AI Improvements?

[igneous01 19]

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.

were you crawling prone? Im thinking you were spotted by a group close by you (maybe 100-50m away)

I have never been spotted 200m or even 150m away when crawling prone on the ground.

Oh, if they do find you, and you hide in a tree, the AI will stay there and camp the tree indefinitely (they wont engage though, apparently its a viewblock to them. Best bet is to wait until nighttime and then move slowly out of the tree (I've been successful at this, but still, not really believable tactics)

[froggyluv 2130]

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 hear what your saying but my point was more geared toward these figures being playtested to hell and back again then released to a better feeling of realistic by default. Many ol heads don't mind in the slightest going in the config and setting values to what better suits them in the same way many don't really care whats in the official campaign preferring to get their well worn grubby hands on the editor ASAP :p

But the newly introduced player from Tac-head grognard to curious newcomer to realism types I would think could feel somewhat turned off by taking the time to plan (similar to OP), then when time to finally pull the trigger and engage in what should be a drawn out firefight (10 to hundreds of rounds fired for every fatality), seeing unrealistic accuracy off everyone in a matter of seconds.

Last night I was messing around in some SP Evolution(on default Vet settings) and approached an enemy town by way of combat chopper and lol'ed when I saw 1 tracer round round from maybe 1000m out hit me and literally knock me from comfy helo seat to the hill underneath in which I just stood stunned :D

For me, I know thats not the usual and took it in stride but that sort of thing could potentially turn off many newcomers expecting realism.

[BobcatBob 10]

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.

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

How about if "behind" is rephrazed as object side that is opposite of bullet impacts? Though if there are multiple close together buildings that are already listed as good cover points, AI should choose which building to consider "looking" at for cover based on proximity, penetration value, and then object size first and then find the particular side of that Building to hide behind. (Obviously this method could use elaboration but generally speaking, I think it could work.)

[-Coulum- 35]

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.

What do you think would happen if that group was not ai, but rather humans? do you really think you would fair any better once they have seen you. To me ai is not nearly as accurate as a human player. I honestly can't understand how people can play with ai accuracy set to anything lower than .9. It just isn't a fair match. Granted firefights are much shorter than in reality but when I tried ai accuracy at .5 or so the firefight wouldn't last much longer, I was just able to get more kills because I had no fear of incoming fire and didn't have to duck in and out of cover as much.

I am not saying that there is nothing wrong with the ai. I just think that their accuracy is not that problem and if it was, it is because they are not accurate enough to snipe and what not.

To me the problems are

the ai do not effectively use cover. If they were actually to pop up and down and hide themselves when under fire I can guarantee firefights would last at least 5x longer.

The ai's form of spotting is far to drastic. They go from knowing next to nothing about you to knowing exactly where you. At long ranges this should not be the case. Ai's knowledge level of where you are should be more gradual and drawn out. They might know you are in a general direction and start firing at you general position but they still don't know exactly where you are. this would create suppressive fire which is responsible for the long length of firefights.

[maturin 12]

How about if "behind" is rephrazed as object side that is opposite of bullet impacts?

So far as I know, the AI already works like this.

It chooses to run for cover based on where bullets are hitting. Of course, what happens when there are shooters at multiple angles, hitting more than one object? No plan survives contact with the enemy, and no algorithm survives contact with an unscripted 3D environment.

[BobcatBob 10]

So far as I know, the AI already works like this.

It chooses to run for cover based on where bullets are hitting. Of course, what happens when there are shooters at multiple angles, hitting more than one object? No plan survives contact with the enemy, and no algorithm survives contact with an unscripted 3D environment.

mmm...that is true...

[-Coulum- 35]

Originally Posted by maturin

So far as I know, the AI already works like this.

It chooses to run for cover based on where bullets are hitting.

Meh, i don't really find this true. actually after a quick test the ai seem worse than I had imagined them.

Basically I gave one russian soldier a move waypoint behind one of those low stone walls on Utes. I put myself up in the light house about 150-200 metres away. I shot a shot off landing it about 5 metres away from the russian. He just went prone but since his waypoint had placed behind that wall he put himself out of sight. I though that was pretty neat... only problem is he just sat there after that. didn't even crouch to try and peak up and shoot at me. I left for 10 minutes came back and he still hadn't budged.

