ARMA 2: OA beta build 85478

[metalcraze 290]

Not really issues, mostly design shortcomings but I voted on half of them anyway.

Besides there's no point in AI staying inside the tank that has disabled weapons but still can move. This tank is useless for AI.

However yes, they shouldn't abandon immobilized tanks with active weapons.

[maturin 12]

Besides there's no point in AI staying inside the tank that has disabled weapons but still can move.

In ACE, such tanks will run away. And if you place a working tank with no ammo in the vanilla game, it will run away. This is often a boon for the survivability of the crew, and in the real world they would be interested in saving the machine. The Israelis have won wars by rapid tank repairs.

Running away from a another tank is a bad idea, but if an unlucky RPG has just knocked out your gun, stay in the damn tank and be safe from the swarming light arms!

[turin turambar 0]

4 of them are AI ISSUES, another one is MODEL ISSUE, the last one is none. Do you mean AI ISSUE is a feature?

It is.

It's a videogame AI, of course if you compare with real life there are lots of areas and behaviors where it's lacking. There are dozens of things like that in the game, even if compared to other games Arma 2 have already one of the most full featured AIs ever done in a videogame.

[OMAC 254]

Combat feels great! Finally, 5.56mm and equivalent rifles actually matter on mid-range.

Thanks for fixing this Suma!

I heartily agree. Great work, Suma! :)

[metalcraze 290]

In ACE, such tanks will run away. And if you place a working tank with no ammo in the vanilla game, it will run away. This is often a boon for the survivability of the crew, and in the real world they would be interested in saving the machine. The Israelis have won wars by rapid tank repairs.

Running away from a another tank is a bad idea, but if an unlucky RPG has just knocked out your gun, stay in the damn tank and be safe from the swarming light arms!

Yeah but if it was running away for repairs and rearming it would've made sense. Unfortunately BIS AI is still way too far from thinking globally, strategically not only tactically.

It is.

It's a videogame AI, of course if you compare with real life there are lots of areas and behaviors where it's lacking. There are dozens of things like that in the game, even if compared to other games Arma 2 have already one of the most full featured AIs ever done in a videogame.

You wanted to say The Most. I can't name an AI in any other game that can be compared to AI in ArmA2. And I've been playing tactical shooters since first GR and SWAT3

Of course that doesn't mean there's no space for improvement. There's a whole lot in fact. What's disappointing is that there's so much obvious stuff with AI that mods fix or improve, but BIS doesn't (groups sharing info about enemies over radios, calling reinforcements, directing artillery, searching houses - but in a vanilla game AI squads seem to exist in separate worlds)

Nobody should expect for AI to behave exactly like humans though. If AI was able to do that - we wouldn't be fighting wars with real soldiers anymore.

Edited October 15, 2011 by metalcraze

[maturin 12]

Yeah but if it was running away for repairs and rearming it would've made sense. Unfortunately BIS AI is still way too far from thinking globally, strategically not only tactically.

Wait, so we don't want the AI to act like humans when it is feasible for them to do so? Self-preservation isn't a behavior that contributes to realism?

Having tanks running away is A) hilarious B) realistic and C) immersive and tactically interesting. Also, remember than the capability to repair tanks actually exists in the game, and I would want my warfare squad squads to keep their expensive vehicles alive so I can repair them later. Also, anything that lessens the numbers of times the flawed behavior of dismounted crews is displayed is a plus.

[CarlGustaffa 4]

@ Beagle

Of course with not longer halving damage for prone will have a major effect - which is very good to see.

Point is that going prone is supposed to make you a harder target to shoot. But with the way we aim super efficiently, there is now not a difference - AI is just as easy to shoot standing up or laying prone, in terms of aiming procedure.

Roll out from position, take aim, shoot, and roll back. It's done in less than two seconds. Try this in real life, while being "worked up". If half damage was an abstraction (like I assumed before), then someone mentioned "don't show blood spray" would be a solution to indicate a "not so successful shot, due not simulated aiming disability, due less visible target".

