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

[Panda_pl 0]

I think I can say the same for Raven Shield's AI.

Playing on expert they still cannot use grenades, still cannot coordinate attacks...

The most efficient they ever get is if they menage to flank you by accident or just stand there and one shot kill you when you pop out with eagle vision.

The Expert AI setting in Raven Shield reduces enemy reaction times to virtually zero to match player's intelligence with their unreal reflexes.

There is really no good AI example, the AI just cheats in all those games.

In SWAT the rules are pitted against the player to help AI (you cannot just shoot them if they are not in turn aiming at you, which often is the case since they usually just walk around and not strafe or slice the corner).

It's really ironic but it seems to me the difference is ArmA2 AI actually tries to do something, not just camp at the end of corridor.

I think if you gave enemy AI an instant shot capability like they have in SWAT or RS you would not notice them being so inept. You'd think they feel threatening and intimidating.

[froggyluv 2130]

Not to mention the AI occasionally forgetting orders, "Sir, your in my spot", getting stuck, running past enemies, entering unchecked rooms to walk through them etc.

Well in CQB games, AI errors are more glaring and deadly as the enemy is right in your face -very little room for error. Despite that it's still (imo) highly enjoyable and gratifying when it does work. Arma (OFP) engine wasn't specifically built for CQB so we can't expect perfection but it becomes increasingly harder not to notice it's absence especiallly in light of almost every modern day conflict. Currently reading the 1st person account of US infantry in Fallujah - "House to House" (as recommended in Books thread) and the quote that really rung out at me:

House to House-

Assault rifles bark. Bullets ping around us.We run along a wall, turn into an alley, and start weaving around houses and shacks. Every doorway, window and rooftop is a potential threat. We keep our heads on a swivel as we run, looking for shooters."

[-Coulum- 35]

There is really no good AI example, the AI just cheats in all those games.

Yeah thats partially true, but I know in r6 the friendly ai was very good at scanning there sectors and when ai controlled teams cleared rooms they did it in a somewhat proper way. In arma I don't believe the ai do the former and I know they don't do the latter. I think these simple behaviour changes could really hepl the ai accel. plus being able to shoot on the move and being aware of what a door and window is.

Assault rifles bark. Bullets ping around us.We run along a wall, turn into an alley, and start weaving around houses and shacks. Every doorway, window and rooftop is a potential threat. We keep our heads on a swivel as we run, looking for shooters.".

good point. If there ever was a "CQC" mode for the ai, they would have to be more aware of these things. I don't really know how the ai scans their surroundings, but in urban combat, windows, doors etc. should be the first things they scan before scanning the rest of the horizon.

But first and foremost, making ai able to shoot and walk and use the crouch stance much more often instead of standing will help their close quarters fighting ability significantly.

[spotter001 82]

Why a module? Why not make it a new formation. That way if your leading a squad and come to a village you can tell them to go into MOUT formation. Or if designing a mission, you can give an ai squad a waypoint in MOUT formation. or if BIS are really ambitious, They will make it so ai leaders can detect when they are near a built up area and change their formation to "MOUT". I think a module isn't quite flexible enough for this kind of thing because a squad may leave an enter urban environments throughout a mission.

in fact, i'd have nothing against the MOUT formation. i only meant the modul would be useful cause it could run not only the formation but also some other aspects of behavior in the urban area, i.e. providing troops with ability to use windows, balconies and roofs or to deploy grenades appropriately for urban combat.

i now wonder if such a formation would hit the performance since it would require engine to handle squads in a totally different way than it currently does, with much more calculations put into pathfinding and a strong enforcement/override factor imposed upon the AI troops under MOUT formation. engine would need to constantly override the AI troops' crazy wish to wheel around the buildings.

[griffz 1]

shacktac movement is a must have for fighting / moving inside building. it reduce the colide box size of weapons. no longer stuck in corner or edge.

it's one of the way to choose. the second is about FOV and movement transition speed. SLX include some of these fix.

[maturin 12]

Shacktac is a fix, not a solution. Weapons should have collision boxes as long as their barrels, and automatically lower (and lose collision) when they make contact with a wall. But it your press optics, your character steps back automatically until there's enough room. As it stands, it is impossible for a character with a raised rifle to get his head close to a wall, or sidestep through a doorway. This can be solved while retaining realism and weapon choice tradeoffs.