Next I tried placing the russian about a metre from the wall but on the opposite side of it to see if he would jump over the wall and put it between me and him. I fired a shot off at the ground infront of him. He just went prone and after a second started shooting at me. I fired another round off near him and he stopped firing. I kept hitting the ground around him and he just sat there doing nothing.

Next I put the russian on the right side of the wall but far away from it. After shooting at him he did the same thing as the last test. dropped and stopped doing anythying.

I repeated these test over but with the same results every time. Not once did the russian move to try and find cover whether that cover was near or far. And when he did happen to be in a position with cover he didn't ever pop up and try to return fire.

Maybe This is because the russian is not in a group or something but.. i don't think that an ai should have to be in a group to perform basic self perservation skills like taking cover and returning fire.

[igneous01 19]

^ ai always stops fighting correctly when they are by themselves, try with 2 men instead of one, and youll get better results. However I do agree that single AI should know how to defend themselves

[-Coulum- 35]

Okay, fair enough. I tried with a three man squad and got different results. This time the ai, when placed close to cover did seek it out and get behind it very well considering my position relative to them. The problem is it took a good 10 seconds of shooting around them before they finally realized they should take cover, and when they did they all went about it at the same time instead of 1 them covering while the other seeks cover. Once they were there they stayed behind the cover. Awesome. but now even when I unloaded an entire clip at the cover infront of them they didn't bother to get down.

When placed far away from cover they didn't really bother to get seek it out. They prefer to just sit in the open and return fire. This is good but I think half the squad should return fire while others seek cover even if it is a fair distance away. survival of ones self should come before killing the enemy.

Also when placed far away from cover and in between you and the cover they don't bother with the cover and instead try to run up to you and engage at close range. Really stupid there.

So from my results this is what I have to say about the ai using cover.

They should move to cover quicker but should not do it all at once but rather in a leapfrog way. It would be really awesome if the guys who layed down the covering fire had sutable weapons as well ie. SAWs

when in cover, if they are sustaining fire they should actually go prone or duck so they can no longer be shot. I made a ticket for that here because I think this would improve firefights immensely.

They do not seek cover enough - although they can seek cover and are fairly good at it If the cover isn't nearby or on there way to their target they ignore it. This leads them to just running out in the open. Basically if the ai has the opportunity to get in cover, or get closer to you for a kill they should opt for the cover unless they are taking very little fire or outnumber you, because to many times the ai just makes a run towards you when there is a nice forest just 50 metres away that they could hide in and shoot from.

And In these test the ai spotting is far to quick and accurate. I fire one shot and they are able to return fire within 1 second. It should take around two seconds to determine the general direction of the shot. They then should lay down area fire on my general location until they pinpoint me which should take another 3-5 seconds at least. total of 5 to 7 seconds to spot me and get accurate fire on me.

Just my opinions though, what do you guys think.

[WildFire6 10]

I agree. You've basically nailed the point of my first post in the head there. When they aquire your position it should not be an immediate position within less than a meter, which right now is not even that, it is your EXACT position. There should be some logic behind~

direction>distance and area>semi-accurate location>precise detection>accurate fire

The above takes time.

I was complaining about an ambush and a jeep in which the enemy knew your exact position as soon as you fired, which in real life, if youve ever been shot at, is rubbish. It is hard to find a shooter at distance. And a lot harder if they are camo'd properly. The ambush was horrible because the entire squad knew my location and was returning accurate fire in a matter of a second or two, and would wipe my squad out in record time, and the jeep moving on a road knew my position and was therefore firing before he had line of sight. I mean he came around the corner and I knew it was coming and there was already a muzzle flash when he appeared and I was dead. Its just not anything believable. You must still have line of sight and at least a second or two of aiming the weapon, firing and stabilizing. I was dead, first shot, multiple reload after multiple reload.

