The trouble with getting people into Arma

[NielsS 10]

@BFHCxPanther

I never was able to see that supressive fire works in ArmA2.

If you give the AI aimbot, sure they will be extrem accurate and thats why you are hiding and retreating. It is not the ability of the AI to supress you, it is just your fear of a AK sniper laying inthe high grass 400m away...although thats maybe the same... ;)

Fact is, at least you cant supress the AI because they dont fear to die during Coop sessions like you do. AI cant be supressed and forced to stay at a static position keeping their heads down. They will fight for death or retreat (run away) and die that way.

What i try to explain is this:

You cant supress a enemy AI HMG position.

You can kill them and thats it...or maybe try do get them to fcus their fire on you while your buddys try to flank them.

Artillery also dont works in supressing the enemy. They will not go into cover and wait till the strike is over...

I can fire a 120mm shell right next to the HMG position, if they dont get killed by the blast then i have failed, because they cant be impressed with such stuff, they will still keep shooting at you instead of stay in cover for some time, recoverying from the shock and blast or maybe try to rout if they think that the next shell could kill them.

AI knows no fear like you, and thats why you cant supress them...and sure, with a aimbot you really have to fear any AI bullet. :rolleyes:

I have successfully surpressed and flanked the enemy AI in Arma using no :icon_confused:ACE and no AI mods. The AI is very capable of doing great things. Furthermore i would like to stress that the AI is very dependent on what kind of CPU you've got. I've seen some very stupid AI on a friends PC with a low end dualcore in it. So check your CPU before you go bash Arma's AI. I have no problems with them and don't need to use any AI mods.

I'm not saying that they can't be improved upon and am looking forward to what BIS will achieve in Arma 3 but it is a LOT better than the AI that comes out of those outdated, overpriced paperweights called consoles.

On the action menu: We do NOT need some console radial crap in Arma. The action menu is fine as it is but may need some streamlining. This is not a console game like in Dragon rising where the UI is limited due to those crappy controllers consoles use.

[wiggum2 31]

I have successfully surpressed and flanked the enemy AI in Arma using no :icon_confused:ACE and no AI mods.

Video or it didnt happen !

The AI is very capable of doing great things. Furthermore i would like to stress that the AI is very dependent on what kind of CPU you've got. I've seen some very stupid AI on a friends PC with a low end dualcore in it. So check your CPU before you go bash Arma's AI.

AMD Phenom II X4 955 should be enough i hope...

On the action menu: We do NOT need some console radial crap in Arma.

I (and many others too) say we need it fast !

[Tonci87 163]

Don't use Zeus_AI development has stoped a long time ago. The latest Versions even have introduced some nasty Bugs like AI getting stuck. You will propably experience even more Problems if you use it with the current Betas.

Stuff you need for challenging AI:

ACE, ASR_AI, powerfull CPU, carefully adjusted AI skill settings.

[nodunit 397]

I (and many others too) say we need it fast !

Then you and those others need to come up with a way that it would work while retaining the current commands. All I hear is "More like battlefield 2!" however no one gives any examples.

If there is a way to differentiate between human and AI squads then perhaps a more simple radial would work but with an AI squad it simple would not work, you would be replacing in fact quicker keystrokes with slower mouse clicks that branch to other commands and take up the screen.

As for the action menu that many complain about, like it or not it is an essential part of the game and very integral in modding, particularly vehicles. It also has one key pro that it does not take up the screen and until they make it where you can interact with parts of a moving vehicle like say TKOH, then you're just doing more harm to the game then any good, in fact you would be ruining it and watering it down.

Edited October 4, 2011 by NodUnit

[Cripsis 10]

Video or it didnt happen !

I can't vouch for NeilsS as I personally have never witnessed suppression fire effects in vanilla ARMA 2 but it can definitely be acheived with mods and settings adjustments.

I edited some gameplay footage today of AI using and reacting to suppression fire, I'm curious to know if anyone is getting similar results without using mods.

In the first video a infantry squad scatters for nearby cover when the enemy opens fire, the machine gunner locates and starts suppressing the enemy, then the squad begins closing in on the enemy using bounding fire.

I'll post more videos when they upload.

