How to improve the Close Quarter Combat experience in Arma 3?

[BetuUuUu 1]

2 True facts

1: ArmA has lack of gameplay on CQC ( I'm not saying that this is important or not )

2: This forum misunderstand CQC with Call of Duty.

I see more like SWAT game or Rainbow SIX game. I believe CQC can be well developed in ArmA, but as I see the developers seems to have a lot of work, its sad they dont have people enough to work on this game that has great potential, BUT I think CQC will bring a lot, I mean, A LOT of selling copies for this game. General people like CQC combat and the modders will, for sure, do some great stuff like DayZ making this game sell A LOT again!

I hope they see this point because its a great chance over there, they have to get it.

[chortles 263]

fREAk., you've got one of the best recent posts in this thread that I've seen yet simply because it has nothing to do with AI :lol:

InstaGoat, weren't you the poster who said that according to BI the AI development plan is "we're not going to add any AI features until the ones we have now work more consistently and the AI stops making baby errors", hence the explicit denials of underground or AI-using-buildings because it was already difficult enough getting the AI to not trip over their own shoelaces?

For me the recoil is to big to... with a 5.56 weapon in CQ the spread isent that big. We did CQ all the time in the army and im sorry to say it but then BF3 is much closer to the "real" life.

I heard a story that ACE increased 5.56 recoil until veterans complained that that was unrealistic...

2: This forum misunderstand CQC with Call of Duty.

Or with BF3... then again, the core product (Arma) uses an engine that favors long-range based on mid-1980s, pre-9/11 assumptions about infantry warfare; updated the terrains, weapons and optics, but the mechanics not so much...

Seriously though, sorry if I'm repeating myself, tactical pace and the mouse look/aim changes are enough to make me happy with where CQC can be in Arma 3, and whenever the community alpha does happen I look forward to "feeling" this for myself (seeing as I've already seen it in videos).

[Phantom Six 25]

I can manually place AIs in buildings for ARMA no problem. Adding some flashbangs, CS gas, and gasmasks may help with CQB (like those in ACE). I'd also like to see a feature like this breaching script right here to improve CQB.

http://www.armaholic.com/page.php?id=18090

Now its not always just gotta be the AIs but the way you handle making entries on buildings and movements as well. The stances will help.

[chortles 263]

Hmmh... might any dev who may or may not be reading this thread (or alternately, InstaGoat since you brought my example up) know whether or not the "eyes burning sensation" from not wearing a diver's mask underwater might be utilized for the CS gas/mask effect insofar as an Arma 3 addon/mod?

Phantom Six has a great point about improving the Close Quarters Combat experience... after all, that experience is being had by players, not non-sentient AIs.

[jinxswe 1]

fREAk., you've got one of the best recent posts in this thread that I've seen yet simply because it has nothing to do with AI :lol:

InstaGoat, weren't you the poster who said that according to BI the AI development plan is "we're not going to add any AI features until the ones we have now work more consistently and the AI stops making baby errors", hence the explicit denials of underground or AI-using-buildings because it was already difficult enough getting the AI to not trip over their own shoelaces?I heard a story that ACE increased 5.56 recoil until veterans complained that that was unrealistic...Or with BF3... then again, the core product (Arma) uses an engine that favors long-range based on mid-1980s, pre-9/11 assumptions about infantry warfare; updated the terrains, weapons and optics, but the mechanics not so much...

Seriously though, sorry if I'm repeating myself, tactical pace and the mouse look/aim changes are enough to make me happy with where CQC can be in Arma 3, and whenever the community alpha does happen I look forward to "feeling" this for myself (seeing as I've already seen it in videos).

Ya i know sorry for bringin up a game that dose the gun real factor better...

okey how about the first ghost recon... even if the was no iron sight it feelt better then arma 2. All they need to add is some gun smothness and remove mouse accelerate i think it would be good

[mr_centipede 31]

You know he's not reply to you JinxSwe? There's a user named fREAk... and he's replying to him

[chrisb 196]

The ai use buildings to a reasonable degree with GL4, mix a few pbo’s from other great ai mod’s in there and sync them to a ‘Static’ module (if you don’t want them to move from building to building, which they can and do), then you have as near as your going to get to urban building to building skirmishes, I think.

