AI Squad Command - to be brushed aside in A3?

[ghost101 10]

We all know that the AI squad command interface in ArmA is far from perfect. The impression we have of a poor interface is partly due to less than great interface design (it's not as good as, say, Ghost Recon's interface) but also an unavoidable consequence of allowing such unique level of AI squad control. There's a trade-off, on one hand the current interface CAN be improved but on the other it is never going to feel "natural" and intuitive issuing such a variety of squad commands using a keyboard. It will always require practice and patience, that is just something that lazy gamers will have to accept.

*NOTE: when i say the interface is poor, I mean just that. The INTERFACE to the squad command set is poor, NOT the idea of expressive squad commands itself.*

But hey, that's one of the main reasons for a sequel - to improve on the games good ideas, right? Well, apparetly not. Apparently (judging by this interview with Ivan of BIS which I've just read) ArmA 3 will be "improving" the idea of AI squad command by making it less expressive and cutting it down. I'm genuinely shocked and disappointed!

Ivan has informed me that the squad command is giving way to a more selfish experience, playing as one soldier in a battle that will come to life around you. There will be elements of squad command again but nowhere near as heavy as what was used in Arma II, something that was complained about and something that has been looked into.

So, as Ivan says, ArmA 3 will make the player the "center of focus". Surrounded by AI over which you have little control, I pressume. Sound familiar? Yes, it sounds like a regular FPS to me, like Battlefield or somesuch dull game where the player's "squad AI" is really just pretty graphical content which surrounds the player to give him a false sense of being in a squad.

Were ArmA fans really "complaining about squad command" and asking for it to be diluted/removed, as Ivan claims? Or were they simply expressing a desire for BIS to IMPROVE the interface? Surely I'm not the only one who LOVES the rich expressive "language" of the current set of Squad Commands in ArmA 2 and has taken time to understand and use them effectively? Sure, the effort involved in learning to use squad command is not attractive to "casual gamers" (that big Squad menu will scare them - ooooohhh!!!) Squade command is not a selling point that's going to have potential customers from the CoD community drooling at the mouth. But, really, are BIS trying to go head-to-head with Battlefield and CoD with ArmA 3 or do they want to be the King of their own domain by refining a game which currently offers rich detail and player tactical control?

I know for certain that I'm not the only ArmA player who uses the Voice Activated Command program and has been able to bypass the current fidly keyboard interface. Using the VAC interface to ArmA's squad command makes the whole thing natural and you really see the great potential of a rich AI squad command set using a BETTER interface. BIS, if you want to know what is possible with a GOOD interface to your squad command set, just watch some of JojoTheSlayer's videos. This is how dynamic AI squad control can be, once you take the time to learn it.

I find myself using much of the squad command set currently in ArmA because the commands enable some surprizingly complex single-player squad manoeuvres. The AI is my friend in ArmA, AI units are my squad buddies - I've come to understand them and speak their language (through the command interface [admittedly via VAC - lol]). AI and player are one and in (almost) perfect syncronicity, working together. :) The commands are NOT a burden to me (and I'm sure many other ArmA fans), they are something to keep and perfect!

Currently, the the idea of a squad in ArmA is REAL, it involves communication and learning to talk to your squad members. Without it the game will lose a lot of depth and tactical control.

Please BIS, do not dilute Squad Command - many of us know how to use it and appretiate it greatly. Just refine its interface and perfect what you have.

Edited September 8, 2011 by ghost101

[maddogx 13]

This has been discussed already. They were only talking about AI usage in the campaign, not gutting AI control in general.

[ghost101 10]

Do you have a link to the thread where this was discussed? I did do a quick search, but I can't see it.

What you say is a bit more reassuring. At least the mechnics will remain but I guess if they're not going to be used in the main campaigns then that will mean that the whole SC system will be neglected somewhat and not recieve the development focus the interface needs and deserves. Also, I doubt I'll find the official campaign very enjoyable without the squad control.

[maddogx 13]

I searched aswell but couldn't find it. The discussion is probably buried somewhere in one of the huge threads this forum tends to produce.