[-Coulum- 35]

Yes, the more I think about the whole auto lowering the more I feel it is a must for a3. I think it's been mentioned, but the speed at which different weapons raise should also be different to represent the weight of the weapons and give smaller weapons an advantage.

Out of interest, would it be possible to mod auto lowering raising of weapons in a2?

[rye1 21]

It's really ironic but it seems to me the difference is ArmA2 AI actually tries to do something, not just camp at the end of corridor.

I think if you gave enemy AI an instant shot capability like they have in SWAT or RS you would not notice them being so inept. You'd think they feel threatening and intimidating.

Internal close quarters, they go prone.... and camp you. The only time they don't is when they are on a pathway somewhere and moving through the building.

BIS should check out Zeus and ASR_AI for some good ideas.

Instant shot capability? In RVS it's a joke, sometimes they don't even face you when they do it. I think RVS is a joke when it comes to this.

SWAT doesn't have this, it just has quick reactions to a visible or audible threat for some characters.

They aren't good examples, spot on. But they are for other features the games offer.

Another kind of 'bug' fix is to allow penetration of weapons, no more invincible weapon that protects people. I was in Yarum and shot at a terrorist - aiming around centre chest and his RPK deflected two rounds before I finally got him. :D

Edited April 7, 2012 by Rye

[Clarkey1 10]

Yes, the more I think about the whole auto lowering the more I feel it is a must for a3. I think it's been mentioned, but the speed at which different weapons raise should also be different to represent the weight of the weapons and give smaller weapons an advantage.

+1 I've seen a lot of game with auto lowering, even while facing friendlies, but I think most of the time their purely aesthetic and would actually be useful in arma to move the guns collision hitbox out of the way enough to turn around in tight spaces. I'm not thinking lowering as in the 'safe' animation lowering but in a similar way to how slx, or smk_anims does it. Where the weapon stays aligned with the right thigh and can quickly be raised back to the ready position.

[rye1 21]

I'd love to see AI work together and come at you in 2's upwards.

Play a bit of insurgency etc, one at a time... lucky to have two come at you and it's two individuals, not working together.

You see it in the open but not in CQB.

[-Coulum- 35]

I'd love to see AI work together and come at you in 2's upwards.

Play a bit of insurgency etc, one at a time... lucky to have two come at you and it's two individuals, not working together.

You see it in the open but not in CQB.

Kind like a buddy team system for close combat? I agree this would be neat. Especially if they cover one another's backs so you can't sneak up on them as easily.

[rye1 21]

Iranian battle buddies. :p

I hate seeing them try pie a corner or burst in a compound just to get shot. Working together for the same goal would be great.

AI nearby can act as individuals or link-up and work together. Provide suppressive fire, move to corners to cover areas, etc.

I'd just love to see it. It would make CQB harder than just "Who can kill the prone loner in the compound?".

[Whirly 1]

I'd love to see AI work together and come at you in 2's upwards.

Play a bit of insurgency etc, one at a time... lucky to have two come at you and it's two individuals, not working together.

You see it in the open but not in CQB.

Fireteam members operating together in close co-ordination would be perfect, imagine AI capable of this -

XKjcfpPq3Yg

[hoak 0]

I don't understand the desire for emphasis on CQC\B in a game that has historically focused on LSS combat. What's more: ArmA 3 would require very high-precision hit-reconciliation, to even function for CQC PvP game effectively and it doesn't even have hit-reconciliation apparently. The level of time, position, and vector precision required to make PvP CQC while not impossible is rather the antithesis of the kind of net-code that works on LSS game engines. You Fellas are kinda ask'n asking the equivalent of making an all-weather fighter out of a cargo plane...

:confused:

[2nd ranger 282]

I don't understand the desire for emphasis on CQC\B

Not emphasis. Just some semblance of functionality. It's clear from Arma 2 and Arrowhead, and now Arma 3, that BIS is focused on portraying the current and evolving state of warfare. Given that urban warfare and thus CQB has been a prominent fixture of most modern conflicts going back even as far as WW2, I would find it very odd if BIS didn't at least develop the AI to a point where they are competent in close quarters. Right now they are barely even that. The last couple of patches did improve the AI's behaviour a little in built-up areas, but their skill inside buildings is a severe handicap.

