AI Improvements?

[WildFire6 10]

Hi, I've been playing arma for a while, I love it, great game. Took a few breaks here and there but I always come back, and the future is very promising for this series.

With that being said I have made a decision. I love the new graphics, I love the map, I love the new features, customizable weapons, changing uniforms and everything I've seen so far.

However. I will not spend a single dollar more if this company makes little to no improvement of the AI. I know its a slippery slope and its hard to program a program to think without input, but its the only problem that is constantly brought up and nothing is done about.

I am tired of hiding in knee-high grass and waiting two minutes only to reload the save point forty times because the jeep that keeps coming around the corner 200 meters away is able to hit me in the head with his first shot every single time while driving at medium to top speed. Oh and he begins shooting before he even comes around the corner. Time and time again. Oh and the old marine motto of "get to high ground" is more likely to get you killed.

Its just completely unbelievable. Suppressive fire does nothing. I can deal with the friendly AI being effectively worthless constantly and doing nothing but dying but If I go out of my way to spend two-three hours to sneak into a town only to come around some corner as quietly as possible and some AI already knows I'm there and is shooting me in the head, it just boggles my mind.

I feel like Im waging war against a whole country of Navy SEALs and they gave me a life preserver instead of a kevlar. Who knew everyone in the middle east was a sniper?? lol.

I kid, but seriously I have no problem paying money for good sh**, but you gotta give us something weve been asking for, for a couple years. Show of force at least.

If your squad sets up a perfect L ambush and is all prone and an enemy squad of 8-15 walks within 50m of your ambush; honestly not a single one of them should get a shot off before they all die. In the current engine I think I've gotten it to work like once or twice in a couple years. And even then I always had someone wounded or dead. Usually most of us. And a good 60-80% we hands down lost outright... Seriously?

This is just my opinion, I mean not to offend anyone and to discredit the hard work BIS has done, they are aces in my book.

[dmarkwick 261]

ib4 the flame.

[maddogx 13]

ib4 the flame.

How did you manage that? I don't see a post #0 anywhere. ;)

[NoRailgunner 0]

Actual you can setup the AI in file watch for usernick.A2OAprofile

skillFriendly=..;

skillEnemy=..;

precisionFriendly=..;

precisionEnemy=..;

0 = lowest 1= highest

+ you can search for "the best AI setup", use AI addons or just use the biki for more infos too.

Lets see if BIS are going to make an extra menu with AI options and one or two special "AI test missions" for A3. Or is this idea too userfriendly?

[Minoza 11]

Yes, it's one thing people never think of... You can actually adjust how effective AI is... Find what best suits you and enjoy!

NoRailgunner described pretty well how to adjust that. Btw. game experience changes dramatically when going from 1.0 to 0.75 or 0.65, just give it a try sometimes!

[ProfTournesol 956]

True. People posting in this section of the forum should learn how to play and adapt the game to their needs before asking for things in ArmA3.

[froggyluv 2136]

I think the OP has a valid point in that this game attracts tactical minded players who expect the settings to already be calibrated to realism rather then lowering settings in a config.

For instance, here is the config setting for the lowly Recruit:

skillFriendly=1;

skillEnemy=0.55000001;

precisionFriendly=1;

precisionEnemy=0.55000001;

Now I've seen many old OFP vet players here post they change precision values to 0.35 and sometimes lower for more realistic playout of firefights

in Veteran where the default is:

skillFriendly=1;

skillEnemy=0.89999998;

precisionFriendly=1;

precisionEnemy=0.89999998;

...signifigant change there. Dropping values to such a degree feels wrong to the tactical gamer who wants the challenge presented to him to be both fair and challenging - going into config to make such a change can feel cheaty (the reason I never do it) - similar to adding two Queens to yourself in a chess program.

I've heard that the dev's are aiming to make the AI's reaction more believable for the next chapter and yes, proper suppresion/morale would go a long ways towards helping. Hopefully the Config will also be better calibrated to better suit the difficulty the player has chosen.

[dragon01 902]

I've lowered the precision quite a bit (to about 40, IIRC), and it plays fairly well for me. Surely, AI is still dumb as a board and doesn't act fully realistically, but are somewhat less effective from long range.

[NeMeSiS 11]

True. People posting in this section of the forum should learn how to play and adapt the game to their needs before asking for things in ArmA3.

And BI should make decent default settings, instead of having default crappy ones that need to be changed anyway. :p

[dragon01 902]

Alternatively, ditch the "levels" completely and make adjustments mandatory (maybe with a couple of presets for easy setup). On top of that, "realism percentage", like in good old sims like Silent Hunter or Search and Rescue. This worked for them, why not for ArmA? Instead of using the difficulty levels, you could just tick options you like and untick those you don't.

