AI Discussion (dev branch)

[chortles 263]

It's easily fixed when one has a complete documentation of how the AI works, not so much when you don't, and (preferably multiple) people who know the AI inside-out on an engine level... and going by a comment of InstaGoat's, as of August 2012 that wasn't the case. Heck, he joked that maybe the only reason we have this push on AI happening now is because it took almost a year since that comment before BI finally had them!

[chrisb 196]

Default AI setting are horrible.

There are actually several variables that effect the behavior of the AI, several of them in dramatic ways, but the options are not available without exiting the game and editing the config files.

Having only a generic skill slider and a 4 difficulty presets in game is not enough. In many of the cases I've read of players complaining that the AI are either too good or really bad; those issues are easily fixed... and yet we're on 3rd edition of ArmA and still these things get brought up and still go unaddressed.

I don't want to bag on BIS or ArmA... but come on... it's not like ArmA hasn't been around for years under constantly evolving development and yet we don't appear to have really spent any time on advancing the cause of ArmA's AI despite the rather important part it plays in the ArmA experience. I mean... we've made improvements... the AI have grown to see the ArmA world in more detail, but what I mean is we still have some pretty basic issues that have been around for ever and never get addressed.

Your right in a some of what you say.

However, I’m just doing some basic tests as I go along, ones that I take for granted in A2 AI, but have been lacking a little here in A3 AI.

Basic behaviour foundations that are desperately needed, just nice to see them appearing without the need for any addon, hope they manage to keep them in..;)

[sqb-sma 66]

Something that could be fairly easy to program (comparatively) but would make the game a lot better would be an integrated "buddy" system. Where AI automatically form teams of two and the second guy simply follows the first. If the first is moving, so is the second, if the first is engaging, the second one attempts to as well. It seems the AI is forgetting to stick with the squad and they end up spread out and on their own.

[progamer 14]

Something that could be fairly easy to program (comparatively) but would make the game a lot better would be an integrated "buddy" system. Where AI automatically form teams of two and the second guy simply follows the first. If the first is moving, so is the second, if the first is engaging, the second one attempts to as well. It seems the AI is forgetting to stick with the squad and they end up spread out and on their own.

You mean Fireteams?

[spamurai 3]

Your right in a some of what you say.

However, I’m just doing some basic tests as I go along, ones that I take for granted in A2 AI, but have been lacking a little here in A3 AI.

Basic behaviour foundations that are desperately needed, just nice to see them appearing without the need for any addon, hope they manage to keep them in..;)

It's funny how some things get fixed/improved in an earlier ArmA and then left out of follow up versions. Like in ArmA 1 at some point I have the ability to lay out a path of waypoints to direct the nav-pathing of my AI. All I had to do was hold shift and click out a path. Then all I had to do was us the 1>9 short cut (Move to Next Waypoint) and the AI would navigate complicated routes at my command and pacing. In ArmA 2 and ArmA 3... that's missing, I can only path Shift-Click one intermediary waypoint on the map. No chains of waypoints.

And then there are things that never get fixed... like the Broken "Scan Horizon" command. Which, if you give to a turret crewman will cause him to endlessly spin the turret "scanning" until you order him out of the vehicle and then issue the an interrupting behavior command. Or how helicopter pilots still have trouble landing at improvised LZ's without a mission designer "cheating" by placing an invisible landing pad object as a work around.

How come AI still mount/dismount vehicles with multiple large access points, one at a time and single-file like school children getting on a yellow bus?

As much as ArmA 3 has made many excellent improvements over ArmA 2 that generally take the game in the right direction over all... the way the AI is behaving and performing, it's like it's gone backwards. It's even more quirky and awkward then before. The AI behave in odd ways. Like giving a simple Move-Too order while in a basic formation will cause them to bump into each other, and when they arrive at their target spot, individual AI often begin wandering around in a tight circle pattern until you physically tell them too stop moving.

Edited August 6, 2013 by Spamurai

[xendance 3]

Well, that's not the only basic infantry stuff that BIS hasn't put in the game. I am still waiting on the ability to be a team leader with an AI squad leader and control my own team. Also waiting for AI to have that same ability and to see one AI fire team suppress the enemy while the other moves to flank the enemy. But that is advanced stuff. AI movement in general is something that needs improvement anyway.

Yes, I hope BI will improve it. Better make a ticket for those issues though.

