AI not in foucs ?

[Tom1 10]

never thought i'd see the day arma players argued over which console is better on an arma thread :/

[hellfire257 3]

Actually the lowest platform is PS3. The CPU is less powerful than that of X360 as well as a videocard (GF6800 vs. Radeon X1900 of X360).

The "8 core CPU!!1" is just a marketing trick. Even PS-fanboys beloved Kojima said PS3 is shit. There's a reason why PS3 games look worse than X360 and have CPU-dependent stuff cut out from them the most if we will take the same title for all 3 platforms.

Flame-bait much?

[hawk66de 10]

never thought i'd see the day arma players argued over which console is better on an arma thread :/

you're right^^we should come back to the OT. So, I'd really like to know if there is a 'common' agreement that the AI guys should get more individual personality...so bringing a little rpg to make them less robotic?

Now I remember the project title: "Next Generation PC Game". And some of the features, which I have describe in my initial post (role playing stuff, individual AI personality) were on the feature list.

[metalcraze 290]

Flame-bait much?

2c about a sad truth. But this thread isn't about this.

[Innomadic 10]

Since i actually own both consoles, i do agree, the Cell architecture is terrible for making games, which is the reason why most early games have some major issues, for example Uncharted has massive horizontal tearing issues, massive slowdown around water areas and the PS3 signature "fuzz" around moving characters and objects. Its game breaking (but its Naughty Dogs first PS3 game, and since they're a fav dev of mine, i'll soldier on).

However thats not to say that if a studio, say PD (GT) or Guerrilla (Killzone), put their resources to it it can't produce fantastic looking games with minimal issues. The problem is that most studios port over from the 360 to the PS3, leading to lower quality on average for the PS3. As a whole, when you count the best games and the best features, they are pretty much equal.

Not that this has any relevance to Arma 3 AI, but i think it needs to be said.

[froggyluv 2136]

Back OT: We've all bitched and moaned about proper pathfinding for AI as well as animations -1 outta 2 on deck fo sho ...

...but I'm surprised not much said about AI's use of object cover. AI can and do find cover, sometimes not staying there very long -but what about AI's combat use of cover?

Meaning, them using the edges of that LAV, ducking in and out to take shots with proper stance and quickness -and prowess :p

It seems like AI just don't understand that type of fighting - I doubt Xaitment would have any matter in this...or would it :j:

Edited September 26, 2011 by froggyluv

[Tom1 10]

Another thing, i find no matter how good the ai is and what improvements are made, they just don't fight like you would in real life.

They need to undertsand fire and movement (and use cover when avaliable while doign so), and this needs to be understood at many different levels.

For example, in fireteams of 4, there should be two 'buddy teams' of 2 men each. They stick and move together. Each team will provide cover fire while the other moves.

Squad level, each fireteam should be positioning and while one or two are giving covering fire, the other one or two move.

I have seen them skirmish, where they will run around under fire, but the others are laying down heavy fire... this is a small step towards the end goal, but i dont think it is sufficient yet. They seem unorganised, and to simply 'find, fix, flank, finish' we shouldn't have to painstakingly micro manage them.

Zeus AI is probably the best addon for AI so far IMO. All those features shoudl be in arma3.

[katipo66 94]

I'd like it to go a step further, what would be great is some central tactical AI that utilizes all assets on the map, so then AI could assess the situation and ether retreat, stay put, or call reinforcements etc.

What makes me think it's not such a simulator is, it currently does not have this.

Example AI cannot ask armour for support even though it's only a few hundred metres away, they just fight and die in vain while the armor just sits their oblivious to it... That's one of the things that disappoints me the most about the game

[sickboy 13]

You can do all of that with the available scripting possibilities, stuff like GroupLink and DAC already do it to some extent.

IMO it doesn't fit every mission scenario.

[katipo66 94]

Yes i realize this and have used both extensively, but i was thinking of battlefield intelligence that maneuvers itself in a military way, as opposed to random type patrolling.

Like you give the AI an objective and it gathers all its resources and is able to make decisions depending on what resistance it may encounter, decide where to position armour and troops etc... as opposed to just marching on in oblivious.

I realize this could probably never happen in this game series but thats what id love to see.

[ProfTournesol 956]

Yes i realize this and have used both extensively, but i was thinking of battlefield intelligence that maneuvers itself in a military way, as opposed to random type patrolling.