As for the SC system being neglected, they certainly haven't been talking about it yet. One would assume that they would mention it if they planned to make big improvements, so for now it seems safe to assume that the AI controls are still the same.

[katipo66 94]

I wouldn't care if they did away with it for something much simpler and made the AI more intuitive, I.e. Copy my stance and follow me (real tight on my six) for starters... I would love to see a video of someone leading their AI squad through a firefight with minimal casualties, cos I sucked badly at it and felt it was a chore/bore to micro manage them

[metalcraze 290]

I would love to see a video of someone leading their AI squad through a firefight with minimal casualties, cos I sucked badly at it and felt it was a chore/bore to micro manage them

What about 3 AI teams at once?

12 of us vs. 30 of them, a few simple squad tactics, only 2 casualties

Edited September 8, 2011 by metalcraze

[ghost101 10]

Katipo66:

uuumm, well i guess i just play the single-player aspect of ArmA differently. For me it is like an RTS on steroids which gives you a unique first-person perspective. I would not enjoy playing it as a regular FPS, which (judging by the interview) seems to be the plan for ArmA 3 campaign. It would be pretty difficult to setup elaborate flanking manuvors, parallel sub-squd positioning, etc. if the squad commands were to be reduced to basic "follow me" and "copy my stance" commands. :( of course, things can be improved but even what is already there enables pretty efficient unit management - it just takes practice and a feel for what the AI will do in certain situations. i play a lot of traditional RTS (Men of War, Homeworld, Star Craft, etc) so i guess I enjoy the micro-management.

but i guess most ArmA players see the campaings as a basic warmup/tutorial session in preparation for multiplayer online games with human team-members. so i can understand why it's not priority. shame.

---------- Post added at 02:40 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:39 PM ----------

What about 3 AI teams at once?

12 of us vs. 30 of them, a few simple squad tactics, only 2 casualties

now that's what i'm talking about!! :D great stuff!

[Dawks 10]

What about 3 AI teams at once?

12 of us vs. 30 of them, a few simple squad tactics, only 2 casualties

Just to say: this is precisely why I re-visted wiki last night, to see if this had been improved.

Let's show some interest and see if BIS responds!

^5

p.s. thanks for the links to video ... it'd be great to have a whole series on this

[JSj 12]

If someone is interrested, the previous discussion of this was somewhere in the "Arma 3 confirmed features" thread.

I agree with ghost101, if the current system can be improved, then great, by all means do that. But it's better to keep it like it is now rather than removing or reducing control over the AI. Then the game would be little more than just a more realistic version of a standard FPS.

Edited September 9, 2011 by Johan S

[ghost101 10]

I done a quick scan of the thread, but I only see 100 pages of people discussing how many different variations of a gun will be included and whether trees will have fancy model 3.0 shaders.

Was hoping that the "new official intel" released today would give me something to get excited about. But again, just a video demo of one single player unit running around like a CounterStrike rambo - without any sign of a tactical squad interface and/or command.

But it's early days yet guys, let's hope BIS will consider us fans of single-player tactical AI Squad Control/command and try to get us more enthusiatic about A3 :)

[Drumheller 19]

One of the videos showed that was talking about the campaign said that for the A3 campaign you could play as a "lone wolf" or a "team/squad leader". I think there will be options and ways to recruit AI to your team for the A3 SP campaign.

Also, I'm absolutely positive that these AI changes you spoke of in your original post are only regarding the single player campaign. They have been working extremely hard recently in ArmA 2 on improving the AI in every way imaginable, and I can only imagine how much better than AI and AI control in ArmA 3 will be.

Oh last thing, I use VAC(Voice Activated Commands) to control AI in my games now. It is 100% absolutely amazing and allows me to micromanage the hell out of my AI team and squadmates. You can use the 30 day trial from here: http://www.dwvac.com/ All you have to do is speak your AI commands and there's an ArmA 2 profile already on their website assuming you use the default ArmA controls for AI(I don't and it took me a while to set up the profile, but it's well worth it).