A lot of people thought I was complaining just about the specific accuracy of AI, or how good they were, when in honesty I was complaining about the logic of the AI, AI actions, how the AI deals with threats and the speed at which the AI work. Because they are ran by a computer, their logic is based on the speed of the chip. Unfortunately humans just arent that fast. Thats why we built computers. I have no doubt in my mind that an enemy should be able to easily kill you from 1-300m but they should not be able to turn around after hearing a bullet whizz past their head, which mind you in real life is surprisingly quiet even when they ricochet close by, and engage you accurately in any less than 3-5 seconds, and more likely half a minute unless they seen a muzzle flash. If you dont fire again and your in camo, they should be properly screwed. I think it would add an entire dynamic to ARMA if the devs could program in a little human tendency, i.e. time to do things, a level of uncertainty. Perhaps a script that allows them to engage a box around your area and tightens the boundaries and accuracy as the firefight continues. And definitely dumb down the hearing so just by hearing a bullet gives away your exact position, thats also rubbish. Gunshots echo, and in crazy mountainous terrain its not uncommon to be facing the wrong direction or to sit there and have to wait to be shot at a couple of times until you can accurately find the shooter(s). This one bullet and AI knows you intimately stuff has got to go. In real life an ambush is the scariest thing in the world because the enemy knows exactly where you are but you dont know where he is. This is why an ambush is completely ineffective in Arma.

But this can be programmed.

Also a major point that if were to be implemented is that once a unit detects your position and radios for support, that it takes some time for the secondary squads to raise accurate fire. Two reasons-

1)It takes time for the first squad to locate you accurately

2)It takes time for the Position coordinates to be transmitted. If only a direction and distance is sent then the secondary squad would still need to narrow down the exact location.

Thank you Coulum, for doing the necessary research to bring my topic to light.

[maturin 12]

I have no doubt in my mind that an enemy should be able to easily kill you from 1-300m but they should not be able to turn around after hearing a bullet whizz past their head, which mind you in real life is surprisingly quiet even when they ricochet close by,

What are you talking about? A bullet makes a deafening crack when it goes past your head. You only hear a whiz if it has slowed down somehow.

Which brings up another problem. The AI can't actually hear sonic cracks. They only hear muzzle blasts (at stupidly short ranges with vanilla configs) and impacts.

Getting the AI to recognize vertical cover would be a big boost to functionality. Popping up to shoot from sandbags and low walls.

Bear in mind, the devs say that the AI can't know whether it is in cover or not. It knows how to run for a protective object, but continually checking whether he is safe would bring your computer to its knees.

So you've got something of half a cover system, and one that has to be balanced with group formations and responsiveness to commands, which is why you get units lying in fields apathetically.

[-Coulum- 35]

Yes bullets, unless subsonic, make a loud snap when they pass by. sounds kind of like a bull whip but really loud. And ai should definitely be able to hear these and act accordingly. Right now they don't and it makes suppressing the ai way to hard.

@maturin

So the ai doesn't know when it is in cover. I find this hard to believe as

When ai go behind a low wall they always crouch

When ai goes behind a tree light post or edge of a building they know to lean and peek out

There seems to be predifined positions of cover. When you command an ai to go near a wall or something. an L will mark the position he will place himself in that provides cover.

These all seem to indicate that the ai has an idea of whether they are in cover or not. But I honestly don't know all that much about how ai function so please tell me if I am spewing total bogus.

This is how I would get ai to duck in and out Of cover. Keep in mind I am not very program oriented so this could be a load of bs.

Each type of cover would have a predefined safe and exposed Stance attasched to it. Basically when the ai come under fire it would force them to check whether they are near cover. If so the ai would check what type of cover it is and what it's safe stance is. The ai would assume the safe stance for a certain amount of time. After that it would assume the exposed position until it detects it is under fire again.

I know it is probably harder than it sounds and it would probably require more computer power - even better reason to set aside a core specifically for ai function. The minimum specs stated for a3 are already higher than a2, I'm hoping some of this extra requirements will be due to more complex ai routines.

[BobcatBob 10]

This is all very interesting stuff... But what is BI's opinion on the matter? About AI both at its current state and what they feel they can accomplish in the future? That's what is really needed for this discussion to really go anywhere IMHO.