What if "damage formula" was kinda exponential wrt stance? Standing up, translation is linear, 0.5 incoming yields 0.5 result (1 is always 1, and 0 is always 0). Taking a knee, makes translation more exponential, say incoming 0.5 yields 0.25. Going prone makes very hard to hit, say incoming 0.5 yields only 0.05 result, and you have to make 0.8 yield previous 0.5. It doesn't mean you don't get fatal bullets. It means the chance of getting a fatal bullet when target is prone is severely reduced. Combined with blood splatter only for wounds > 0.5, I believe this could work.

This is just wild idea not brainstormed at all. But the point is that we get random input damages that is now not abstracted in any way, shape, or form anymore (to my knowledge). Since going prone now has no effect on taking damage, and no effect on ability to hit, it means that there is no purpose on going prone anymore (making yourself hard to hit, but in this game it isn't hard to hit).

Previously I could avoid stupid distant turkey shoots by limiting weapon choice to 5.56 for most players, because these weapons rightly wasn't suited for distant shooting against army personnel using armor. Now that is gone.

It's what made fighting Russians a blast, because we were both having infantry with ineffective bullets (at range), and machine gunners (or other squad weapons) the main guns in a squad (like it should be). Taking out machine gunner and snipers became tactics. Now it's back to just shoot at anything that moves, doesn't matter what anymore, because all calibers are almost equally deadly.

If this is the only fix, it will break the game (for me). These changes does nothing to prolong the firefight. Quite the opposite. Just watch any youtube video and make a guess on how many bullets find their target. Then combine with Arma footage. It's ridiculous.

Maybe they were bugs. But to me they provided balance which is now completely lost.

Wait, so we don't want the AI to act like humans when it is feasible for them to do so? Self-preservation isn't a behavior that contributes to realism?

Of course we do. But I guess it isn't realistic to think it will happen. BIS can only do so much. And we can only do so much with mission editing and scripting - the mission have to perform as well. Just look at most downloadable missions how defense works - it's usually behind convex ground features going prone in grass. Rarely anything innovative like putting snipers deep within rooms to avoid visible smoke puffs, because scripting it is a bitch (if possible at all).

Edited October 15, 2011 by CarlGustaffa

[Beagle 684]

CarlGustaffa

Equally lethal is far off, its just that the range issue is fixed...Or was it better to have Players and A...with a well aimed headshot from 150m just walk away???

5.56 were already 1 hit killers before this fix dependend on range, it's just the power at range that is fixed and nothing in this fix makes aiming easier.

The changes affect the player too...you can't any longer just lie prone in the open and hope to deal enough damage before the 6th hit kills you.

Prone targets are still harder to spot and prone still makes players and A.I. better shot...all other issues with accuracy can be simply tweaked by changuing a.i. accuracy in the user.cfg

Mission simply play much better now and in conjunction with First Aid module Players and A.I. both will still SURVIVE MG hits...but not just walk off after it.

The benchmarks in here are vanilla single player missions, and those work much better now.

BIS took the changes into acount already and lowered the A.I. accuracy by default while keeping the general skill, see user.cfg and A.I. has a hard time now in grass areas, especiall high grass like featured on Test Area map...fire fights beetween simply in editor dropped groups are much longer now and much more fire volume occurs. The prone damage reduction and the los of lethality beyond 150m was a real annoyance, it's good that it is done. Personal liking regarding the lenght of engeaments can easily be tweaked in user.cfg. As soon as build up areas and woodlands are involved the whole situation has changes anyway...infanrty platoon vs. platoon egagements in open fields have been erased of the book of tactics after the introduction of the rifled gun in line infantry anyway. Back in my basic infatrny trainign in 1994 i can stil remeber very well that movement took so long because we were drilels to avoid open fields at any cost all the time...well not that hard in a dense forest rich region like central germany.

Edited October 15, 2011 by Beagle

[metalcraze 290]

Wait, so we don't want the AI to act like humans when it is feasible for them to do so? Self-preservation isn't a behavior that contributes to realism?

I want AI to act like humans of course, but the point is that AI that will just ride away will be useless. You can put 50 repair trucks in the valley and AI with a broken turret will completely ignore them - just riding around, not contributing anything to the battle.