Much better AI control. Your family may look at you a tad weird while you talk to the computer though.

[metalcraze 290]

VAC (and Pilfius before that) are great if you don't have anyone else within 5 meters of you (=

I recommend them too if you have a relatively good mic that will record your voice good enough from any angle - although I myself can press number keys fast enough

[JSj 12]

I done a quick scan of the thread, but I only see 100 pages of people discussing how many different variations of a gun will be included and whether trees will have fancy model 3.0 shaders.

The discussion starts on this page:

http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?t=119512&page=90

, but there's no real new info there. It would have been nice if someone from Bohemia could have settled this matter with some clarification about what squad control will be like in Arma 3.

[ghost101 10]

Ah, page 90 onwards. thanks Johan. A lot of speculation there. I agree, it would be great to hear some words from BIS on this matter. The only "official" statement we really have is the interview, which doesn't leave a good impression of A3 - as far as single-player tactical squad level play is concerned.

And, btw (from people's posts in that thread) I get the impression that there is a mixture of opinions about SC coming from those who have mastered SC and others who are just not as comfortable with it. Again, that is not a failing of the SC system/concept - no excuse to neglect it or dilute it in anyway. metalcraze's demo vid shows what is possible if you have the ability to use it and many of us clearly do.

Better interface and better tutorials for the nubs, please BIS.

[WarriorM4 10]

If they take away AI squad control in campaigns or even MP it will totally ruin this game.Why do that when every facet of Arma before it had it?Iv'e been with this series since OFP1 and don't want to see this happen.

[Maio 293]

They are not taking away squad command... I don't know why you are so concerned. It's just that the single player campaign will be more player centric, yet the info clearly states that you can also be a commander

Quote from ArmA 3 website:

Single-Player Campaign

Evolve from a lone prey into a military commander in an open-ended & story-driven campaign.

[ghost101 10]

I think that much has already been established. But take the two sources of information together:

Evolve from a lone prey into a military commander in an open-ended & story-driven campaign.

There will be elements of squad command again but nowhere near as heavy as what was used in Arma II

It is still not comforting. So, sure, you still (EVENTUALLY) have the chance to evolve into a squad commander. But once you arrive, what kind of commands will you have? Simplified compared to ArmA II ? I really hope not, for all the reasons mentioned in my previous posts. I can understand if they want to ease new players into SC, but what about experienced ArmA players? For how long in the campaign must we be forced to play it as a regular FPS shooter?

Just hope you are right and that BIS strike the right balance as the SP campaigns are quite imprtant for me in ArmA. I do not see them as tutorial missions for noobs.

Edited September 11, 2011 by ghost101

[WarriorM4 10]

There will be elements of squad command again but nowhere near as heavy as what was used in Arma II

That is very alarming.Does this mean that BIS is going the way of console gaming and selling out its core base of customers who crave the complexity?If they decide to "dumb down" the software they are going to lose a lot of long time customers.I sure hope this isn't true.

I do MP with Domination and Warfare using the ACE mod but the single player campaigns are very important to me to.I don't see them as tutorial missions either.There is a huge group of people that make them and they are very enjoyable.

Edited September 11, 2011 by WarriorM4

[Maio 293]

That is very alarming.Does this mean that BIS is going the way of console gaming and selling out its core base of customers who crave the complexity?If they decide to "dumb down" the software they are going to lose a lot of long time customers.I sure hope this isn't true.

I do MP with Domination and Warfare using the ACE mod but the single player campaigns are very important to me to.I don't see them as tutorial missions either.There is a huge group of people that make them and they are very enjoyable.

Once again , he was talking about the SP campaign, not the whole game. Nothing is getting dumbed down :)

They simply want to make a more user friendly campaign so that new players can get into the game with more ease.

[WarriorM4 10]

Once again , he was talking about the SP campaign, not the whole game. Nothing is getting dumbed down :)

They simply want to make a more user friendly campaign so that new players can get into the game with more ease.