[WildFire6 10]

Ok, well your right to a point.. Sometimes it cracks and sometimes its pops and sometimes it barely makes any noise at all. I always enjoyed when the rounds would hit soft material right next to me and make that thud and just stop. That always made me laugh. I wont argue this as its true, its more rare that a bullet would not make noise than if it would. I should have said "which can be surprisingly quiet sometimes".

Temperature, air pressure, velocity, angle of impact, distance of shot, distance of hit, and surface makeup all define the characteristics of the bullets noise as it passes you. It doesn't always.

But unless your well trained and have been shot at enough to distinguish the sound of the bullets velocity and a fairly accurate direction then its still going to take a while to locate the shooter. This is also very dependent on how long you intend to stand there and look while they are shooting at you. Someone said it here, preservation of life comes first. So although you have taken rounds and may be returning fire, it doesn't mean you have a clue where the shooter is, and is very possible it will take some time to find him after you find and take cover.

As it pertains to the game, while in combat self preservation shall trump command response in the initial seconds. The cover system shall be in effect while the AI is finding and hiding to save himself. Once he is safe from direct fire he may acknowledge commands, move again and obey orders. During the initial moment an AI should not be focused on acquiring a target. Only those returning fire or covering shall have a chance at detecting the threat and even then the chance shall be somewhat low at first. Each AI must aquire the target individually. Once a member of a group has an exact location it should be a few seconds until the other members of the group direct fire to the location.

Just a few small notes.

[-Coulum- 35]

Not so sure about your idea of what bullets sound like going passed you. As far as I know, nonsilenced rounds will break the sound barrier. When that happens it creates a sonic boom. At longer ranges a bullet may slow to speeds below the speed of sound but as far as I know bullets will often hit the ground before they lose the majority of there speed. I guess what your saying is that these sonic booms vary in volume depending on how far the bullet passes from you?

Anyways, it doesn't really matter. The ai currently don't respond to the sound of bullets passing by like they should. It doesn't matter whether you are battlehardened or green the sound of distant gunfire coupled with whizzes or snaps or cracks near by should be enough to make you want to seek shelter.

Ideally the order of things should be

Ai hears incoming fire

Half ai squad goes prone scanning horizon

Half the ai run for cover

The scanning section takes a couple of seconds to a full minute to determine your general location depending on distance, cover your in camouflage your in and whether you are opening fire or not.

After finding your general position they should open fire with general area suppression

As time goes by they will gain more and more knowledge about your location as you fire, move etc. In turn their fire will become more accurate

While this is happening the second section has sought out cover and is also scanning for you. they will start performing suppressive fire as well.

The first section in the open will now run towards the second to find cover with them.

From here the squad will keep up the fire on your position until you are dead or move away.

They would share info with one another but it would take a fair bit of time (3-5 seconds)to do so.

They would duck in and out of cover as they take fire.

If the squad is not taking serious casualties, they aren't taking as much fire and outnumber you considerably (or at least think they do) they will start doing assault moves towards you. During this time the squad will split into suppressive and assault sections and assault your position by leapfrogging and flanking. Note that they would only do this when they are taking very little fire.

This would be an awesome system. Of course it isn't possible right now but I still think that bi should be working towards this kind of goal when concerning ai.

And yes it would be nice to hear what bis thinks concerning ai. So far there doesn't seem to be much of a focus on it due to the lack of it's mention in there presentations.

It's to bad because to me ai is one of the things holding the game back.

Still got my fingers crossed though

[maturin 12]

And ai should definitely be able to hear these and act accordingly. Right now they don't and it makes suppressing the ai way to hard.

That would get pretty dicey with MP. You'd have to track the distance of every round fired from any unit. Either that or give them another huge hitbox.

So the ai doesn't know when it is in cover. I find this hard to believe as

When ai go behind a low wall they always crouch

When ai goes behind a tree light post or edge of a building they know to lean and peek out

There seems to be predifined positions of cover. When you command an ai to go near a wall or something. an L will mark the position he will place himself in that provides cover.

That's what I mean. They know that they are next to an object defined as cover, but they don't know whether or not they are safe.