LenVbkyZOmA

---------- Post added at 07:38 AM ---------- Previous post was at 06:48 AM ----------

AI rifleman firing steady and accurate suppression fire on a compound doorway, keeping the enemy pinned inside.

c7y6vdLNgts&feature=channel_video_title

Enemy rushing for cover.

i5WcL25Ukf0&feature=channel_video_title

The AI immediately changes position each time it comes under accurate fire.

a7RCCK3Vces&feature=channel_video_title

AI laying down covering fire. It would be suicide trying this without freindly AI suppressing the enemy.

Z5Ft5MKuPXs&feature=channel_video_title

I think newbies would be more inclined to play ARMA if it played like this straight off the shelf.

[CarlGustaffa 4]

THank god the communities standards have been lowered thanks to people like you...

Oh, great...

i mean you like shooting fish in a barrel right...quite a challenge...i mean even the AI set to maximum (super AI turned off still) they suck, and are retarded....

Certainly not my impression with them. Give me one game whose combat AI is better than Arma's, featuring medium to long range engagements using squad or heavier support weapons.

I play this game because it can be played in coop. And because I can script the AI to suppress the hell out of us with big guns while artillery rounds are on the way. That is how modern warfare over distance is done, not so much about rifleman vs rifleman.

I've watched hundreds of ARMA co-op videos on Youtube and the enemy AI is miserably inadequate

To me, the bigger issue is that we as players are overly adequate, and doesn't reflect real world fighting abilities at all. Calm aiming, with adrenaline level the same of what it would be on a shooting range. We hit with so many rifle bullets its completely ridiculous compared to a real life shootout. But when it comes to this, people want it to be a game rather than realistic. I'm not saying the AI is perfect, far from it. But they're more capable than anything I've seen elsewhere, as long as the mission is relatively small giving AI enough cycles to think, and helping them out using scripts where heavier guns are used more than rifles.

I'll agree that their survival instinct isn't the best, and also that this is near impossible to script (without the script going mission crippling complex). But that doesn't warrant getting rid of a game mode that obviously is pretty popular?

@BFHCxPanther

I never was able to see that supressive fire works in ArmA2.

...

Fact is, at least you cant supress the AI because they dont fear to die during Coop sessions like you do. AI cant be supressed and forced to stay at a static position keeping their heads down. They will fight for death or retreat (run away) and die that way.

Although kinda broken (have no idea why, I gave up on it), try Domino (based on Domination, but a different style of play needed to survive) for AI suppressing you. If you suddenly feel extremely suppressed, it means that arty or mortar rounds is heading your way. You want to get out of there because you know what's coming, but you're seriously pinned down. Not made for public games. Public coop != closed coop, and for me personally, a closed coop is not about "winning over AI", but cohesion in doing things correctly. "Winning" where everyone is lone wolfing, is a lot worse than loosing when everyone is playing in teams.

You can suppress AI quite well, as you will impale their ability to lay down accurate return fire. Even if they suck at taking cover, they become focused on that direction and may attempt to flank. While suppressing, you send in a maneuver element to get on top of them. Plus, it adds a hell of a lot to the whole feel of the battle compared to everyone picking off targets from a distance where AI is less capable (at least without scripting).

I use Arma's scripted suppression with good results, but as I don't like commanding, I tend to avoid the AI (unscripted) suppress command, so I don't know how well that one works.

[HyperU2 11]

If the AI suck in Coop it doesn't speak well for the players skills. Hop into a public server sometime and check out the scoreboards.

[Cripsis 10]

I'll agree that their survival instinct isn't the best

I think the problem is that their accuracy settings are too low, there is no fear factor for the human players, it's basically a turkey shoot.

But that doesn't warrant getting rid of a game mode that obviously is pretty popular?

I think co-op is awesome, in fact I really look forward to playing co-op with ARMA 3, I'm just saying that I personally would find it more appealing if the co-op AI presented a tougher challenge.

[wiggum2 31]

@ Cripsis

Nothing special in your videos, looks like normal ArmA2 AI to me.

Actually they are pretty good in going into cover while moving in COMBAT mode.

But again, try to supress a enemy HMG position.

They will:

• Still shooting at you
  
• Be dead
  
• Maybe focus on you so you can flank them
  

But you cant really supress them so they will take cover and stop shooting.

You cant fix a enemy squad behind a wall or other cover.

They will:

• Move into the wrong direction and die
  

[Cripsis 10]

But again, try to supress a enemy HMG position.