[petek 62]

"It's funny how some things get fixed/improved in an earlier ArmA and then left out of follow up versions. Like in ArmA 1 at some point I have the ability to lay out a path of waypoints to direct the nav-pathing of my AI. All I had to do was hold shift and click out a path. Then all I had to do was us the 1>9 short cut (Move to Next Waypoint) and the AI would navigate complicated routes at my command and pacing. In ArmA 2 and ArmA 3... that's missing, I can only path Shift-Click one intermediary waypoint on the map. No chains of waypoints."

Spamurai - I don't think I can even shift-click any waypoints (unless it's in high command were you can make a chain?) I know what you mean re things being changed to the detriment - moving from right-click targeting of anything on the map that can be Identified to now where we can't even command land vehicle gunners to engage EMPTY vehicles. (I made a ticket so hopefully it will be addressed). I'm not sure if the tab targeting was implemented for AI to better process (and I know it's been discussed before) but it is horrible! Anyway on a positive note the fact that AI is responding as Cliffy noted are steps in the right direction.

[Windwalking 18]

As it is now, it is very difficult to bring down a helicopter piloted by an AI using AA missiles. They immediately release flares and waste AA shots. Have a team of AA AI solders attack an AI chopper and not a single one will land on it. Makes AA useless for anything but pvp.

Edited August 6, 2013 by Windwalking

[TSAndrey 1]

As it is now, it is very difficult to bring down a helicopter piloted by an AI using AA missiles. They immediately release flares and waste AA shots. Have a team of AA AI solders attack an AI chopper and not a single one will land on it. Makes AA useless for anything not pvp.

I also wondered about this. Can helicopters fire flares every 2 seconds in real life?

[Windwalking 18]

I also wondered about this. Can helicopters fire flares every 2 seconds in real life?

I am not sure about that. AI however shouldn't be that fast in using them. They fire up flares way faster than a normal human reaction would. It should be slowed down and be based on AI skill level even.

[bigpickle 0]

I also wondered about this. Can helicopters fire flares every 2 seconds in real life?

giving ai the ability to fire flares as quickly as they want is truly what has made it worse.

[Kolmain 6]

Does anyone know where the dangerFSM is? The one I pulled out of \Addons\characters_f.pbo\scripts\danger.fsm seems pretty empty... there are objects but they dont contain any scripts?...

[NeMeSiS 11]

Does anyone know where the dangerFSM is? The one I pulled out of \Addons\characters_f.pbo\scripts\danger.fsm seems pretty empty... there are objects but they dont contain any scripts?...

In ArmA2 they seemed to be integrated in the character config.bin, IIRC. Not exactly sure how to get that into an editable form though.

[Artyom 10]

I also wondered about this. Can helicopters fire flares every 2 seconds in real life?

Absolutely, in fact you want to dump a lot of them quickly sometimes.

The A-10 Warthog (I know it isn't a chopper...) has programmable fire modes where you can set how many flares are dispensed, how many chaff bursts are dispensed, and the interval in which they fire in 0.25s, 0.5s and so on. You can program a lot of different sets for a variety of situations.

[spamurai 3]

Some countermeasure systems are controlled by the onboard computer and trigger involuntarily to perceived threats . So, the vehicle automatically reacts to a missile launch much quicker then the pilots human level of reflexes.

[Kolmain 6]

The config.bin shows this:

fsmDanger = "A3\characters_f\scripts\danger.fsm";

[Windwalking 18]

How then can the AI be balanced to be slightly easier to being down a chopper? Right now it's next to impossible unless the chopper is hovering. This bring another problem which is that the AI attacks as if its flying a jet. It never tries to level clear an area, which makes them not so much of a large threat in choppers but really impossible to bring them down.

[dayglow 2]

Depends on the type of chopper. Soviet era doctrine for attack choppers is high speed slashing attacks. Most opfor choppers will follow this doctrine.

The only time a chopper should hover is behind cover for a stand off attack. If they are using guns and rockets then speed is life as you have noted.

[Windwalking 18]

Depends on the type of chopper. Soviet era doctrine for attack choppers is high speed slashing attacks. Most opfor choppers will follow this doctrine.

The only time a chopper should hover is behind cover for a stand off attack. If they are using guns and rockets then speed is life as you have noted.

That's actually very interesting to know. But are AA missiles useless in real life or they are just ineffective in the game because of the AI?