There are many battles and skirmishes I have had with a type of street to street fighting. Maybe not the ideal type I would like, but enough to be as near to passable as arma 2 allows. Some videos show this in my sig, they also use rooftops and balconies a lot better than the buildings themselves, however everything has a cost, its what cost, that matters..

[chortles 263]

okey how about the first ghost recon... even if the was no iron sight it feelt better then arma 2. All they need to add is some gun smothness and remove mouse accelerate i think it would be good

I'm going to ask here: Are you aware that a dev including Buchta has said that mouse smoothing/acceleration has been altered (compared to Arma 2) and have you seen footage of Arma 3 infantry small arms handling?

[Trapper 0]

@ChrisB

That's really impressive, for example this

of yours. That adds a whole new game play challenge.

I couldn't find any detailed informations about your addon setup. You should really write that down and publish it, maybe on the "Addons & Mods Complete" or just the "General" ArmA2 boards. I guess many players would like to improve their general single player experience with that.

Edit: This sticky is probably a good place... AI Compilation List of Addons/Mods/Scripts & Misc

Edited December 23, 2012 by Trapper

[down8 30]

@ChrisB

That's really impressive, for example this

of yours. That adds a whole new game play challenge.

I couldn't find any detailed informations about your addon setup. You should really write that down and publish it, maybe on the "Addons & Mods Complete" or just the "General" ArmA2 boards. I guess many players would like to improve their general single player experience with that.

Edit: This sticky is probably a good place... AI Compilation List of Addons/Mods/Scripts & Misc

http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?117674-AI-Compilation-List-of-Addons-Mods-Scripts-amp-Misc&p=2267869&viewfull=1#post2267869

[wipman 1]

Hi, i would like to see the AI acting as in the GR (on the editor) when they enter or are close to buildings and acting in a different way when they're on an open terrain without human structures arround, just threes, rocks... deeps on the ground etc, but that must be very hard to achive without a big impact on the performance and the proccessor mainly. Let's C ya

[chrisb 196]

AI will use anything they recognise it seems to me, certainly the missions our group plays (GL4 based) they tend to. Here they run for the nearest hard cover (rock wall), they do this with tree’s, wrecks, buildings of any type, rocks, posts, lampposts, signs, etc. Nothing is out of bounds provided its recognised within the terrain, GL4 has ai groups using ground levels well too, plus coordinating structured attacks via communicating with one another, even units not linked/synced, just read the GL4 ‘readme’ & features its all there.

Really its mission design that’s very important to create a realistic environment, you don’t want to micro manage all ai, turns off realism, allow a percentage of them to decide certain things themselves, as shown here, where cover is some way off to the side, but its good solid hard cover and being out in the open on level ground is not the best place to stay.. The test shown is a very basic run at each other on level ground, one waypoint for each side i.e. ‘run straight towards the enemy’ all settings are default, all are ai apart from me the camera man. The only cover provided is by two settlements, off to each side of the factions involved, editor pic here (Edit: sorry wrong pic, there is actually another settlement over opposite but staggered, still way off as you can see will try and find the right Ed pic:o)..

Turn this and the many other ai behaviour traits shown in the vids (sig), into a well designed mission and you get astonishing results, better than any other arma ai interaction I have seen anywhere, other than our own groups missions, of course. But all this is available and has been for many years.

I think for Arma 3 to have serious ‘close quarter combat’ or indeed any meaningful ai interaction, ideas like those used in GL4 have to be looked at properly. The standard ai has been slow to improve whereas with modders it has been vastly improved and also been going on for some time now. It’s a shame that the very talented makers of these extraordinary mods don’t work for BIS, or if they do, don’t get involved with the ai side of the game, its really needed to bring it into the game as standard ai behaviour (not mods/addons).

There will be no GL4 for Arma 3 or indeed SLX probably, so who’s going to fill the gap, please, don’t tell me ASR_ai, o.k. its not bad, but its no comparison..