They will:

• Still shooting at you
  
• Be dead
  
• Maybe focus on you so you can flank them
  

But you cant really supress them so they will take cover and stop shooting.

You cant fix a enemy squad behind a wall or other cover.

They will:

• Move into the wrong direction and die
  

I'll give it a test run now and see if it works.

---------- Post added at 09:27 AM ---------- Previous post was at 08:50 AM ----------

I'll give it a test run now and see if it works.

OK several times I tested a scenario in which a squad of infantry patrol over a small crest and are engaged by a static HMG from a range of roughly 250m-300m over open ground. Each time the HMG opens fire first, the squad of infantry break into seperate elements and unleash a blistering volume of fire on the HMG gunner, as the incoming fire increases his firing rate decreases until he is killed. I will post some videos if you would like to see it.

If you have a more specific scenario in mind let me know and I will test it out to see the results.

[hellfire257 3]

real brains in there noggins.

FPDR.

Zipper pretty much summed that up.

About the AI, it depends how you set them up. I used to have GL4 with a minimum of 80% AI accuracy so it would at least be comparable to a human player. Now that was brutal.

[NoRailgunner 0]

Why should players who love to play run'n'gun no-brainers/shooters play Arma III? For example - why should HAWX/Ace Combat "addicted" love to play flightsims like DCS:A10/KA-50? Better be happy about diversity instead of beeing forced to like certain games (and their gameplay).

Imo BIS should not care so much about killstat/scoreboard wanking players but more for those who like to play a different mil(sim) game. Maybe implement additional options and more tutorial/training missions for weapon system and AI...

[Cripsis 10]

About the AI, it depends how you set them up. I used to have GL4 with a minimum of 80% AI accuracy so it would at least be comparable to a human player. Now that was brutal.

That sounds really good. I really hope BIS make it easy to set up brutal AI in ARMA3 without the need for mods, hardcore AI isn't everyone's cup of tea but it would make things a lot easier for the newbies that do enjoy a challenge.

[CarlGustaffa 4]

Why should players who love to play run'n'gun no-brainers/shooters play Arma III?

Players style may change with the game as they get into it? I know mine did, and I came from rocket launcher spamming Unreal Tournament :p I'll also mention that the change to cautious play didn't exactly happen overnight.

[FileAxis 10]

Going with the original poster's definitions, I really think ArmA needs to be more of a game. If ArmA 3 provides gamers with some more highspeed action the likes of the Battlefield series, I think ArmA 3 really has the chance to not only attract a ton of new fans but crush Battlefield 3.

I tried ArmA and didn't like it for the reasons outlined at length in this thread. I was hoping for a bigger and more realistic version of Battlefield but instead I got clunky controls (you can't jump, you have to hit a button to climb a ladder, etc., etc.).

DICE/EA has decided to sellout in favor of attracting the teeniebopper Call of Duty fanbase. BF3 will have no commander mode, despite complaints for a host of BF2 fans and DICE/EA requires the use of "Battelog" (a Facebook-meets-train-wreck web browser-based server browser). Their are countless other problems with BF3 has that dedicated Battlefield fans are complaining about.

Battlefield 3 is looking so bad to me that I might just close down my clan and wait for ArmA 3. :(

I strongly suggest that Bohemia Interactive takes a good hard look at Battlefield 2's features and gameplay and the positive things that are coming out of DICE's Frostbite engine and in creating ArmA 3present it as an awesome FPS game with the toybox hidden but completely accessible for those that want to use it.

[wiggum2 31]

I tried ArmA and didn't like it for the reasons outlined at length in this thread. I was hoping for a bigger and more realistic version of Battlefield but instead I got clunky controls (you can't jump, you have to hit a button to climb a ladder, etc., etc.).

You should know, those clunky controls are just complex & realistic and ArmA is not a game, its a MilSim. ;)

[FileAxis 10]

You should know, those clunky controls are just complex & realistic and ArmA is not a game, its a MilSim. ;)

No, clunky controls do not equal realism. What is realistic is something like Track IR (i.e., you turn your head and your character's head turns instead of requiring more keys, mouse, etc., to produce the same effect). Making something complicated or clunky does not create a more realistic feeling.

In fact, it does quite the opposite.

In real life, if I want to climb a ladder quickly I can run at it, jump and grab onto a rung. In ArmA you can't jump and you can't fluidly grab onto a rung...and that's only one small criticism among others.