[-Coulum- 35]

The fact that you can set the accuracy of ai is great and these kind of options and preferences are some of the things that make arma such a great game. The thing is, default ai is not overly accurate (IMO). I mean if I see an ai laying out on a field 200 maybe 300 metres away, It won't take more than a couple of seconds for me to take him out. Thus when the ai does this to me I don't think they are overpowered, it is just fair. In my opinion, what makes the ai appear to be far to accurate is actually due to their spotting ability. basically it is way to "Black and white". They either know nothing about you and don't even try to shoot you, or they know exactly where you are and are able to headshot because of this knowledge.

For example when you snipe a group from around 500 m it goes down something like this.

You shoot and kill a guy

the ai squad kind of runs around in circles and go prone. They may take cover but don't actually hide, just place themselves behind it.

You fire another shot taking another guy down.

The ai keep in cover but still don't know where you are so don't make any attempt to do anything else. still those that are lucky enough to place themselves behind cover don't actually duck behind it just stand behind

You fire another shot

The fine line between totally invisible to totally visible is crossed. within milliseconds the entire squad knows your exactly where you are and within a second or so you've been headshotted.

This demonstrates how the ai's spotting and knowledge of the enemy is far too "all or nothing" - there is no middle ground. This is the reactions I would expect.

after the first shot the ai takes cover and actually hides behind cover, making it impossible to shoot them because they are fully concealed. after a while they start peaking up and scanning the surroundings.

After the second shot the ai gets a general idea of your location but doesn't know exactly where you are. In the ai mind there is a large circle around you that they know you are in. Those who aren't ducking behind cover start randomly shooting at points within that circle. while doing this the ai's precision is very high but since they don't actually know where you are they won't appear to be accurate as would be in real life. after the third shot they have an even better idea of where you are and start increasing the volume of fire and since they have a better idea of where you are the radius of the "circle" around you will decrease leading to shots landing closer and closer to you. By now any sane player would be up and out of there but if you were brave enough to take another shot, the ai would get even more accurate. The more shots you take, the more the ai know about you leading the circle they shoot at around you to shrink making shots land closer and closer to you.

Using this kind of system, the ai would be able to pop off very accurate shots and snipe, if they had enough knowledge but otherwise would be pretty inaccurate as in real life. If this spotting/knowledge system isn't made the the precision of ai should be dependent on their knowledge of the target

[maturin 12]

I know its a slippery slope and its hard to program a program to think without input,

Correct.

and nothing is done about.

Incorrect.

Oh and he begins shooting before he even comes around the corner.

Well, then someone told him about your position. Because the AI doesn't see through walls. (ever)

Oh and the old marine motto of "get to high ground" is more likely to get you killed.

Mottos don't win firefights. There are times that holding high ground is useful.

Suppressive fire does nothing.

Incorrect.

I can deal with the friendly AI being effectively worthless constantly and doing nothing but dying but If I go out of my way to spend two-three hours to sneak into a town only to come around some corner as quietly as possible and some AI already knows I'm there and is shooting me in the head, it just boggles my mind.

So the friendly AI sucks and is worthless but the enemy AI is too good and cheats? Cry harder, buddy, because friendly and enemy AI is exactly the same, except that friendlies are set to higher experience levels in default settings.

Who knew everyone in the middle east was a sniper??

This is in bold. Because for real, the AI is not good at shooting. If you were an eighty year old man with Parkinson's Disease, you would still be a much better shot than the AI in the majority of situations.

Go load up Utes. Do it now. See what the accuracy rate of an AI sniper is at 300m. It's dismal, just dismal. You wouldn't miss a single round at that range.

If your squad sets up a perfect L ambush and is all prone and an enemy squad of 8-15 walks within 50m of your ambush; honestly not a single one of them should get a shot off before they all die. In the current engine I think I've gotten it to work like once or twice in a couple years. And even then I always had someone wounded or dead. Usually most of us. And a good 60-80% we hands down lost outright... Seriously?

.

Sounds like you're not very good at ambushes. I made a mission where twenty guys can wipe out a force of almost 100. And I'm not sure how your failed re-creation of one action movie scene is any comment on the AI. You haven't pointed out a single actual weakness of the AI. And there are many.

Coulum: Regarding your comments about "middle ground," I have done a lot of research into this with the help of various scripts.

There is actually middle ground. If you fire a single shot at a squad and they hear it, they will enter combat mode like you describe. They won't take cover too effectively because they're just computers. But they will know the general direction the shot came from, and turn to scan the area.

