ARMA 2: OA beta build 77159

[twisted 127]

i find it strange that ai try and keep in formation even when told to take cover. that should break the formation as cover from fire becomes priority.

[Zipper5 74]

One person wants control over where the AI move when they go into Danger mode, BIS make it so, but then the other wants them to act autonomously. BIS can never win. :rolleyes:

[stun 5]

So far I'm liking the new AI. I haven't had a chance to test it much, but it feels more right somehow.

[tj72 0]

BIS can never win. [/Quote]

If the AI are told to take cover or if the player tell them to move somewhere in tactical view then they should move there. If they are in formation then its good for them to stay in formation for the most part. BIS can win if they just make reasonable changes and dont try to over automate things for a small group of players who dont care if some new system they want ruins the game for countless other people.

BIS can "win" if they just think about keeping players options open and keeping the largest number of users happy.

[mrcash2009 0]

I have a video showing the AI in action (all be it not online as I need to re up a new youtube account). All I can say is that if anyone saw the vid they would think it was MP session (it was SP).

I like it, alot. took me by suprise when i moved and they suddenly took it upon themselves to flank and spread to trees and crouch, peeping around. Realy "felt" like they were acting upon what they say .. "go, covering" ... and yes, they looked more like they were covering and the next bounding unit moved up to next tree to play peek-a-boo. Must get it online.

[froggyluv 2130]

I have a video showing the AI in action (all be it not online as I need to re up a new youtube account). All I can say is that if anyone saw the vid they would think it was MP session (it was SP).

I like it, alot. took me by suprise when i moved and they suddenly took it upon themselves to flank and spread to trees and crouch, peeping around. Realy "felt" like they were acting upon what they say .. "go, covering" ... and yes, they looked more like they were covering and the next bounding unit moved up to next tree to play peek-a-boo. Must get it online.

Haven't played this game in some time but after reading this I decided to give the Ol Girl a whirl :)

Problem I still see is in CQB - the enemy (sometimes) completely disregards the player if too close. I tried the simple village assault mission Hike in Hills I believe, and got to the rear of the enemy, and eventually walked right up to an enemy who was rotating left/right looking for threat. I was still able to dance around him while he didnt seem to be aware of me at all :(

I wonder if the cycles to force AI to check for imminent threats is too slow :confused:

[stun 5]

I'm definately enjoying the fact that I don't have to baby sit and micro manage the AI as much. So far I'm loving the changes to the AI. It really does feel sometimes like I'm playing with humans rather than AI. Had a couple of cool moments when I ordered my squad to attack an enemy and they automatically split into two teams and flanked the enemy using bounding overwatch. The AI seem to have more purpose about them - they don't seem to be milling about like headless chickens as much. Top Job BI, keep up the good work!

Edited January 15, 2011 by stun

[twisted 127]

One person wants control over where the AI move when they go into Danger mode, BIS make it so, but then the other wants them to act autonomously. BIS can never win. :rolleyes:

bis should do what they believe is an authentic reaction to incoming fire - every one has opinions and its importnat for bis to weigh em up them disregard or take into account as necessary.

and more importnat than opinions is actaul observation of troops under fire taking cover and using that

[Alex72 1]

Ive seen some spectacular AI moves as well in this beta. Definatelly going in the right direction. :)

There are some things that make you sad of course when it comes to AI. For example AI that you order to go somewhere chose to move in visibility of the enemy AI when they have a big wall to move behind (and they know the enemy is right there - and they get killed). Things like that is annoying, but i bet it's hard to fix to 100% perfection. Im satisfied however that BIS keeps updating us. Could'nt ask for more. :cool:

[mrcash2009 0]

Cz5Mx7gzm9M

Heres a very nasty thrown together (sorry) video of the AI using cover in danger mode of what I mentioned in previous post.

[SFJackBauer 10]

One person wants control over where the AI move when they go into Danger mode, BIS make it so, but then the other wants them to act autonomously. BIS can never win. :rolleyes:

Danger mode =/= Seek cover command.

Modes are like "state of mind" from my understanding, in danger mode the squad still must not break formation, but should move more cautiously. Once a command is issued, unless its a "group move to" command which still should maintain formation, then the priority should become executing the command, be it seek cover, engage etc.

[stun 5]

Except in real life if you are under fire (combat mode, so to speak) your priority isn't to keep formation it is to get to the closest cover. If the AI tries to stay in formation it may not be able to make it to cover. If you want the AI to stay in formation when under fire you might be happier playing the original Operation flashpoint as the AI was quite happy staying put to get slaughtered like a bunch of idiots back in the day.