I'm trying to help here by offering my view from someone that is attracted to ArmA but was disappointed. Unfortunately, I sense that I'm just going to be hit with comments such as yours that are intended to insult my intelligence instead of expand on the dialog of how ArmA can increase it's player base. How sad.

Edited October 4, 2011 by FileAxis

[dysta 10]

In real life, if I want to climb a ladder quickly I can run at it, jump and grab onto a rung. In ArmA you can't jump and you can't fluidly grab onto a rung...and that's only one small criticism among others.

You climb the ladder because you run at it. And you suddenly drop your weapon because you are close to the ladder. Excuse me, MilSim has no such thing call "automation" in control.

[FileAxis 10]

You climb the ladder because you run at it. And you suddenly drop your weapon because you are close to the ladder. Excuse me, MilSim has no such thing call "automation" in control.

Except of course if you're using Track IR to move your head, right? Track IR is automation, for the record.

If your "logic" was correct, then reloading your weapon should be the following steps:

1. Press a button to open your pocket.

2. Press a button to pull out the clip.

3. Press a button to eject the current clip.

4. Press a button to insert the full clip.

That isn't the present system of reloading because that would be clunky. Once again, complexity and clunkiness don't necessarily equal realism.

[chiefredcloud 10]

My opinion (and I have not read ALL the posts here) is that BIS should make or contract to have made something in the way of Domination or Evolution ready to install out of the box. ArmA, ArmA2 and hopefully ArmA3 are or should be great SandBox Tools. But unfotunatly, many of us do not have the drive (i.e. lazy like me), or the know how to cnnect it all to make something playable.

honestly I have no idea how many play the single player portion (other than me) but I do know that there is a great want by many to play online. This should, in my opinion, be BISs focus.

A SandBox and one online mission such as Domination, Evo or Insurgency to jump start the new ArmA3 franchise.

[nodunit 397]

Going with the original poster's definitions, I really think ArmA needs to be more of a game. If ArmA 3 provides gamers with some more highspeed action the likes of the Battlefield series, I think ArmA 3 really has the chance to not only attract a ton of new fans but crush Battlefield 3.

Two main thing I see when it comes to the 'high speed action' of battlefield is the fluidity of the controls and squad. Having a sort of mission type that when saved would allow people to select defined 'classes' rather than needing to customize their gear at the start would make things quicker, likewise would having that file type allow the ability to dynamicly join squads rather than be forced at the start.

A universal use key would be great too, it would assist in the action menu for sure..an action key to get in vehicles (use action menu to change seats if necessary), to open doors, to climb ladders, to use single action items etc rather than needing to bind it to the rest of the menu. Removing geometry from guns would be another boost as you wouldn't get stuck on building sides and it would make indoor combat more possible, imagine a warehouse distract battle whereupon your cover is crates and other materials, having to fight your way up and down stairs, through tight corridors and to a control point.

A jump feature limited to the weight you carry IE civilians can jump but a soldier carrying equipment would jump much shorter (during which you must not be allowed to shoot), would be beneficial in more ways than one, with physics comming in arma3 a new door is opened to minigame style. But back on topic, I'm not sure that having a ton of battlefield 3 players would be such a great thing considering how they would react to 2-3 people required to use a vehicle, helicopter flight model, how the vehicles receive damage IE "Why my vehicle suddenly stop when not destroyed?!".

They would likely ask many things to become simplified or 'balanced' and really they would likely be more detrimental than good, besides they would just move on to the next pretty shooter.

Edited October 4, 2011 by NodUnit

[katipo66 94]

No, clunky controls do not equal realism.

In real life, if I want to climb a ladder quickly I can run at it, jump and grab onto a rung. In ArmA you can't jump.....

What do you mean by clunky? I see that word used a lot to describe arma, I personally like the Arma controls, I like the feel of my character and the way it moves in the world.

jumping is not in to prevent bunnyhopping? Not sure but from experience in other games this is a good thing, maybe a jump button that resets after 3 seconds?

Bro you cannot run at a ladder jump and grab a rung :p but I agree on an auto climb if you walk up to it, as I clearly want to climb it, cos I walked over to it.

[hellfire257 3]

It's all very well running at a ladder but if your weapon isn't on a sling then I'm not really sure how you're going to climb it as simply as that.