Half ai squad goes prone scanning horizon

Half the ai run for cover

This can and has been scripted in the existing engine. It occasionally happens, just not in a very organized or effective fashion.

The scanning section takes a couple of seconds to a full minute to determine your general location depending on distance, cover your in camouflage your in and whether you are opening fire or not.

The AI typically takes a few seconds to react to incoming fire. If they don't see you immediately, they usually need to wait for you to reveal your position by firing again. They may also become confused as to the origin of the gunfire and look in the wrong direction. This is what people think should happen, but when the AI does it, people call them stupid. So BIS can't really win there.

After finding your general position they should open fire with general area suppression

As time goes by they will gain more and more knowledge about your location as you fire, move etc. In turn their fire will become more accurate

While this is happening the second section has sought out cover and is also scanning for you. they will start performing suppressive fire as well.

This also happens. Shooting increases their knowledge of your position. This knowledge fades over time. You can crawl away from your perceived position, albeit only at range, in grass, with a ghillie suit.

If the squad is not taking serious casualties, they aren't taking as much fire and outnumber you considerably (or at least think they do) they will start doing assault moves towards you. During this time the squad will split into suppressive and assault sections and assault your position by leapfrogging and flanking. Note that they would only do this when they are taking very little fire.

They already do this.

My point is that BIS works from the same set of ideas that we do. They have the same goals and contrary to popular belief, the AI is already capable of many of the things we want it to do. Whether because BIS has not taken the time to perfect it, or because the task is simply too herculean, the AI CAN do many things that it rarely does well.

Edited December 8, 2011 by maturin

[-Coulum- 35]

That would get pretty dicey with MP. You'd have to track the distance of every round fired from any unit. Either that or give them another huge hitbox.

I was about that last idea. Would it be possible t give everyone a huge hit box around them that bullets can Pass through and cannot be seen. Then whenever this hit box is hit the unit will realize it is under under fire and can react accordingly. Would this be possibly less system intnsive.

That's what I mean. They know that they are next to an object defined as cover, but they don't know whether or not they are safe.

Okay I think I understand what you are saying and I agree it would be ridiculous for every unit to determine whether others can see him or shoot him and whether not he is in a safe position. But I am not really suggesting they should.

When a bullet whizzes by they know they are under fire. This is possible to implement.

The ai will determine whether they are close to cover and if so what cover that is ie. A low wall. This is possible

If they are close they assume the safe stance attached to that object in it's config- ie for a low the safe stance would be prone. I think this is also possible to be added

I don't think this really requires the ai to determine whether it is safe or not (could be wrong though). And really they might not even be safe after doing this. If you were shooting down on them it wouldn't offer much protection but in most cases it would provide total concealment and this is much better than what is currently in game.

[maturin 12]

I was about that last idea. Would it be possible t give everyone a huge hit box around them that bullets can Pass through and cannot be seen. Then whenever this hit box is hit the unit will realize it is under under fire and can react accordingly. Would this be possibly less system intnsive.

I'd imagine that it would be quite system intensive. At least compared to the current system where the engine can pretty much calculate the trajectory of a round and then forget about it until impact. After all, it's impact that alerts the AI.

Currently, only bullets passing nearby players have to make a sound, and this is handled locally. But a server would have to watch additional hitboxes for tons of AI. A partial solution is just to let AI recognize muzzle blasts out to several hundred meters. They don't get suppressed, but they wouldn't be oblivious, unless you were engaging with 12.7mm from long range. The current system is fair because players don't suffer from suppression effects unless the bullets actually land near them.

Okay I think I understand what you are saying and I agree it would be ridiculous for every unit to determine whether others can see him or shoot him and whether not he is in a safe position. But I am not really suggesting they should.

It's not ridiculous. You could do it in Counterstrike, with small maps and entity limits.

The ai will determine whether they are close to cover and if so what cover that is ie. A low wall. This is possible

If they are close they assume the safe stance attached to that object in it's config- ie for a low the safe stance would be prone. I think this is also possible to be added

I don't think the stance is such a big deal. And they know that they can hide behind a fence by standing up.

The larger problem is that the AI can't reliably put hard objects between themselves and the shooter. They'll lie down on the wrong sides of barriers.