[204 Kallisto 14]

the biggest problem with the ai is that they use only 1 cpu core

please make it so that the ai calculateb by 2 or more cpu cores

is it at least not possible to calculate the ai from blufor and opfor on core 2

and the ai from resistance and civilians on cpu core 3

it would be nice if could the mission creator in this scenario can choose which cpu core calculate

which ai factions

[instagoat 133]

Once a cannon armed vehicle is around, helicopters are useless. I´ve a mission where an opfor gunship defends Rogain, and by the time it arrives, there are two or three AMVs around. It usually gets shot down the second it arrives.

[Windwalking 18]

Is it possible for friendly AI to rearm on their own from enemies or boxes nearby? It could even be based on a group command. I know ASR mod does it, but it will greatly help new players if its in vanilla.

[Kolmain 6]

Still having trouble finding the vanilla danger.FSM :(

[sqb-sma 66]

That's actually very interesting to know. But are AA missiles useless in real life or they are just ineffective in the game because of the AI?

AA missiles are very effective against helis, as helis are often found flying very low and slow(relatively, the speed limit of most military helicopters is at or below 350km/h). There's a high chance of survival if the enemy sight is using lower grade missiles (Igla, Strela, Stinger) and you have a lot of flares, as the missile will lose speed and you, as you're flying so low, can drive it close to the ground where your radar and heat signatures are harder to read and the flares and chaff have a greater chance of defeating it. High grade missiles like SA-8s, SA-11s, Amraam type guidance or, god forbid, a visual tracking system like a maverick (if the pilot's skilled/crazy enough to get a lock on you with it) you're pretty much fucked in a heli. There's a limit to how evasively you can fly, rotors are fairly fragile, and you won't have enough speed or altitude to properly engage defensive. If there's a hill or building nearby you may have a chance, but... well good luck with that.

Regarding stand off engagement in Helicopters, it really depends more on the weaponry than the company of origin. Early Hinds have most unguided rockets and fairly poorly guided guns, and so Russian training at the time was to run in very close and use high amounts of ammunition to make an area a no-go zone. Modern Russian helicopters, and any other nation's modern heli, has the weapons needed for stand off engagements, which are far safer for the pilots. In 2035 I wouldn't expect any modern military to do helicopter gun runs against anything other than isolated infantry.

Furthermore, modern tanks like the T90 and M1 Abrams have laser designated targeting systems and fully automated ballistic computers, they can shoot down a helicopter with their main cannon as well as coaxial MGs/mounted MGs. Even vehicles that aren't suited to AA are now a huge danger to helicopter pilots, I honestly don't think helicopters will play any role in all out war between two 1st world nations.

[Windwalking 18]

AA missiles are very effective against helis, as helis are often found flying very low and slow(relatively, the speed limit of most military helicopters is at or below 350km/h). There's a high chance of survival if the enemy sight is using lower grade missiles (Igla, Strela, Stinger) and you have a lot of flares, as the missile will lose speed and you, as you're flying so low, can drive it close to the ground where your radar and heat signatures are harder to read and the flares and chaff have a greater chance of defeating it. High grade missiles like SA-8s, SA-11s, Amraam type guidance or, god forbid, a visual tracking system like a maverick (if the pilot's skilled/crazy enough to get a lock on you with it) you're pretty much fucked in a heli. There's a limit to how evasively you can fly, rotors are fairly fragile, and you won't have enough speed or altitude to properly engage defensive. If there's a hill or building nearby you may have a chance, but... well good luck with that.

Regarding stand off engagement in Helicopters, it really depends more on the weaponry than the company of origin. Early Hinds have most unguided rockets and fairly poorly guided guns, and so Russian training at the time was to run in very close and use high amounts of ammunition to make an area a no-go zone. Modern Russian helicopters, and any other nation's modern heli, has the weapons needed for stand off engagements, which are far safer for the pilots. In 2035 I wouldn't expect any modern military to do helicopter gun runs against anything other than isolated infantry.

Furthermore, modern tanks like the T90 and M1 Abrams have laser designated targeting systems and fully automated ballistic computers, they can shoot down a helicopter with their main cannon as well as coaxial MGs/mounted MGs. Even vehicles that aren't suited to AA are now a huge danger to helicopter pilots, I honestly don't think helicopters will play any role in all out war between two 1st world nations.

So AI flying techniques are to blame here? They just keep flying at really high speeds when engaging.