User friendly?Whats not user friendly already?Ahhh,yes making the game less complex so those brain dead COD and MOH players can comprehend it.Sad!Sign of the times I guess.:rolleyes:The series has been very successful as is.Big thumbs down on this idea.

Edited September 11, 2011 by WarriorM4

[dmarkwick 261]

I see this thread has almost immediately turned into the sort of squealing girl hysteria that making unfounded assumptions usually produces. Try reading & understanding ALL the info ladies, before getting into a circle panty bunching state.

[ghost101 10]

Once again , he was talking about the SP campaign, not the whole game. Nothing is getting dumbed down

They simply want to make a more user friendly campaign so that new players can get into the game with more ease.

Once again, many people value the SP campaigns and don't want to see them simplified for the sake of new players (or less capable players). If players have difficulty with the mechanics of the game, then better tutorials should be provided. That's what the "Tutorial Missions" are for. The solution is not to remove critical aspects of the game from the main campaign - surely (ie: rich Squad Control).

Also, you seem to dismiss the value of SP play in ArmA. Perhaps you only value MP, which I understand. But many of us enjoy a real BIS campaign and their high production values. I've had ArmA for only a few months, but already I have played the Crimson Lance campaign through 4 times. It's a "difficult" campaign (by your standards) but VERY enjoyable and important part of the ArmA package.

Sure, an "easier" game of Maze - but not as it should be.

---------- Post added at 11:57 PM ---------- Previous post was at 11:52 PM ----------

I see this thread has almost immediately turned into the sort of squealing girl hysteria that making unfounded assumptions usually produces. Try reading & understanding ALL the info ladies, before getting into a circle panty bunching state.

the thread is based on an interview with Ivan. i have tried not to rely so much on speculation. but I still have concerns with even the official announcement regarding the main campaign and emphasis on Squad Control.

i don't think it's squealing, or unfounded hysteria. perhaps you're aware of other information I've overlooked?

[Maio 293]

User friendly?Whats not user friendly already?Ahhh,yes making the game less complex so those brain dead COD and MOH players can comprehend it.Sad!Sign of the times I guess.:rolleyes:The series has been very successful as is.Big thumbs down on this idea.

More user friendly as in built in tutorial hints and not being forced to lead a squad if you dont want to :), thus the option to go the lone wolf path or if you like leading squads you can be a commander.

Also keep in mind that BIS is a bussines, they need income to survive. The more people that buy it and decide to stick with the series, the better.Lot's of players consider a games SP campaign the entry point. Making the campaign more user friendly helps smooth the process of getting into ArmA and then understanding it better.

[dmarkwick 261]

perhaps you're aware of other information I've overlooked?

The most relevant information is that BIS never remove features.

[ghost101 10]

DMarkwick:

yep, well ArmA is more of a system than a one-shot game. so I believe you when you say they will not remove features. I'm sure now (since my first post) that they will not actually remove the ability for content creators to use much or all of the SC commands currently in ArmA. That doesn't mean that they can't/won't neglect what is already there by not developing it further. especially if current fans do not let them know that actually it is a great defining feature of ArmA - that maybe just needs a cleaner interface and better tutorials.

If you look at the campaign from the latest (PMC) expansion, it's safe to say it may show a potential trend to neglect strategic single-player AI squad play in ArmA. Ive not even been able to bring myself to complete the PMC campaign as it goes against all the attraction of the original game's campaigns (and the fantastic BAF expansion). It's like playing a very poor traditional FPS. If the PMC campaign was the early phase of BIS's response to people "complaining about the difficulty of Squad Command" (as Ivan puts it in that interview) and they plan to follow that path in A3, then there's something to worry about.

There is a lot more that can be done with AI SC and if it is not fully present in the main campaign then I do not see any reason for BIS to give it the development it deserves. The suggestion of Ivan to cut it back and simplify it would be a step back for ArmA. That is not the solution. I'm saying this as a recent convert who has become a big fan of ArmA and who does not play a single other game that could be considered an "FPS", that's all.

but i think i will stop these posts now, because they really are beging to become pure speculation :) but i hope you get the reason for my concern at least.