They should use ray-tracing to check line of sight to the particular shooter that worries them most, the one whose fire made them run for cover. Maybe they already do this, I don't know.

[-Coulum- 35]

The larger problem is that the AI can't reliably put hard objects between themselves and the shooter. They'll lie down on the wrong sides of barriers.

hmm... although this is true I actually find that when cover is nearby, the ai is fairly good at getting on the right side of it. Not all the time but enough for me to notice. The only problem is sometimes this cover is a light post or sign so it really doesn't help them much and in the spacious maps there often isn't much cover nearby so they opt to stay in the open and lay prone. and of course if they are surrounded they are pretty screwed but I'm alright with that because it encourages you to get on their flanks.

I can only guess what ray tracing is but wouldn't it be pretty system intensive to use that for every ai on the map.

I don't think the stance is such a big deal.

I am not sure if you are understanding what I am saying then. Stance plays a big role. If an ai is crouched behind a wall he is harder to shoot but with a few extra seconds to aim is still a relatively easy kill. An ai that has gone prone behind a low wall would be impossible to shoot and would actually require you to move and assault him. An ai that will switch between these two stances when he thinks he is safe or unsafe would result in ai that is harder to kill, but still can be a danger to you so requires suppression fire to keep him down. To me the ai changing stance when behind cover would be a huge improvement to the challenge and tactics when facing ai in firefights.

[froggyluv 2130]

Great discussion here.

When the patch came out to allow AI to go under fences rather then ghost through them I created a quick scenario with 6 Blufor on the inside of the fence directly outside of a factory and 6 Opfor maybe 50m south outside the fence with the closest entry point being the hole under fence.

It unfolded far better then expected with Opfor approaching the hole in prone and Blufor individually took positions behind pillars leaning out and firing on all Opfor shooting thru the hole - I was amazed to see what looked like a relatively realistic firefight take place. Thats a huge advancement from OFP days!

I think pop up/duck down vertical cover fire and perhaps quicker animations in terms of scanning (heads not always full body) could add a lot here. Perhaps even a squad member quickly pointing and yelling when a confirmed shooter is sighted would also give the player more visual cues as to how the AI is reacting thereby creating better immersion.

As far as super cpu intensive full cover awareness and raytracing -I wonder if these could be implemented for small scale engagements (as most firefights I'm in are in the 6 vs 6 area) - and scale itself down to what we see now respectively as numbers grow (Warfare etc..).

3D world AI has get to be the toughest beast to control and make believable and I love BI for continuing to be one of the few who still try to advance it.

[maturin 12]

I think pop up/duck down vertical cover fire and perhaps quicker animations in terms of scanning (heads not always full body) could add a lot here. Perhaps even a squad member quickly pointing and yelling when a confirmed shooter is sighted would also give the player more visual cues as to how the AI is reacting thereby creating better immersion.

Not to sound like a broken record, but the AI already look around with their heads. They get tunnel vision in combat, but before contact, they will scan a certain arc while on the move, depending on their place in formation.

And squad leaders accompany their commands with hand motions, and they sometimes end up pointing at you when they order someone to engage you. You can see their danger signals, etc.

As far as immersion goes, well, their hands swelling up to the size of basketballs doesn't help that.

As far as super cpu intensive full cover awareness and raytracing -I wonder if these could be implemented for small scale engagements (as most firefights I'm in are in the 6 vs 6 area) - and scale itself down to what we see now respectively as numbers grow (Warfare etc..).

I could see a module handling this. Any unit you synchronize it to will benefit from continuous line of sight analysis with certain enemies and pieces of cover. So when they set across that field under fire, they will know that they will be safe when they get to their destination.

3D world AI has get to be the toughest beast to control and make believable and I love BI for continuing to be one of the few who still try to advance it.

It's not even the 3D aspect. CoD's 3D world just doesn't compare in terms of complexity and possibility.

ArmA AI is like a dumb human, while CoD AI is a marginally clever parrot. Completely different level.

[froggyluv 2130]

Yeah I know they turn their heads - not really sure how to convey what I mean but there seems to be a disconnect between an enemy looking at you with a turned head and the body reacting quickly to then turn into you -especially if your flanking him CQB. I guess thats more of an animation issue.