Like you give the AI an objective and it gathers all its resources and is able to make decisions depending on what resistance it may encounter, decide where to position armour and troops etc... as opposed to just marching on in oblivious.

I realize this could probably never happen in this game series but thats what id love to see.

Yep, i guess it cannot be included in the vanilla system as it doesn't suit every mission types but it could be handled through an advanced battlefield module for example. The actual system through "GUARD" WP and/or triggers is nice but it's too simple.

Edited September 26, 2011 by ProfTournesol

[NielsS 10]

Another thing, i find no matter how good the ai is and what improvements are made, they just don't fight like you would in real life.

They need to undertsand fire and movement (and use cover when avaliable while doign so), and this needs to be understood at many different levels.

For example, in fireteams of 4, there should be two 'buddy teams' of 2 men each. They stick and move together. Each team will provide cover fire while the other moves.

Squad level, each fireteam should be positioning and while one or two are giving covering fire, the other one or two move.

I've actually seen them do that in a mission i made. I was assaulting a town from one direction while my friend called in airstrikes to take out the armour. I split my squad in to groups of 4 and then send them to the left, middle and right while i provided overwatch with my sniperrifle. When one of the fireteams encountered buildings they used them as cover and then moved forward in two by two. It was the only time i've seen them do that and have not been able to replicate it. I used no AI mods when i played that mission.

Maybe it was a fluke but it would indeed be great if those squad mechanics can be incorporated into ArmA 3.:)

[metalcraze 290]

Basically BIS should focus more on strategic AI (as in interaction between teams not within the team which they have in an OK state right now) for ArmA3.

I really want to see proper combined ops in ArmA3.

[Militant1006 11]

Another thing is I would like to see the AI able to be ordered into cover facing one direction, I know it is specific, but it is almost impossible to get the AI into cover or concealment at least reasonably quickly.

I do agree with sickboy that there are a few scripts and addons out there that make the AI a lot better, but there are still a bunch of fundamental problems:

- They cannot find cover quickly from the direction they are taking fire

- They don't have a player's sense of when and when not to shoot, they will frequently run right past you, to shoot back at you, or they will stand in a field with no cover and just stand there and shoot back

- They cannot properly evaluate what weapons should and should not be used in a supporting fire role

There are more problems obviously but those ones stick out to me a lot, these problems may never be changed, but it would be an important goal.

Something people may forget is although we are all critical of arma's AI, I am still to find a game that makes the AI work efficiently just from placing them in the editor.

[metalcraze 290]

Another thing is I would like to see the AI able to be ordered into cover facing one direction

What stops you?

or they will stand in a field with no cover and just stand there and shoot back

I've been complaining about that since forever but the community (and looks like BIS as well) seems to ignore the issue - don't know why. Maybe AI dying like flies is not important?

But there's a chance BIS will fix this during our lifetime - vote: http://dev-heaven.net/issues/23559

Edited September 27, 2011 by metalcraze

[hund 0]

I'd like to be able to properly suppress the AI (and in turn be properly suppressed myself). There ain't much fire-and-movement gameplay when one half of the cornerstone of modern warfare tactics is woefully underdone. In fact, it feels more like aggro-and-movement tactics to me: You don't shoot so they'll keep their heads down, you shoot so they'll focus on you and not the poor sod legging it across open ground.

Edited September 28, 2011 by Hund

[wiggum2 31]

Isent there a "Suppresive Fire" command in ArmA2 that, at the moment, is totally useless ?

[hund 0]

I've seen suppression that worked in VBS, or at least I've convinced myself that was what the whole blinky effect was for, so it should be doable within the engine. However all the fan-based systems I've tried haven't really been able to do a proper job of it, so I am hoping that BIS might this time around.

It is very important, y'know? :D

[Cripsis 10]

IMHO suppressive fire and the AI cleverly fighting from behind cover are the 2 most important details that need addressing. I want lengthy firefights against a cunning enemy AI that fights from behind cover and exposes only a small portion of it's body when firing. Ideally the enemy AI would remain behind solid cover when suppressed and only maneuver toward my position if it has gained fire superiority.

We have all seen enough combat footage to know for certain that suppressive fire is the key element in winning a firefight and that the side who can keep the enemy pinned is the side with the upper hand.

[froggyluv 2136]

New-ish video from Xaitment. No sound but you get the idea ;)

Edit: some reason, only works some of the time. Better odds if you watch direct on YT.

Br1rymqEFys