This is actually the middle ground. They know that there is a shooter and they know his general direction. If you had used a silenced weapon, or fired from beyond their hearing range (very low, by default), they would have no directional information and be truly clueless.

Once the AI is scanning for you, they may acquire you visually. If you are prone, in grass, in a ghillie suit that matches the vegetation, at several hundred meters, you will probably not be seen. However, at this stage the AI's vision goes from legally blind to excellent.

If you fire any weapon while in their cone of vision, they will detect the muzzle flash and muzzle smoke with superhuman ability. Now the whole squad knows your exact location, as you say. Accurate fire will commence. If you are at long range, you may be able to crawl away. They will lose track of your exact position if you don't fire back, and suppress a circle a dozen meters wide or so.

They are completely dependent on vision for target acquisition, except at very close ranges. If you shoot through a bush at them, no amount of shooting will get them to realize your position. They will remain in the middle state of scanning a large area of map.

What is needed here, imho, is a visual middle state, not just a pre-vision middle state. If you are in high grass or wearing ghillie, they engage a general area rather than seeing you precisely.

Edited December 5, 2011 by maturin

[-Coulum- 35]

@maturin

I agree with you on pretty much everything you said, especially this.

This is in bold. Because for real, the AI is not good at shooting. If you were an eighty year old man with Parkinson's Disease, you would still be a much better shot than the AI in the majority of situations.

Because it is so true. The ai actually sucks at shooting and I don't get why people complain when the ai actually manages to do to them what they do with ease.

As for the "middle ground" you describe in the current game, I don't think it is enough. If i understand you correctly the ai will go from totally clueless, to knowing the general direction of the enemy, to pinpointing there exact location. I think there needs to be another state in there that causes the ai to engage the area around enemies thus creating suppressive fire. Also, the liklihood of a unit to try this suppressive fire would be based on the weapon he is using. As soon as a SAW guy even got a hint of enemy movement he would open up on the area. a rifle men would wait for a bit more knowledge. A sniper would wait until he knew exactly where the enemy was. This would make it so ai snipers can actually snipe, without making every single soldier an ak sniper as well

Quote:

Suppressive fire does nothing.

Incorrect.

Although you are right you must admit the effect isn't nearly enough. right now the ai just run around a bit and go prone if no cover is near by and suffer from shaky aim. and this is only if shots impact near them. passing by shots have now effect. I actually find it far easier to simple shoot the ai than suppress him. When suppressed, ai should go behind cover and fully conceal themselves so they cannot be shot. passing by shots 2 maybe 2.5 metres from the ai should cause suppression.

[igneous01 19]

the ai isn't that challenging, I have been playing with the skill settings almost maxed (friendly 0.95, enemy 0.98) and while the ai fire reasonably well, their maneuvering is terrible.

Biggest problem is the default ai leader assigns targets for individual units to engage, and their they go, running off on their own across a hail of fire, only to be gunned down one by one. I have noticed that alot of fights I get into with the ai, the squad or fireteam is spread out all over the place, because everyone is engaging their own target - destroys cohesion of the unit. This is forgiven in open and sometimes forested areas, but where hard cover is plenty, you usually see 1 man running in the open trying to flank, die, then see his buddy attempt the same thing.

Also, AI have a tough time engaging vehicles with their at weaponry. The ai (for me) refuses to engage with SMAW's more than 150m away. they'll pull it out, look at it, admire its texture, read the warning and inscriptions, then put it away again and continue watching armor chew up town.

also, the suppressive fire command only works 1/3 of the time on a machinegunner that is laying down facing enemy direction.

So, those are my biggest gripes with ai - biggest being lack of cohesion, it should be the minimum of two units engaging a target while also watching each other, lanes of fire should also be utilized for suppression - maneuver - flank - advance etc

[Napalm Titan 10]

Double Post

Edited December 6, 2011 by Napalm Titan
Accidental double post

[Napalm Titan 10]

That is if their AI leader isn't killed. If the leader is killed, I've seen an entire squad just lie in the middle of a road and effectively wait for someone to realize that he's dead right in front of them. In that time, half of them die from exposure to fire by just lying there looking around.

I love this game, but I think the AI needs improvement for me to buy it. There are times when the AI's stupidity just breaks the game for me. On almost every level there could be improvements made that could increase happiness tenfold.