[-Coulum- 35]

I don't understand the desire for emphasis on CQC\B in a game that has historically focused on LSS combat.

I can think of several reasons off the top of my head.

Arma has always depicted long range combat well but has never depict close quarters combat well. CQC is an area that is clearly lacking and IMO needs and upgrade to be on par with the long range stuff.

CQC is intense and thus fun to play. Its up close and personal.

CQC is more tactically unpredictable. and thus there are more tactical possibilites. it requires a whole new level of thinking.

The difficult parts of modern warfare occur in close range battles. The further the ranges, the more clear cut a battle is determined by technology. By implementing CQC, the infantry soldier will get more action, instead of the tanks, helis and artillery. In today's wars, it is in CQC where the infantry soldiers can become more deadly than the tank.

CQC is a large part of modern combat.

That being said, I don't think anyone wants the long range component of the game to be in anyway reduced. And I don't think the game should be centred around just CQC. I just think it should be a viable possibility, and smooth, easy, and enjoyable to do.

What's more: ArmA 3 would require very high-precision hit-reconciliation, to even function for CQC PvP game effectively and it doesn't even have hit-reconciliation apparently

First off not everyone plays PVP. From what I understand there are tons of coop and even sp players. Secondly, why does it even matter that much. by not improving better CQC high-precision hit-reconciliation will be in no way fixed and people will still be trying to play CQC fights... just it will be clunky and imprecise on top of the lack of hit-reconciliation.

You Fellas are kinda ask'n asking the equivalent of making an all-weather fighter out of a cargo plane...

So your saying arma should simply focus on one aspect of combat? If so, might as well take the armoured units, planes helicopters etc. out and just focus on the infantry combat.

Arma is a very ambitious game trying to cover all the aspects of modern warfare. This means that often certain aspects fall behind others or lack detail. We are simply pointing out one of those aspects and brainstorming ways to fix it. Come on, you have to admit, it would be quite a disappointment to have every building on the map enter-able and not be able to have good close quarters fighting.

Edited April 7, 2012 by -Coulum-

[hoak 0]

So your saying arma should simply focus on one aspect of combat?

Any sentence that begins with 'so you're saying is' even with the best intentions is misguided, especially when what was said was explicit and clear. More typically, when what was said was explicit and clear, 'so you're saying is' is sophomoric, sophist setup to informal fallacy; ergo 'straw man' argument... I never wrote, implied or suggested ArmaA or BI for that matter 'should simply focus on one aspect of combat' -- that assumption is all yours... Please read what I wrote, read it again, and then read it for meaning.

:rolleyes:

[-Coulum- 35]

Oh... okay. so what do you mean by "You Fellas are kinda ask'n asking the equivalent of making an all-weather fighter out of a cargo plane...". If you read my post I never actually stated that you were saying anything. I was merely asking, thus the ?. please explain to me what you truly mean as we are obviously not understanding one another.

[maturin 12]

What's more: ArmA 3 would require very high-precision hit-reconciliation, to even function for CQC PvP game effectively and it doesn't even have hit-reconciliation apparently.

What's wrong with the hit-reconciliation? The game can already distinguish between shots to the helmeted head and shots to the bare face, even though you need to install ACE for it to make a difference.

[wipman 1]

Hi, an example of improvement... would be to just adopt Close Column formation on streets and have CQB specific closer formations, rightnow the AIs try to keep the distances on the formations, so they keep the 15 to 25m distances on the Wedge formation, loosing the trail of each other and having to recalculate where their mates are and where they gonna be 5secs later; this two things, the leak of CQB specific formations and keep distances on CQB or just urban enviroments... that are not fuctional for those places or situations... remove effectiveness from the AI and it could be improved very much.

The AI don't crouch or go prone when they pass by a window, don't aim inside the buildings when they pass by an open door or window, don't use assigned fire sectors depending on the weapon that they've and the possition (1,2,3,4 etc) that they're in on the fire team, the AI switch to the pistol at the wrong distances and the wrong situations never switching back to their main weapon or switching between all their arsenal before choose their main weapon, shoot it a couple of times and switching back to the side weapon or the AT once the target is dead; they also use the M203/GP-35 nades at the wrong distances and wrong places.

