Suicide missions
-
Months back asked why not scale target priority by distance from flot. No real answer.
Using triggers to work around the ATM deficiency inelegant as that hardly makes for a dynamic campaign.
Also mentioned months back that PAK map other than as flavor not necessary for operation of either ATM or GTM. That one’s p. obvious.
Then Dee came in putting a burden of proof of the ‘but it has to mirror real SOP’ quality that’s neither representative of what present ATM does, neither feasible, since if Falcon 4.0 code could decide theater strategy… We’d have some srs job cuts in military advisors, etc.
As for other dyncamp snafu there’s uselessness of ATM code even CONSIDERING bombing (for peace, of course) factories, not to mention bridges (everyone’s favorite by now).
Hardly see even the point of priority assignment by campaign creators, as they’re not familiar with how tasking managers work in the first place, assumptions made there, weights individual priorities residing in campaign directory have, etc. Given that BMS hacks away at tasking code w/o documenting the new order at all, snafu soon to become more of a cluster failure.
-sh
-
Target value should be scaled by PAK value. That way they could be by distance from FLOT or not, it would depend on PAK setup.
-
Then Dee came in putting a burden of proof of the ‘but it has to mirror real SOP’ quality that’s neither representative of what present ATM does, neither feasible, since if Falcon 4.0 code could decide theater strategy… We’d have some srs job cuts in military advisors, etc.
Where? what? who is “Dee”?
Given that BMS hacks away at tasking code w/o documenting the new order at all, snafu soon to become more of a cluster failure.
Unhappy with “BMS hacks”?
-
Let the troll troll DJ
He is making fool of himself
-
-
Given that BMS hacks away at tasking code w/o documenting the new order at all, snafu soon to become more of a cluster failure.
Unhappy with “BMS hacks”?What hacks? Hacking away at stuff doesn’t imply that result is hacky or whatnot.
Let the troll troll DJ
And you base that on what exactly? So far, a completely bare assertion. If you wanna diss me bro, you hafta do better than that or else risk making a fool outta yerself.
Even if positively reinforced by the usual claque. Which brings the last point to mention…
So far both demer and me put forth statements either factual or at least argued. As for the last 2 fellows we get bare assertions dissing us bros Dave and self.
In any case lotsa irony in #3 having standing on this very forum. To draw the matter further, #4 has standing in the gated community everyone heard of.
–
That technical discussion involves a flame after a third post, is tiring and discouraging. That people take code deficiencies as if they were attacks on their immediate family, even more
When guys learn of participating in a technical discussion without involving fuzzy feelings too numerous to mention, perhaps we can have one to begin with.
-sh
-
Let’s at least attempt to have a discussion with any technical merit:
@Dee
https://www.benchmarksims.org/forum/showthread.php?11132-Just-what-is-a-PAK&highlight=pakThat’s the link you asked for.
What meaning of PAK I see is at most for triggers, so that campaign creators can at least steer tasking in right direction. Can see this in FO campaigns.
But the point is of triggers not inherently needed in the first place, nor whole deal requiring some advanced AI or anything. It’s not hard to do right, no machine learning either. Merely take feedbacks of the effect of weights used and iteratively improve till campaign behavior makes enough sense at least.
There’re some special cases like scramble missions, reactive air to ground flights, etc. But those special cases are already included in the code.
If PAK needed for flavor, that it’s included now doesn’t cause any “realism” to appear outta thin air. If separate branches were to manage each PAK, we have no sign of it here at all. So it’s just flavor and ad-hoc way for campaign creators to guide tasking by way of triggers.
-sh
-
That technical discussion involves a flame after a third post, is tiring and discouraging. That people take code deficiencies as if they were attacks on their immediate family, even more
Your tone and your words are responsible of thread going flame.
And if you dont understand why you just should learn what respect means
Since you dont treat with resoectbthe people that offer you for free this simulator your comments are automatically ignored even if they are 100% true .
Btw how do i know that you are a troll ? Just because i am one of the biggest this community got
-
@Dee
https://www.benchmarksims.org/forum/showthread.php?11132-Just-what-is-a-PAK&highlight=pakThat’s the link you asked for.
No it is not.
I can just see:
I’m controlling the PAK manually all the time.
and
Manual ATO
I want you to show me or quote this:
> Then Dee came in putting a burden of proof of the ‘but it has to mirror real SOP’ quality that’s neither representative of what present ATM does, neither feasible, since if Falcon 4.0 code could decide theater strategy… We’d have some srs job cuts in military advisors, etc.
-
@Dee
It’s possible that it never occured, i.e. confusing it with different person saying something like that, something similar, or whatnot else. That explanation given so that you hopefully agree that no ill will was included in making this likely wrong assertion. Carry on!Your tone and your words are responsible of thread going flame.
As said earlier, merely considering some of the code, and individual data fields to be poor for what’s the intended purpose.
If you, or whomever else, considers this to be poor in “tone” or word choice, hardly can see self as the problem. You can make whatever accusations or even demands you want, but with that amount of sense, can’t reasonably expect that kinda talk to work on me. There’s some english expression along the lines of “get off your high horse” that’s valid in this particular context.
And if you dont understand why you just should learn what respect means
Given the lack of issues gotten when it comes to participating in both hobby and work software projects. Given lack of issues in peer interaction. I conclude that my knowledge of “what respect means” is sufficient so that your demand of my further research of the “respect” subject remains and is to remain unfulfilled…
Since you dont treat with resoectbthe people that offer you for free this simulator
That I do. Whether or not you agree with me is a different matter entirely.