And squad leaders accompany their commands with hand motions, and they sometimes end up pointing at you when they order someone to engage you. You can see their danger signals, etc.

What I see looks similar to a Jersey Shore fist pump then any sort of pointing. To see an AI point at you and scream "Theres the Motherflippa!!" and have his whole squad turn on you would be quite immersive and funny at the same time.

I could see a module handling this. Any unit you synchronize it to will benefit from continuous line of sight analysis with certain enemies and pieces of cover. So when they set across that field under fire, they will know that they will be safe when they get to their destination.

I would love this tho I could see many arguing it's too much damned work for just a module. Of course I'd argue back that the sales coming from Youtube clips of serious cover infantry combat.......

It's not even the 3D aspect. CoD's 3D world just doesn't compare in terms of complexity and possibility

Yep, I should have mentioned open world/scale.

ArmA AI is like a dumb human, while CoD AI is a marginally clever parrot. Completely different level

Hehe, a perfect analogy.

[-Coulum- 35]

They get tunnel vision in combat, but before contact, they will scan a certain arc while on the move, depending on their place in formation.

Yeah they do scan pretty well while on the move or when out of combat, but like you say in combat they become tunnel visioned, and this is a problem. I once came up to an enemy soldier hiding behind a sandbag, prone. a gunfight had just ended and he was facing towards the area I used to have been. I was now to his side about 5 feet away but he refused to even glance at me for about 15 seconds. Then I fired a shot off to get his attention and thankfully that got him looking at me. But still That is way to much time for an ai to spot you at that range and really detracts from urban combat. even in combat ai should be actively scanning around them, maybe just not as wide an arc or not as frequently.

I think pop up/duck down vertical cover fire and perhaps quicker animations in terms of scanning (heads not always full body) could add a lot here. Perhaps even a squad member quickly pointing and yelling when a confirmed shooter is sighted would also give the player more visual cues as to how the AI is reacting thereby creating better immersion.

Great point. Good animation can make ai look ten times smarter than they actually are. I think this is why BIS is revamping there animations.

As far as super cpu intensive full cover awareness and raytracing -I wonder if these could be implemented for small scale engagements (as most firefights I'm in are in the 6 vs 6 area) - and scale itself down to what we see now respectively as numbers grow (Warfare etc..).

A neat idea but I would rather they simply make it so there is an entire core dedicated to the ai and they use all its power to function leaving other cores free to do the other work. but if that isn't possible than yeah, I would definitely appreciate them making some kind of module like that. maybe the module would be player player centric instead though. Any units within 100 maybe 200 metres would be effected by this good stuff. That way the quality of the ai wouldn't seem to degrade as more ai are present.

Or maybe don't make it a module but rather have it in game options.

ai skill

basic

medium

or advanced

[Tonci87 163]

I think the Arma AI is sometimes capable of doing great things.

Example:

A few weeks ago I played the forgotten few by King Nothing.

The task was to raid Elektrozavodsk.

I moved into the industrial part near the railstation and had my squad in Danger Mode.

I had to stop for a few seconds to check something on my map. I stopped at a wall that had a steel door a few meters behind me.

My squad stacked up behind me, covering all sectors, one or two of them covered the door.

Suddenly one of my men spotted an enemy on the other side of the wall and immediately opened Fire on him. The other guy at the door opened it and stormed the yard together with half the squad while firering at the enemys. It was really great to see my men fall in and take positions on the sides of the door. They wiped out a whole enemy squad in under two seconds and I didn't issue a single command.

I was shocked! And happy!

Behaviour like this should be further developed for Arma 3

[WildFire6 10]

I am very happy to see what this thread has turned into. We first digressed and now some really good stuff is coming out. And the topic is definitely running more in the direction I had hoped for it.

Thats a pretty great story tonic. Usually my guys see an enemy and report him then either they hold fire and get massacred or they open fire and get massacred. lol. Usually one person will spot an enemy and the other 3 or 4 will be looking a totally different direction. I always admire how they line up and cover all sectors when no one is around. Sometimes I feel like its just my luck.