Despite the fact that the AI is moving out of formation, I've found that in the current Beta it does follow commands and will attempt to move where you tell it, or follow you far more rapidly than it used to. The added bonus is that it looks for cover along the way.

Edited January 16, 2011 by stun

[SFJackBauer 10]

If you want the AI to stay in formation when under fire

Quote me where did I said that.

Under fire the AI should seek cover - unless there is no cover nearby, then it should return fire as accurately as possible.

But I was talking when you issue the "Danger" mode. I issue it when I expect enemy contact soon. Is it the same mode when the AI gets under fire? In danger mode I want them moving along, but under fire I expect them to do the behavior you described.

For example, I have half of my squad engaging a group of enemies. Other half is on other side of road, behind a hill, where I'm inside a Humvee. This second element is not under fire, neither has line of sight to any of the enemies. However, the simple task of ordering them to embark the Humvee takes ages, because after the order is issued, they look around, run, look, run, look, and then enter the vehicle. In the end they comply, but the lack of urgency in executing certain arguably simple actions is what bothers me most.

Edited January 16, 2011 by SFJackBauer

[NeMeSiS 11]

Is it the same mode when the AI gets under fire?

Yes. Aware is for imminent danger but not under direct attack, safe is for for no expected threats.

Edited January 17, 2011 by NeMeSiS

[Alwarren 2765]

Despite the fact that the AI is moving out of formation, I've found that in the current Beta it does follow commands and will attempt to move where you tell it, or follow you far more rapidly than it used to. The added bonus is that it looks for cover along the way.

As I said before, this beta's AI has two major flaws.

1) They run ahead, going into a V formation when they should be in a wedge formation. They do that all the time, and they spread out too far, and most of all, they run ahead too far. For example, I was attacking a settlement that was swarming with hostiles. I order my squad in danger mode, they immediately run ahead INTO the village, and get slaughtered. In the end, only I, the other human player, and one AI remained - the others got picked off easily because they just charged ahead.

2) They zig-zag in front of each other, and myself. I suppose this is a consequence of 1) and they would normally zig-zag behind me, but as it is now, they constantly get into each others line of fire. I had one guy consistently crouching in front of me, even though there wasn't any cover at all, and even though he should have been at least 30 meters to my side.

Maybe the above two issues can be fixed by selecting a different formation (i.e. Vee instead of wedge) but that is a workaround at most. It also shows in MrCash's video, if you have a large squad with, say, 10 or more members, you will have constant crossing of fire arcs.

[rübe 127]

Following scenario: a vehicle with a driver and a gunner (any jeep with mg for example) are beeing given a MOVE waypoint. What happens now is that the gunner(!) is _not_ unitReady, while the driver(!) is unitReady. Why?

Shouldn't the driver not be ready until the MOVE waypoint is completed? I don't get this. Is there a good reason for this? Has this been always like this?

I mean, shouldn't a simple (unitReady (driver _vehicle)) work reliably for all vehicles? Even if there is a commander too, still the driver gets an order to move somewhere and shouldn't be ready.

Or like this: I'm totally fine if the gunner isn't ready either. But please, the driver shouldn't be ready in the first place.

So, that's a bug, yes?

And on another note concerning convoys: please teach vehicles in column formation to simply stop and wait a little if there is currently something in the way. Have a cooldown and maybe after a minute - if things haven't changed for good - let the vehicle try to find another way. But for the love of god, stop that "oh, I can't move at the speed I'd like to if I don't wan't to bump into something in front of me.. ok let's try a sharp right/left turn and go offroads. Oh, it's better now? (the vehicle in front of this one finally moved and isn't considered an obstacle anymore) Ok, let's make a full circle or two, and try to catch up...". Boy it's tedious.

Maybe implement a simply check: "is the obstacle in front of me a vehicle? can it move? Ok then we will wait a little and not go immediately offroad.". How about that?

Edited January 17, 2011 by ruebe

[whisper 0]

So, that's a bug, yes?

Probably

=> http://dev-heaven.net/projects/cis/issues ;)

[76 0]

Lol, how did there manage to be 3 threads created for this build?

"ow ow cause I wanted to be cool first...!" said cooptain america.

[stun 5]

As I said before, this beta's AI has two major flaws.

1) They run ahead, going into a V formation when they should be in a wedge formation. They do that all the time, and they spread out too far, and most of all, they run ahead too far. For example, I was attacking a settlement that was swarming with hostiles. I order my squad in danger mode, they immediately run ahead INTO the village, and get slaughtered. In the end, only I, the other human player, and one AI remained - the others got picked off easily because they just charged ahead.

