a little more... rough than other people, but I'd love to be able to force surrenders out of units.) This would also be nice to do if you could snipe off an enemy unit's radio, so they had no outside contact, and then force them to surrender. Give each soldier a level of Morale or Nerves, of course subject to factors like if they're getting picked on, or picked off, by sniper fire, if they can see the enemy, so on and so forth (making things real bad for troops in Vietnam, like everybody keeps pointing out, as the Vietcong were a good chunk of the time, hiding).


Also, I like the suggestion about being able to inventory the weapons on vehicles... this brings it a little closer to a FPS version of Soldiers of Anarchy (here's the part where some people go "What game is that?"). SOA is a squad-based RTS, in a post apocalyptic scenario, with a real dynamic campaign. You can take trucks with your team, and you really have to worry about squandering high quality resources (like T-80s, Dragunovs, and such) while asking yourself if you really want to take the umpeenth 9mm handgun. I always nickname, in the game, the Ural Trucks I can get, "Shopping Carts" because that's the purpose they serve for me, I drive them along, tossing all the ammo and weapons I can't tote around in them. It'd definately be a good thing to look at, being able to pick what you want to drag along in the vehicles, and what you want to leave stockpiled in your inventory back at the base. *knows he'd be ditching every possible M-16 for AKs in most situations, because it would affect any morale ratings if such were implemented, amongst forces using the AK's because it sounds like friendly fire*

Sauragnmon.