Why is it the driver of my LAV suddenly stops when told to drive over a rock that's ankle high? If he observes the rock at a high speed, he'll slow down and mount a tire on it and continue to reverse and change direction go forward reverse change direction and go forward despite my commands as a crew commander. I've driven Bisons and I've been in many LAV's IRL so I know that sapling the thickness of my finger nearby could be easily demolished; but the driver refuses to go beyond that rock or go near that sapling. Drivers in this game annoy me to no end as they'll screw up the simplest directions. Same goes for Gunners as well. There are times they will spot something and engage, and there are times they spot something but will refuse to. But manual control is a good way to deal with that. But that comes down to a point, why should I have to use manual control? I want to be able to crew command my LAV through the rocky terrain and cross tiny rocks without the hassle of nearly telling my driver to get out and do it myself. I don't expect them to go knocking down trees, but I expect them to see a few rocks and just drive over them. I know I would.

This deals with the accuracy settings mentioned earlier in this thread. Why should I have to exit the game and manually change settings through a word document in a config file? Why not make it a slider in the game? Same with the editor. Why do I have to write a sentence long almost impossible to remember code in order to tell the editor I want that dude up on the 1st floor instead of the roof? A slider? Alas, that is a different thread.

Infantry AI is another gripe, too. There are times where the performance is outstanding. But that is rarely. Squads simply split up or guys go missing. Go anywhere near, in, or around a building or a cluster of buildings turns everything into an orgy of disaster. I want my four guys in each corner of the compound covering the doors. One guy stands on the other side of the wall, the other guy is prone facing towards the wall by the building, and the other two are outside looking away. An OpFor guy walks in, shoots one, wounds the other, before someone reacts to kill him.

Another, a squad in a town come under fire. Reaction? To go prone and get shot. Yes, I know one of the first reactions to engagement is to drop. But not drop, then lie in the middle of the road or open area to get shot. Instead of lying in the road, why not run behind the building? Why not crouch behind that wall? Why do they lay down next to the wall? Now as he lies down next to the wall, he will face the direction the wall is running and continue to lie there until he is told to, or he stands up fully and gets shot.

Yes, I know; these things can be easily fixed in scripts, commands, coding, triggers, syntax, and a magic wand. But again, why should it? I know there is a building search script, an IED disabling script, and a script for the bad guys to see better and to see worse at night; but again why should I have to either create this scripts or download them for the AI to do these tasks? Why can't I just look at a building, tell my squad to clear it, and not expect half of them to prone outside the front door and spin in several directions while one walks in and stares at the drapes while the threat drops him; the guy to follow him; and so on.

Improvements I hope the Dev's get into. Just sayin.

Edit:

Look at the Arma III site GC footage Part 8.

Is it me or did it seem that none of the enemy soldiers actually fired? While it may be a case of coding not complete or just demo soldiers, but the player seemed hardly in any danger. One soldier got up at 1:06, and ran down the road in an opposite direction in the middle of the road. This is what I mean about the AI. Why didn't the enemy also suppress? Or fire an m203 or throw a grenade? No one seemed to actually engage, except for the player. The enemy seemed more or less clueless as to what to do.

[maturin 12]

Although you are right you must admit the effect isn't nearly enough. right now the ai just run around a bit and go prone if no cover is near by and suffer from shaky aim. and this is only if shots impact near them. passing by shots have now effect. I actually find it far easier to simple shoot the ai than suppress him. When suppressed, ai should go behind cover and fully conceal themselves so they cannot be shot. passing by shots 2 maybe 2.5 metres from the ai should cause suppression.

Ideally, yes, putting rounds overhead would alert them. But this would be a major strain on hardware and servers, especially.

Suppression makes the AI shoot inaccurately and very slowly.

Ideally, it would prevent the AI from running around, but this is more complicated than it sounds. After all, you want them to run for cover beforehand.

Instead of lying in the road, why not run behind the building?

What does "behind" mean? For a computer in a 3D space, that's a harder question that "what is the meaning of life?"

[echosixgolf 10]

Other posts have previously touched on adjusting the AI manually. If not I think BI could take a look at what ZeusAI has done and build off of that. IMO that was an incredibly effective mod. The simple adjustments it made to AI accuracy made all the difference in the world. The first time I tried the mod firefights felt more drawn out. Which was good because it eliminated the detect, turn, headshot at 500m +. As far as I could tell AI showed some signs of being suppressed and showed reasonable effort to take cover.

[maturin 12]

Zeus doesn't change AI accuracy much. Protegimus does told us what Precision values worked well.

That mod just tweaks spotting and engagement ranges, for the most part. The AI could never make headshots at 500m. It has a hit rate of about 3% at that range, and a player crybaby rate of 95%.