[antoineflemming 14]

What do you mean by clunky? I see that word used a lot to describe arma, I personally like the Arma controls, I like the feel of my character and the way it moves in the world.

jumping is not in to prevent bunnyhopping? Not sure but from experience in other games this is a good thing, maybe a jump button that resets after 3 seconds?

Bro you cannot run at a ladder jump and grab a rung :p but I agree on an auto climb if you walk up to it, as I clearly want to climb it, cos I walked over to it.

Pretty sure a whole lot of people don't agree with you when it comes to ArmA's controls. Clunky isn't hard to understand. Let's put it this way: there are fluid controls and there are clunky controls. Fluid, realistic human movement vs. animations that don't seamlessly transition, animations that are at times robotic. For one, the player should be able to break certain movements (i.e., if I'm moving to a sprint from crouch and I stop, I should not run a couple feet, then stop.). In other words, the player should not have to wait for every animation to finish before he/she can perform another movement. The running with a sidearm or without a weapon is another issue. Clearly, that is hand-animated. Clearly, it is not realistic human movement. Also, realistically, the human body does not snap to another position. It transitions. Movement of arms and legs should behave as though they have joints (balls in sockets) that rotate. In ArmA, the limbs (especially the arms and neck, not really a limb though) fold to a certain position. The shoulders should pivot, the elbows and knees bend. The neck should turn, not fold around when turning the head. Examples like this are what people refer to when they label ArmA's animations clunky and unrealistic, and they are right. Only a handful of ArmA animations are good.

---------- Post added at 15:44 ---------- Previous post was at 15:33 ----------

Two main thing I see when it comes to the 'high speed action' of battlefield is the fluidity of the controls and squad. Having a sort of mission type that when saved would allow people to select defined 'classes' rather than needing to customize their gear at the start would make things quicker, likewise would having that file type allow the ability to dynamicly join squads rather than be forced at the start.

The best way to include classes is to have a fireteam system, where players are organized into fireteams (BF3's squads) and players can be the Team Leader (standard rifle), Rifleman (standard rifle) Grenadier (rifle with grenade launcher), Automatic Rifleman (automatic weapon/machine gun), with additional roles per mission: Marksman, Sniper, Medic. This would remove the need to have to create specific units for these roles. Weapons can be assigned into their designated categories, and the player can select from a drop-down list which weapon the fireteam role allows (i.e. for Automatic Rifleman, then there are machine gun options only). When using unit addons, the player would not have to download a separate weapon pack in order for the unit addon to have weapons (as is the case with several ACE-only unit addons). The units would not be tied to the weapons and vice-versa. Especially with ArmA3, you could have a basic unit, and based on the role, ArmA would automatically assign certain gear (addon-based) to the player, so gear would also not be dependent on the unit. This would make addon creation a lot easier and simpler, and it would make the use of addons a whole lot simpler.

EDIT: Also, the "fireteam" system could vary based on factions within BLUFOR/OPFOR.

Edited October 4, 2011 by antoineflemming

[nodunit 397]

The best way to include classes is to have a fireteam system, where players are organized into fireteams (BF3's squads) and players can be the Team Leader (standard rifle), Rifleman (standard rifle) Grenadier (rifle with grenade launcher), Automatic Rifleman (automatic weapon/machine gun), with additional roles per mission: Marksman, Sniper, Medic. This would remove the need to have to create specific units for these roles. Weapons can be assigned into their designated categories, and the player can select from a drop-down list which weapon the fireteam role allows (i.e. for Automatic Rifleman, then there are machine gun options only). When using unit addons, the player would not have to download a separate weapon pack in order for the unit addon to have weapons (as is the case with several ACE-only unit addons). The units would not be tied to the weapons and vice-versa. Especially with ArmA3, you could have a basic unit, and based on the role, ArmA would automatically assign certain gear (addon-based) to the player, so gear would also not be dependent on the unit. This would make addon creation a lot easier and simpler, and it would make the use of addons a whole lot simpler.

EDIT: Also, the "fireteam" system could vary based on factions within BLUFOR/OPFOR.

That sounds good, just need to make it so that they can drop out of or change to another fire team and be able to change the unit per death if so desired. In all honesty though I just can't see Arma working like battlefields gameplay due to how the game works, such as the infantry wounding system and you just know that there would be threads popping up demanding the removal of that feature "getting shot in the leg to crawl around the match is NOT fun!"