Crew AI knows next to nothing about self-preservation. You can have 50 RPG-7 dudes behind that hill and it will not stop AI in a single tank from riding there.

[maturin 12]

I want AI to act like humans of course, but the point is that AI that will just ride away will be useless. You can put 50 repair trucks in the valley and AI with a broken turret will completely ignore them - just riding around, not contributing anything to the battle.

Unless that tank runs into my field of view on the other side of the next ridge, and freak out because I think I have to kill tanks now.

Crew AI knows next to nothing about self-preservation. You can have 50 RPG-7 dudes behind that hill and it will not stop AI in a single tank from riding there.

But there aren't 50 guys with RPG-7s behind that hill. In concrete terms, the crew and vehicle will survive more often.

Honestly, it sounds like you're arguing for dumbed-down behavior. Even if you do not accept that having retreating tanks could have benefits for realism and immersion and occasionally tactics, you must accept that being shot by the driver of the tank you just rocketed when he teleports out of his seat is stupid and should not be a regular part of gameplay.

[Beagle 684]

I want AI to act like humans of course, but the point is that AI that will just ride away will be useless. You can put 50 repair trucks in the valley and AI with a broken turret will completely ignore them - just riding around, not contributing anything to the battle.

Crew AI knows next to nothing about self-preservation. You can have 50 RPG-7 dudes behind that hill and it will not stop AI in a single tank from riding there.

Mission makers have to do something too, you cant exspect to drop a few units on the map and have them all work perfectly in a strategic level...that's the job of the mission desinger and it works without script knowledge already...just by using a few triggers and zones...so that a tank wont move in until beeing backed up by Infantry for example.

Back in OFP every aspect had to be scripted, in A2 a lot of that work is done by default A.I. functions already.

[Black Russian 10]

I agree with Beagle here. It is a great fix but I understand CarlGustaffa's concerns.

I think that having a breathing simulation in combination with a cross hair which is not always in the center of the screen should do the trick. This would also prevent people from using signs on their screen if the cross hair is disabled.

Anyway this will be most likely to late for 1.60 but it is still better not needing five shots of a Dragunov to kill one soldier.

And of course more AI tweaks in the future will help like improving the behavior of AI while getting shot by a sniper rifle so they are running like crazy or firing back instead of laying down and waiting nearly immovable for their certain death.

Thanks again for the great fixes.

[Beagle 684]

I agree with Beagle here. It is a great fix but I understand CarlGustaffa's concerns.

I think that having a breathing simulation in combination with a cross hair which is not always in the center of the screen should do the trick. This would also prevent people from using signs on their screen if the cross hair is disabled.

Anyway this will be most likely to late for 1.60 but it is still better not needing five shots of a Dragunov to kill one soldier.

And of course more AI tweaks in the future will help like improving the behavior of AI while getting shot by a sniper rifle so they are running like crazy or firing back instead of laying down and waiting nearly immovable for their certain death.

Thanks again for the great fixes.

Right, every build is a step by step evolution... just fire up ArmA 1.10 and notice the extreme difference we already have. A few hours of A2 gameplay can be a good treatment for embracing the fixes since 1.50. Its close to a quantum leap in A.I. and engine functions already. BIS has done a great job here without charging any money and I don't know about any other company doing that today....Just take a russian developer for Flight Simulations as example...they sell fixes by releasing the same game since 2003 ovr and over again but they let you pay for every second major patch that comes in bundle with a addon only calling it a gold or platinum edition that is of course incompatible with the predecessor featuring the same map and basically the same units since 2003 now. Edited October 15, 2011 by Beagle

[maturin 12]

And of course more AI tweaks in the future will help like improving the behavior of AI while getting shot by a sniper rifle so they are running like crazy or firing back instead of laying down and waiting nearly immovable for their certain death.

The AI's reaction is appropriate, I think, if they are in an environment with high grass and lots of cover and concealment. Dropping to the ground and making yourself a small target is what a real person would do.

Of course, this is suicide when you are on the Utes runway and some newb with an M107 is trying to kill you all at once. Context, not capability, is the great limiting factor of AI behavior.