[Minoza 11]

I did have few really negative experiences. Especially when we're outnumbered (usually 4-6 of us). Last example -> I tried playing alone, stealthy, no Rambo stuff. I was moving slowly through the woods towards objective, 300m from the objective they somehow managed to see my exact location even though I've head no idea where the bullets are even coming from... I've spent 5 mins in prone position, hidden behind the tree. Shooting stops, great... I try to move 1cm and here we go again... They couldn't possibly see me that easy, no way.

This happens quite often when trying to play stealthy, they simply notice you too easy.

[CyclonicTuna 87]

What actually bothers me the most is the friendly AI. I agree with you on the fact that pretty much every enemy soldier is a terminator with a polirized titanium body and a 2 mile killshot, but what I can't stand is friendly AI taking cover on the wrong side of the cover!! I mean....come on!!!

[dmarkwick 261]

I think the OP has a valid point in that this game attracts tactical minded players who expect the settings to already be calibrated to realism rather then lowering settings in a config.

For instance, here is the config setting for the lowly Recruit:

Now I've seen many old OFP vet players here post they change precision values to 0.35 and sometimes lower for more realistic playout of firefights

in Veteran where the default is:

...signifigant change there. Dropping values to such a degree feels wrong to the tactical gamer who wants the challenge presented to him to be both fair and challenging - going into config to make such a change can feel cheaty (the reason I never do it) - similar to adding two Queens to yourself in a chess program.

I've heard that the dev's are aiming to make the AI's reaction more believable for the next chapter and yes, proper suppresion/morale would go a long ways towards helping. Hopefully the Config will also be better calibrated to better suit the difficulty the player has chosen.

IMO you shouldn't get hung up on the values themselves, only their effects. I don't believe lowering values is a cheat or a nerf, who's to say that higher values are not unrealistic in their accuracy and effectiveness? If a value of say 0.8 is unrealistically high, why should that value be preferred simply because it's higher than 0.35, which might statistically be more appropriate? I don't believe it's a cheat at all, especially in a complex situation like most ArmA2 scenarios. As I see it there are two important variables:

1. Realism. Setting the values to be as realistic as possible requires a knowledge of how various situation "should" pan out, and see if that's reflected ingame.

2. Gameplay. Values that add to gameplay should be considered. Personally speaking, values that lower the accuracy but raise the skill are preferable to me, as firefights last longer and are more interesting. I don't feel like I've cheated anybody, because I am suitably entertained, and I don't get entertained by cakewalks :)

Edited December 6, 2011 by DMarkwick

[WildFire6 10]

I like to see the mix of opinions even if Im not allowed to have mine.

I've modified almost every campaign ive ever download to use ACE and all RH weapons and custom units. I recently redid Benny's WF ACE version for all maps but I only posted a couple. I've used tested and played with Zues, ZuesACE, ASR, GL4, and am a big fan of ACE obviously. I'm not new, and I'm no slouch at programming anything I want.

So dont think I came on and dont know jack about this game. My opinion has been shaped through years of playing this game. However, I understand the validity of peoples opinions and do agree with some of them. However, there is still a multitude of issues that exist with the AI, from being stuck with weapons, total lack of using cover, team leaders sending men to fight by themselves and medics being completely afraid to heal, or drag one of their wounded members to cover.

As far as enemy units go yes, you put once in a field and let him shoot at you hes worthless, however you put a group with a machine gunner and a sniper three hundred meters from and fire off some shots, you'll have a hard time surviving even while using cover and concealment, even while they are using nothing but iron sights.

There is many more, these are just a few. I wont continue as I know there are far too many people that believe my statements do not hold merit. Which is fine.

Just for the record, maturin, your crybaby statements are not only offensive to me, but to any member of the community as a whole. If you cannot be respectful, then you should not speak, being actively offensive has no place in a public forum. Very, very immature, I hope you understand that you yourself are no god, and not above anyone's opinion.

Im not going to sit here and tell you your opinion is wrong but they way in which you have voiced it holds no merit. You could have communicated the same message perfectly clear without being offensive, and you should have.

[ProfTournesol 956]

I agree with you on the fact that pretty much every enemy soldier is a terminator with a polirized titanium body and a 2 mile killshot

This is very far from being true.

[NoRailgunner 0]

You can also try and change some other AI settings:

http://community.bistudio.com/wiki/CfgAISkill

Keep in mind:

+ the AI is depending on CPU power, proper ingame setup and how well-designed the mission is + which addons/mods are in use.

+ AI is not equal to complex human behaviour

+ real soldiers do make mistakes too - even SOF

Cross fingers that BIS will include an userfriendly "AI setup/menu" as option and editor feature in A3.