The main problem is to make the AI recognize when they're on an enviroment that require urban/CQB tactics instead open field ones and do booth in a credible and efficent way; but i've to say that i haven't seen any game where the AI do it right without be scripted and BIS, as we all know... are not God. Let's C ya

[Flash Thunder 10]

why the desire for stronger emphasize on CQB in Arma 3?

Gee I don't know.... Maybe because there's 50 towns/cities on Limnos that's a lot of close quarters real estate! FPDR

AI improvements are imperative for Arma 3 because Cooperative is the heart and soul of the franchise. If I had the absolute choice of pretty graphics or incredible AI that makes use of every asset,feature and location in convincing ways I would take the AI improvements.

AI just needs massive improvement I know BIS will put their best efforts into improving the AI for Arma 3.

Edited April 7, 2012 by Flash Thunder

[SexParty 1]

More thought and input from the DEV team needs to be put into the gameplay and gun mechanics to accomodate for long range and close range fighting at the same time. Americas Army 2 did it better than any game so far and is proof it's do able. So really it's up to them.

But smoother player movement at realistic speeds and realistic weapon handling are needed. I'm yet to see a soldier struggle in CQC enviroments with standard issue equipment so the players in there game shouldn't either. If that means reworking the controlls, do so but it's up to them. It's easily done so we will see what happens and if not, then MOD tools.

[rye1 21]

A good sub-formation would be to stack. They could implement some pathfinding for the AI to clear from the stack, i.e. a simple buttonhook from a wall into a room. Couldn't they?

Agreed with all posts so far (except Hoaks).

Loopholes (natural or artificial) would also be a great idea. Detail like that in the urban environment would be excellent. They said it's going to be a war environment - abandoned and destroyed buildings, well there you go. Bullet marks, explosive hits causing holes, cracks, openings. Narrow shooting lanes for the sneaky ones.

You can look at a number of mods for ideas too:

- ACE CSW system.

- Swedish Army mod buddy reload system (

).

They would improve teamwork and interoperability of weaponry within different environments. Now imagine AI scripts for them to do similar! Interfunctionalities. AI working together - anything from working as an MG team, a sniper team, one throwing a grenade as the other covers or shoots. This is a place for ideas Hoaks, not confirmations.

I just wanted to ask you guys as well, if the grenade system was improved what would you think of being able to throw it back? Not like COD with one click but maybe with holding the mouse over it and throwing or something. And also, if so I hope blast simulation is improved so it 1) Actually kills when it's really close, and 2) You and/or objects can deflect or take the brunt of the blast.

Edited April 8, 2012 by Rye

[-Coulum- 35]

being able to throw grenades back would be pretty neat. Although it would require two things in my opinio.

Smooth animations so you could quickly and preciesly move over to the grenade instead of running over it backing up to far running past it and being blown up because you took to long

you would need the ability to cook off grenades to counter this

The stacking formation in urban combat would be neat as well. may I ask what you mean by

Loopholes (natural or artificial) would also be a great idea. Detail like that in the urban environment would be excellent. They said it's going to be a war environment - abandoned and destroyed buildings, well there you go. Bullet marks, explosive hits causing holes, cracks, openings. Narrow shooting lanes for the sneaky ones.

What exactly is a loophole

[rye1 21]

Hole you shoot or observe out of. Hence the artificial or natural - it could be some dodgey builder and a dodgey wall that's cracked and created a hole to a demolition charge or chisel used to knock one out. The latter is a bit over-the-top (actually shaping the battlespace individually), so I stated a war environment as BIS have talked about in their videos. It would be great to see partially damaged and fully destroyed buildings which actually offer some advantages such as loopholes. Like mouseholes (that the Taliban use) but not for movement but more for concealed shooting.

http://img594.imageshack.us/img594/8119/captur4e.jpg

And the calculation if you're into sniping:

http://shanedaughtry.com/images/Sniper%20Loophole.jpg

14:05.

Edited April 8, 2012 by Rye