We are going to be in need of a gifted mod maker to get the ai in arma 3 to the same standard as the ai in arma 2, when using GL4/SLX/Zeus and a little tpwc.. Certainly for SP, or group play where ai are the predominant enemy or friendlies..

Edited December 24, 2012 by ChrisB

[chortles 263]

I get how you feel, but all that I recall from both devs and InstaGoat's Gamescom report suggests that "big leap" fundamental shifts in AI are not in the development pipeline for Arma 3.

[wipman 1]

AI will use anything they recognise it seems to me, certainly the missions our group plays (GL4 based) they tend to. Here they run for the nearest hard cover (rock wall), they do this with tree’s, wrecks, buildings of any type, rocks, posts, lampposts, signs, etc. Nothing is out of bounds provided its recognised within the terrain, GL4 has ai groups using ground levels well too, plus coordinating structured attacks via communicating with one another, even units not linked/synced, just read the GL4 ‘readme’ & features its all there.

Really its mission design that’s very important to create a realistic environment, you don’t want to micro manage all ai, turns off realism, allow a percentage of them to decide certain things themselves, as shown here, where cover is some way off to the side, but its good solid hard cover and being out in the open on level ground is not the best place to stay.. The test shown is a very basic run at each other on level ground, one waypoint for each side i.e. ‘run straight towards the enemy’ all settings are default, all are ai apart from me the camera man. The only cover provided is by two settlements, off to each side of the factions involved, editor pic here (Edit: sorry wrong pic, there is actually another settlement over opposite but staggered, still way off as you can see will try and find the right Ed pic:o)..

Turn this and the many other ai behaviour traits shown in the vids (sig), into a well designed mission and you get astonishing results, better than any other arma ai interaction I have seen anywhere, other than our own groups missions, of course. But all this is available and has been for many years.

I think for Arma 3 to have serious ‘close quarter combat’ or indeed any meaningful ai interaction, ideas like those used in GL4 have to be looked at properly. The standard ai has been slow to improve whereas with modders it has been vastly improved and also been going on for some time now. It’s a shame that the very talented makers of these extraordinary mods don’t work for BIS, or if they do, don’t get involved with the ai side of the game, its really needed to bring it into the game as standard ai behaviour (not mods/addons).

There will be no GL4 for Arma 3 or indeed SLX probably, so who’s going to fill the gap, please, don’t tell me ASR_ai, o.k. its not bad, but its no comparison..

We are going to be in need of a gifted mod maker to get the ai in arma 3 to the same standard as the ai in arma 2, when using GL4/SLX/Zeus and a little tpwc.. Certainly for SP, or group play where ai are the predominant enemy or friendlies..

It annoys me that they leave the important things for the community, they sell the game at the 50% and then the community haves to come and fix or add the things that they could have added in a begining; like the AI improvements, fixed models and many other things, aside of scripts and "Missions Editor for Fools". It really annoys me

[dmarkwick 261]

It annoys me that they leave the important things for the community, they sell the game at the 50% and then the community haves to come and fix or add the things that they could have added in a begining; like the AI improvements, fixed models and many other things, aside of scripts and "Missions Editor for Fools". It really annoys me

To be fair the main thrust of ArmA is to provide a playable game out of the box. As such if the AI & assets are appropriate for that, then the game is saleable. The bonus for us is that it is also very modifiable and flexible.

Better to be moddable and "fixable" than not eh? :)

[wipman 1]

To be fair the main thrust of ArmA is to provide a playable game out of the box. As such if the AI & assets are appropriate for that, then the game is saleable. The bonus for us is that it is also very modifiable and flexible.

Better to be moddable and "fixable" than not eh? :)

True.

[jinxswe 1]

I'm going to ask here: Are you aware that a dev including Buchta has said that mouse smoothing/acceleration has been altered (compared to Arma 2) and have you seen footage of Arma 3 infantry small arms handling?

Yes i have... i was just saying..

[chortles 263]

Yes i have... i was just saying..

