Suicide missions
-
@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. -
@A.S:
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.
Totally Agree!
@A.S:
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.
Very True, takes some tinkering, but it’s totally doable as you say.
Love the “modder-assumption” part, LOL
C9
-
Sooooooooo……you and RAM22 are now the MASTERS of this???
Prey tell where you two acquired this sudden In-depth knowledge of the associated files and post what you have found so that others may LEARN!!!
That would help others in their pursuit.demer
-
Sooooooooo……you and RAM22 are now the MASTERS of this???
demer
Sorry to go off topic, but I am NOT RAM22. I ask the moderators to admonish anyone who keeps personally attacking me and accusing me of being someone who I am not.
I’m tired of these personal attacks.
Just because you make assertions with frivolous post’s that you think are totally correct and you end it with “Get It”, does not mean YOU “Get It”.
Do you know some stuff, sure, but you don’t know it all. That’s up to you to deal with, not us.
C9
-
-
@Cloud:
Sorry to go off topic, but I am NOT RAM22. I ask the moderators to admonish anyone who keeps personally attacking me and accusing me of being someone who I am not.
I’m tired of these personal attacks.
Just because you make assertions with frivolous post’s that you think are totally correct and you end it with “Get It”, does not mean YOU “Get It”.
Do you know some stuff, sure, but you don’t know it all. That’s up to you to deal with, not us.
C9
Please excuse my error C9.
As far as personal attacks, I too am tired of yours. I have never stated in this forum or the many that came B4 it that “I know it all” what I have stated is that “We don’t know what we don’t know, but we can find out what we don’t know”
So that being stated again, let’s question who you are and what iteration of Falcon that you have imparted your knowledge to?Ala: “These can all be controlled, which I’ve done, to reduce these suicide strikes!”
Where have you done this???
Please share.As far as frivolous post’s, they are not. They are intended to open discussion on a topic and the “Get it” was referring to the Attack Order only.
Guess you missed that.I get it and have for years, when you can prove to me that you have helped rewrite the CODE or the DB for any iteration of Falcon, then I might take you more seriously.
As it is now, your just another troll……:)
LOL…thanks Paveway,
tired demer -
Prey tell where you two acquired this sudden In-depth knowledge…
No offense and i hope it will not be read as personal attack, but let me be honest and straight forward for a moment here.
It wasn´t you as you spread around in self-glorifiacations just too often Demer. You helped me in the very early beginnings introducing me into some bascis of tools (and im thankfull for that),
but it wasn´t you, who “teached” me(us) all the things learnt in that journey. Infact, you purposly mislead me (and Mystic) often, maybe because you wanted to “make us learn better” (as you claimed) or you just didn´t know and have/had issues with admitting it.
You are not the “father” of all the 3rd party modders, regardless what you have wasted your time on in the past (FF Korea2012, AF etc).
That the credit you wish for is not given is noones fault other than yours. If credit is really an important factor, all you need to do is finish a work and release it (and i mean finish, not experimental stages, which we have seen too often in F4 times). Turst me, noone wants a “look what i am working for” theater or project…or a “what i did in the very past story” …people want results - and you know that.
As much as i like to socialize with you as man you are, as much i (we) sometimes run away from that “Godfather of all modders” attitude…. or we just say “yeah yeah” in respect and move on.
Falcon can be indeed tricky as it comes with many evolutions each time and no complete documentation is available, but it isn´t rocket-science either. All it takes is analytic thinking, testing and
dedication to make the “best” of what is given. It make take time till more modders and theater-builders get a better bigger picture or till 3rd party modders develope better and more “fruitfull” relations (communication) with BMS developers (the know-how of both is valueable, complementing AND CRUCIAL!) …but so be it… we will get there one day.
I am saying this, because campaign and theater-builders “out there” learnt alot the BMS developers could profit from … and on the other hand theater-builders reached their “limits”, because for further improvements relative code-changes are required - and at the end it will be the vpilots to judge the flight expirience and the environment delivered.peace out
A.S
PS: you can eliminate sucide missions not only “reduce” them - without changing Obj values whatsoever (proper .pri, .aii, mission.dat files and smart role distributions in the DB are your friends here as the standard ones are only “general templates” for a “multi-purpose” theater). I don´t think, manipulating Obj values for that purpose only is a good approach as it might have other linked side-effects.