-sh
-
Lets cool down a bit…
@Dee
It’s possible that it never occured, i.e. confusing it with different person saying something like that, something similar, or whatnot else.Then dont accuse when you are not sure. You cant be surprised DeeJay reacted this way, he is absolutely right, I would have done exactly the same.
You say the ATO can be improved. Sure ! I completely agree with you ! But do you know about how it works ? Whats the mechanism behind it ? That your suggestion will not break it or have unexpected consequences ? By the way, I dont either.
Instead of saying basically “oh, BMS team sucks, they said my suggestion was stupid” (which they didnt), get your hands on the F4 ATO code, review it, and suggest some argumented, technical changes and the expected change in ATO behaviour. You seem to have an excellent background*, why not put it to use for the community ?
I garantee you BMS team has already thought about most suggested improvements and they have been discussed in details.
*By the way, opentrack is a wonderful piece of software, which saved me 250€ (real TIR) so thanks
-
Good suggestion. Wish literal too, month of 30 celsius is killing me. So exhausting. Unless mercury drops soon, well…
That your suggestion will not break it or have unexpected consequences ? By the way, I dont either.
That I know not, given perspective of the jet wash dancing aircraft bug, as well as FCR GM crash. Not just refactor can cause hard to explain or reproduce issues, but even changes local to a function, and plethora of other unimaginable stuff that’s obviously right but, say, due to abuse of C undefined behavior[1] causes horrible breaks.
Since that’s some fun stuff, getting ATM analyzed and changed in some places a fun side-project. Would BMS team member look at the changes though? Being serious here, not asking anyone for promises, or expecting to review thoroughly, say, complete crapola, wasting time better spent drinking or many other ways
I’m glad for your feedback in the last paragraph, if only markers caught up, instead of byzantine led setup. But digressing.
[1] In case of doubt, not dissing the BMS bros here. F4.0 code so messed up (if cringing at fread()/fwrite() on data structures that even include pointers, think again) that if one think had to be said about the BMS endeavor, it’s that it’s a ****ing wonder about the amount of competent effort put into making the whole thing work in the first place.
PS wrt @Dee misremembered stuff, even mentioned the thing once few months back. Not sure what way he reacted cause he was civil to me in the thread, as well as in general so far. People make mistakes, people misremember. Unless @Dee has a problem why drag the thing.
-
This post is deleted! -
One is an autodidactic self-teached “coder”, the other a veteran F4 “analyst” and modder. Both i have never seen “fyling” once since BMS exists.
Both have their worthy know-how in their own fields though and i repsect them both, but that above is “blub” “blub”…As i know you both personally - no offense intented.
@Stahlik: How did you decrypt the BMS code if i may ask, because any other F4 code you might be looking at (found on net) might be completly irrelevant?
There’s some english expression along the lines of “get off your high horse” that’s valid in this particular context.
Like that ??? :mrgreen:
-
PS wrt @Dee misremembered stuff, even mentioned the thing once few months back. Not sure what way he reacted cause he was civil to me in the thread, as well as in general so far. People make mistakes, people misremember. Unless @Dee has a problem why drag the thing.
Sorry. My English is probably not good enough.
I do not understand. Please reformulate.
-
Hey guys,
maybe little bit back on topic…
GET IT???
Not really.
Where in code have you found that the accumulation of all feature values is crucial for mission generation?
Because e.g. for an airbase the priority to get a flight planned to strike it, is dependent on it’s current usage (plus some other stuff).
So I don’t see why we do get suicide missions because of this!Cheers
Biker -
.GET IT??
Not really.
Because e.g. for an airbase the priority to get a flight planned to strike it, is dependent on it’s current usage (plus some other stuff).
So I don’t see why we do get suicide missions because of this!Cheers
BikerTotally agree! As you point out, the usage of a certain airbase, no matter what it’s priority is, will draw strikes. Lots of variables as to why there are suicide strikes. From all the stuff I’ve seen, PAK priority, unit placement, AC role scores for specific missions, i.e., Strike/Sead Strike all play a role in suicide strikes.
These can all be controlled, which I’ve done, to reduce these suicide strikes!
C9
-
Biker,
Clear your inbox!!!
Dave
-
-
@Cloud:
Totally agree! As you point out, the usage of a certain airbase, no matter what it’s priority is, will draw strikes.
True, but more true is the second quote of yours (below). Obj priorities and ATO scedulings are seperate things.
@Cloud:
Lots of variables as to why there are suicide strikes.
ABSOLUTLY.
@Cloud:
These can all be controlledC9
DEFINILTY. Not only that, “suicide missions” aka Bombers flying deep into enemy territory i.e without escort at best, and no tactical timing can even be ELIMINATED totally >>>> … regardless of “VALUES” of objectives as pointed out in post#1. That objectives have or require “values” plays a role in different ways, but not connected with “suicide missions” directly as such.
I.e in RedFlag 4 Deep Strike missions (aka suicide-kamikaze-attacks on ojbectives of any kind - not only runways - far behind enemy lines) do not exist AT ALL (by AI, humans do all kind of silly stuff :P).
I agree, it can be tricky to “master” the ATM and GTM in its “habbits” and how it does what it does (no good documentations available and alot of “modder-assumptions floating around”)… but its do-able.