And how are they supposed to distinguish a sniper's bullet from the 100th round from a SAW or even a gunship?

[Tonci87 163]

The new damage improvement is great, keep it BIS.

I think that this breathe in, breathe out thing to steady your aim would be a good idea.

And of course it is easy to kill AI if almost everybody runs around with an ACOG.

Its up to the mission builders to include more weapons with iron sights.

And if you still think that hitting AI is to easy, then play with ACE and wind enabled

[maturin 12]

I have heard suggestions for weapon sway that is mostly vertical, with your point of aim moving up and down to the rhythm of breath. So you have to time every shot, while having a chance to get off good shots while winded as well.

[metalcraze 290]

Mission makers have to do something too, you cant exspect to drop a few units on the map and have them all work perfectly in a strategic level...that's the job of the mission desinger and it works without script knowledge already...just by using a few triggers and zones...so that a tank wont move in until beeing backed up by Infantry for example.

Back in OFP every aspect had to be scripted, in A2 a lot of that work is done by default A.I. functions already.

Basic decisions should be automatic. The problem is that AI in the tank will completely ignore a squad of that friendly infantry nearby, just like a squad of a friendly infantry will ignore a friendly tank. They won't build an intelligent attack/defence based on what they have in AO, they won't cooperate.

AI can cooperate within the squad and you won't see a rifleman trying to take out the tank, but an AT gunner instead - why can't BIS do the same for the global level? Except with squads instead of units.

Even if you do not accept that having retreating tanks could have benefits for realism and immersion and occasionally tactics, you must accept that being shot by the driver of the tank you just rocketed when he teleports out of his seat is stupid and should not be a regular part of gameplay.

I perfectly accept the retreating tanks thing, my problem here is that they don't 'retreat', they just randomly move away instead of going for repairs or at least moving to where the rest of friendlies is. You see the problem here is that while the tank runs away it's still easy to take it out since it becomes harmless - it won't come to friendlies for help/protection.

I don't argue for the dumbing down of AI, but for AI still adding something to the cause instead of a halfway fix. I of course prefer a full fix.

[Fireball 16]

ALL combatants in ArmA are considerd to wear body armour...even those that show no trace of it in the model...unfortunately.

Who told you that? There is absolutely no simulation of body armor in ArmA2/OA.

[maturin 12]

AI can cooperate within the squad and you won't see a rifleman trying to take out the tank, but an AT gunner instead - why can't BIS do the same for the global level? Except with squads instead of units.

Because that would mean making twice as much AI. But the real reason is that missionmaking would become impossible. Missionmakers control squads, while usually letting individual units act autonomously within the squad. If squads could act too independently, they would conflict with missionmakers' orders.

I perfectly accept the retreating tanks thing, my problem here is that they don't 'retreat', they just randomly move away instead of going for repairs or at least moving to where the rest of friendlies is. You see the problem here is that while the tank runs away it's still easy to take it out since it becomes harmless - it won't come to friendlies for help/protection.

I don't argue for the dumbing down of AI, but for AI still adding something to the cause instead of a halfway fix. I of course prefer a full fix.

The halfway fix could come in a beta patch, as opposed to Arma 3.

And besides, fleeing units typically put hills and forests between themselves and the enemy. This is a better bet, given their limited faculties, than running towards a randomly-chosen friendly squad. Do you want your tanks hiding behind the snipers or a unit that's still in the field of fire?

Who told you that? There is absolutely no simulation of body armor in ArmA2/OA.

All units having body armor is the same as no units having it. We're just rationalizing the hitpoint model subjectively.

[msy 22]

It is.

It's a videogame AI, of course if you compare with real life there are lots of areas and behaviors where it's lacking. There are dozens of things like that in the game, even if compared to other games Arma 2 have already one of the most full featured AIs ever done in a videogame.

I mean, some issues due to parameters setting should be fixed very easy which has nothing to do with human like action.