In that case, was that not enough smoothing/acceleration change for you? Because I'm okay with more, but after seeing

I was like "okay, print and ship!"... Gamescom

didn't seem as smooth but I'm told that the machines were overheating anyway so the frame rate was reduced by that (the hardware) so oh well... still, I felt "yes, this already feels better than Arma 2 and this at least is how I want Arma 3 infantry to be like when it releases if not better than this."

[max power 21]

It annoys me that they leave the important things for the community, they sell the game at the 50% and then the community haves to come and fix or add the things that they could have added in a begining; like the AI improvements, fixed models and many other things, aside of scripts and "Missions Editor for Fools". It really annoys me

I think there's a real problem with certain people interpreting 'possible to be modded by the community' as 'leaving the community to pick up their garbage'. If it was possible to model ground combat in IL2, and the community thought that was a really good idea but it was not in the scope of Maddox's design, is Maddox 'leaving ground combat to the community'? Or is it simply making it possible for the community to do the things it wants?

Now, what if Maddox really really really wanted to add ground combat because he felt it's a big part of the WW2 experience, but such a project was out of the scope of what was currently possible by their studio. Are they now 'leaving it to the community' to do?

I don't know, I think this phrase is very high handed but also very meaningless. Maybe the AI does require a complete overhaul in order to make extremely large changes to it. But in my view, saying they are relying on the community to make their game for them because ACE does something, or because they didn't port Sahrani, or because they didn't do many of the other things the community wanted but made it possible for us to tinker with is really biting the hand that feeds.

Edited December 25, 2012 by Max Power

[chortles 263]

I'd say that it's less "biting the hand that feeds" and more "these community members have a very different and narrower idea of what they want to play than what BI wants to make", and that their development priorities differ from BI's, even though the community members don't have to make the sacrifices that BI devs do because of development constraints (budget, time, personnel) which are why there's priorities in the first place.... admittedly my positive noises are because BI's publicly-stated development priorities happen to line up with mine. :D (As embodied by the video links)

Oddly enough, I'm reminded of how some people complained about the seeming lack of floating aim deadzone in the E3/Gamescom videos and worrying that the game had been made more arcadey, until a dev explained that it was simply disabled in the videos because the creative director Jay Crowe doesn't play Arma with deadzone enabled anyway. :D

[max power 21]

I think we're saying the same thing, but I really view it as insulting when members of the community imply that BI is using them as a crutch, and their game is incomplete without the heroic community stepping in to right wrongs and justify their existence. Surely the community helps with the longevity of the game, and certainly has many good ideas... but the community didn't decide to make the games moddable in the first place.

edit: I guess I should also add that I am not an employee of BI and am only affiliated with them because I volunteer to moderate their forums. I don't speak for them and when I say I view something as insulting, I don't speak for Bohemia at all.

[chortles 263]

The irony is that if "the community" were instead playing Star Trek Online, they'd be much more accurate. :p Seriously though, repeating myself here, the reason I'm not saying it is simply this time around, BI's apparent development priorities happen to correlate with mine and not these community members. It's kind of like how I view ACE and ACRE, I remember some guy requesting that the ACRE devs get early modding access specifically because he considered ACRE so "fundamental"... I of course disagreed.

Another way to look at it... they don't want to play Arma, they want to play ACE+ACRE/SLX/insert-preferred-conversion-mod-here.

Same regarding the people who complained about improving the graphics while leaving AI, 3D editor, AI-seeing-through-grass unfixed... I don't care about those, I care about other things (mainly controls, UI, animations) related to extremely-CQC and those were the ones seemingly most attended to by BI this time around, so I've been promoting Arma 3 by word of mouth on the basis of the controls/UI/animations changes.

[Don Camillo 10]

fREAk., you've got one of the best recent posts in this thread that I've seen yet simply because it has nothing to do with AI :lol:

Uhhhm?

Threadtile: How to improve the Close Quarter Combat experience in Arma 3?

Stupid me! I always thought combat would be something between at least two opponent sides.

Never considered that one side is already perfect.

fREAk

[chortles 263]

Dude, just take the damn compliment will ya? ;) Your idea about snapping-the-point-of-aim based on free-look was honestly interesting in a good way.

[Don Camillo 10]

sry, misunderstood - glad to hear positive response :)

B2T