From the limited testing I've done they don't always seem to run ahead. I could be wrong, but I get the feeling that they move ahead because there is better cover when they are under fire. If I don't want them moving forward I just give them the hold command. I don't mind them getting forward when I'm under attack I've never liked the fact that when under fire the squad leader would get picked off first for taking the point position. In my opinion, it looks pretty cool when the AI track forward into cover. While there are lots of areas that need to be improved (Convoy behaviour for instance), it's good to see BI spending some time enhancing the AI; it's been long over due.

@SFJackBauer

Apologies mate, I thought you meant Danger/combat mode (i.e. under fire)- but as you meant aware mode, I agree with you - they should maintain formation and follow orders while they are in aware mode.

Edited January 17, 2011 by stun

[fruity_rudy 16]

Good direction with the AI, but still i'd love to be able to tell em 7,4 (relax), and they are relaxed and follow me in formation..everytime i need to get fast in a chopper at the LZ , they look around , cover each other and stuff.

Thats still very annoying. Telling them to relax and go inside the helo(which should last less then 10 seconds, when they are standing right next to it) would be so god damn nice..

[Ulanthorn 10]

contrary I like that I don't have to oder them into combat mode when in danger...The covering is better than just standig around upright and beeing sniped away one after the other. In combat you better exspect the worst case, thats what is taught RL too. Sudden Death comes over you when you're at ease.

[suma 8]

Following scenario: a vehicle with a driver and a gunner (any jeep with mg for example) are beeing given a MOVE waypoint. What happens now is that the gunner(!) is _not_ unitReady, while the driver(!) is unitReady. Why?

It depends on vehicle, but for most vehicles this is OK. The gunner is the commander of the vehicle and the gunner is given the command (he then direct the driver what to do to have the command completed). The driver is not "unit" at all and asking him unitReady has no sense.

[rübe 127]

It depends on vehicle, but for most vehicles this is OK. The gunner is the commander of the vehicle and the gunner is given the command (he then direct the driver what to do to have the command completed). The driver is not "unit" at all and asking him unitReady has no sense.

Thanks for the clarification, though I can follow only half way :o

So the gunner is in charge of the vehicle, he takes commands (eg. from waypoints) and he is responsible, thus he is not unitReady until the MOVE waypoints (or any other explicit command) has completed. I'm fine with that part.

What I don't really get is this part:

The driver is not "unit" at all and asking him unitReady has no sense.

So in other words: the driver didn't recieve an explicit command, he isn't responsible for anything, thus he is unitReady all the time. There is no command for him to complete. Right? Really?

The gunner/commander of said vehicle told him (implicitly) to drive somewhere. Sure, it's no explicit or official command to him, but shouldn't this count as command nevertheless?

I mean, "unitReady unit" equals to: the unit is available. But the driver clearly isn't, since he has been given a command (internally/implicitly) by his gunner/commander. So, shouldn't infact both of them be _not_ unitReady? That's the part I still struggle with. IMHO the commanders unitReady of a vehicle should affect all of his crew too (but not the cargo).

But ok, if this is by design, I'll simply check if the driver, gunner and maybe a commander are all unitReady - booleaned together. Or is there a simpler way to get the "man in charge" (or "unit" executing commands) of a vehicle?

EDIT: oh, if anyone cares. This works fine for a "vehicleReady":

_vehicleReady = {
  private ["_veh", "_ready"];
  _veh = _this;
  _ready = true;

  {
     if (!(isNull _x)) then
     {
        _ready = _ready && (unitReady _x);
     };
  } forEach [
     (commander _veh),
     (gunner _veh),
     (driver _veh)
  ];

  _ready
};

Edited January 17, 2011 by ruebe

[nkenny 1051]

Good direction with the AI, but still i'd love to be able to tell em 7,4 (relax), and they are relaxed and follow me in formation..everytime i need to get fast in a chopper at the LZ , they look around , cover each other and stuff.

Thats still very annoying. Telling them to relax and go inside the helo(which should last less then 10 seconds, when they are standing right next to it) would be so god damn nice..

Change to either the Close column or Delta formation (~-8-8 or ~-8-9) to have the AI stop most of its bounding overwatch

-k

[Grizzle 0]

I have a video showing the AI in action (all be it not online as I need to re up a new youtube account). All I can say is that if anyone saw the vid they would think it was MP session (it was SP).

I like it, alot. took me by suprise when i moved and they suddenly took it upon themselves to flank and spread to trees and crouch, peeping around. Realy "felt" like they were acting upon what they say .. "go, covering" ... and yes, they looked more like they were covering and the next bounding unit moved up to next tree to play peek-a-boo. Must get it online.

I agree. Played some PMC missions over the weekend and I was mighty impressed with the AI. Seemed much more realistic and I felt they were moving/reacting much better than I had ever seen before.