Like my first CIT, make the crews leave the wreck farther or weaken the explosion should be piece of cake. But this existed since OFP. And the issue let me remember another game IL2, when you broke your plane on the ground you will be forced to jump out of it , run away far enough and jump to prone to avoid of explosion, which is done by script. However in ARMA series, you will find that the crews just only jump out of the vehicle which is going to explode, then go prone near it. When the vehicle finally explodes, they all die.

---------- Post added at 10:55 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:50 AM ----------

Who told you that? There is absolutely no simulation of body armor in ArmA2/OA.

Maybe there are some little difference between soldier model and civil model. I remember I tested to shoot soldier's and civil's body by MP5 at a close distance. At last the soldier can bear 2 more bullets than civil.

[Dwarden 1125]

i would like to shape some of the requests here laterly,

unless You got old bug which is 'extreme' game-breaker then leave it for 1.61

for 1.60 it's best to fix these:

- newly introduced bugs post 1.59 (or major ones first in 1.59)

- any instability in SP and MP (hence why i collect as many as possible crashdumps from 1.60 betas)

- any MP playability breaks (disconnects, signature timeouts, desync, server stalls, memory leaks etc.)

- security problems (network protocol wise, scriptwise or w/e else)

so, if You aware of some problem or 'hoarding' knowledge about 'crash cases' (i know some admins like to disconnect people via that)

then please share (everyone knows my email :cool: ) cause You may hinder fix for some quite bigger problem

for the 'bad guys' who i bet read this from time to time, if You share we will credit Ya for telling us (but don't await anything more ;) )

(in other words let us fix more stuff so You have challenge on breaking it later again)

[nkenny 1057]

I want AI to act like humans of course, but the point is that AI that will just ride away will be useless. You can put 50 repair trucks in the valley and AI with a broken turret will completely ignore them - just riding around, not contributing anything to the battle.

Crew AI knows next to nothing about self-preservation. You can have 50 RPG-7 dudes behind that hill and it will not stop AI in a single tank from riding there.

*shrug* Put a manned repair vehicle on a SUPPORT WP. Be thankful that human roles are all multi talents (repair, pilot, drive, whatnot). In the case of the AI however? Well joe-bob-twofist aint' gonna mess with the Hummer. That might break something, affecting the warranty, and leaving him in a pile of shit.

-k

[Black Russian 10]

The AI's reaction is appropriate, I think, if they are in an environment with high grass and lots of cover and concealment. Dropping to the ground and making yourself a small target is what a real person would do.

Of course, this is suicide when you are on the Utes runway and some newb with an M107 is trying to kill you all at once. Context, not capability, is the great limiting factor of AI behavior.

And how are they supposed to distinguish a sniper's bullet from the 100th round from a SAW or even a gunship?

In Chernarus and Utes you are right but we have played in Takistan and there is no grass.

The biggest AI problem I saw was while sniping a group of ais they didn't really react so much except of running a little bit and then laying down and then they saw a flash and it was too late :D

Edited October 16, 2011 by Black Russian

[msy 22]

Here is the CTD report which I should have posted a month ago. It is about CTD in a third party campaign when using beta patch. If it does not matter to the release of 1.60 full patch, or the author of the campaign can deal with it himself, then it can be delet.

http://dev-heaven.net/issues/25531

---------- Post added at 03:58 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:48 PM ----------

In Chernarus and Utes you are right but we have played in Takistan and there is no grass.

The biggest AI problem I saw was while sniping a group of ais they didn't really react so much except of running a little bit and then laying down and then they saw a flash and it was too late :D

But now AI can throw smoke grenade to obscure himself, though sometimes not very effective and is not helpful to avoid killed from TWS.

[kremator 1065]

*shrug* Put a manned repair vehicle on a SUPPORT WP. Be thankful that human roles are all multi talents (repair, pilot, drive, whatnot). In the case of the AI however? Well joe-bob-twofist aint' gonna mess with the Hummer. That might break something, affecting the warranty, and leaving him in a pile of shit.

-k

I remember seeing a mod where the AI could fix their own vehicles (leaving a gunner in for protection). Can't remember for the life of me what is was called though.

It WOULD be good if there was native support for repair (ala First Aid module etc)