AI Discussion (dev branch)

[maturin 12]

@ maturin & Bad Benson,

I am all for heated discussions on these forums, its good for the soul! However, do not turn this into a slanging match between the both of you and stop with the personal attacks from both sides. By all means carry on the discussion but do it from a civil point of view.

The discussion is over, and it was never a good one, as Bad Benson refused to actually debate or entertain the slightest difference in perspective. It will not be civil if it continues, but I will not continue it. From now on I will only be discussing the bolded sections of post #671.

Everyone who is interested, please share your thoughts and we'll make tickets and repros.

it was (and is) always killing not wounding that is the problem.

There is no exclusive causation between wounding/killing and the fast turn and acquisition (as opposed to other, less deadly responses). The 'auto target' you so deplore can also be triggered by shooting a single shot into the air from standing position, then waiting five seconds. Or other methods that I described for you to repro yourself. This is 100% proof that the shooting of AI is not the root of the issue. Please respond to these findings.

wrong. as my repro video and mission show the first hit will not have an effect. BUT the kill shot will have an effect on the remaining group.

I have been spotted after wounding AI with a single shot. Just because you made a few videos doesn't mean you have seen the results of every ArmA AI computation. As I stated in the Observed Behavior section, sometimes the AI is slow to analyze the first shot. So what's going on is the opposite of what you describe. The AI is faulty when it fails to turn towards the shot, and functioning correctly when it turns immediately. In the former instance, it fails to take advantage of audible information fairly given to it. In the latter instance, it acts logically and competently on what it has heard.

The fact that the incorrect former instance is better for gameplay is what has you so confused. We need to make the AI always act as it does when we wound or kill them, then make them slower to acquire targets visually. Your bewildering refusal to accept the two-step Hearing+Vision acquisition process is what makes this conversation impossibly frustrating.

I say again, when you see the AI apparently learn your position, you are witnessing correct behavior.

Now, answer me this. If you do not provide a clear yes or no answer I will refuse to respond to your posts ever again and see if the forum has an Ignore function. Ready?

Query: If an AI squad hears a gunshot from 6 o'clock, should every member of that squad turn to face 6 o'clock and scan the horizon for enemies? Yes or no?

Edited August 25, 2013 by maturin

[froggyluv 2136]

.... Seriously, what do you think?

This shit is why developers usually ignore consumers.

Lol -yeah your right man, blame sleep deprivation and mother in law in town :o

After removing LOS mod I do get the same results as Benson. Ill duck out of this now......

[Azzur33 1]

listen. i don't care about your definitions of "seeing" and "knowing". the quick turn is exactly the issue. read the following very carefully, then watch the video. and then read it very carefully again.

the squad auto turns into the players direction after 5 shots fired at the ground.

the squad auto turns into the players direction after 2 shots which are both aimed at one single unit in the manner described.

it will turn out like that every time, if you do it right.

5 > 2. got it now?

I've watched your videos, I've tried your repro, I've modified your repro, tested differend aspects and scenarios with your repro.

Not sure about the mathematics. One shot kills make them turn also, not always, but often. Sometimes it takes 3-4 wounding shots to kill, and result in "quick turn".

So maths is irrelevant.

And they do "quick turn" if you only wound them. It just takes few seconds more.

the whole discussion about definitions was initiated by maturin after he saw in my vids that the issue is present, which he said it wasn't before. i was describing the problem as i saw it. if you have to be pedantic about "turning", "aiming" and "knowing" then do so in your free time but please don't bother me with it. if you want to believe that some ways how i describe things make this issue not exisitent then i can do nothing about that. my whole agenda is to make BI aware of this and not win some argument.

Calm down.

Definitions? You are talking about "EXACTLY KNOWING" and "PINPOINTING", which are completely a differend matters than "QUICK TURN" and "APPROXIMATE LOCATION".

I'm trying to make BI aware of this issue too, but being aggressive and babbling about "definitions" and "being pedant" doesn't help.

so after all this pointless discussing the fact remains that the AI is aided by the engine if you kill a squad member not fast enough. please someone who actually is working on the AI do something about it. it's all i'm advocating.

Pointless? Whe are defining the problem here, or at least trying. More than one person is trying out differend scenarios and repros, and talking about the results.

exactly. why would i have something against that. never said anything like that. the problem here is not the AI being able to see at all but the engine helping them out in that specific scenario in a very forceful way. anything else would be reading stuff into my posts just to win the argument...

AND the helping is the "QUICK TURN"?

Or/and "pinpointing" and "exact location"?

I'm too old to have an alpha-male battle in the forums. So I'm NOT trying to win "an argument" or fight you.

I have my arguments, you have yours.

If there is some misunderstanding somewhere, that is bad.

All I'm saying that I do not think that they pinpoint you when one group member is killed, while some say they do.

They know your approximate location by hearing, or by the hits.

You obviously think that body hits reveal too much about your location to the AI.

I could even say that is realistic. If your buddy is shot in the back, while he is watching the same direction you are watching, that would reveal that the shooter must be somewhere behind you. If you are prone, and his legs are hit, same thing.

And, again, if your group members are being killed, the reaction should be instant.

Only devs can answer is this the behaviour they are trying to achieve. There is after all logic in that.

If it's not, and there is some kind of a bug somewhere, devs should be able to answer to that too.

Now, I don't want to see any "heated argumentation" anymore, I just want your opinion what Should happen in your repro and similar situations.

---------- Post added at 23:00 ---------- Previous post was at 22:17 ----------

After removing LOS mod I do get the same results as Benson. Ill duck out of this now......

I had the same result as you, and I do not have any AI mods.

If I shoot while I'm better concealed and prone, they don't turn.

Unfortunately there is a problem/bug.

Repro:

Use AI_hive_brain-repro.

Get to the top of the hill, go prone in the grass, so you can shoot at the AI but they do not see you. Kill one of them, no matter if it takes one shot or four shots. Watch for a while.

AI is looking around, like they don't see you and know where the shot came from, as long as you stay hidden.

While they are looking away, with no possible way to see you, stand up and whoops, they turn immediately and see you (as long as the knowsabout is 1.5, and not yet 0).

Now, how the hell would they know that I stood up.

Edited August 25, 2013 by Azzur33

[bad benson 1733]

dude. this went wrong right at the start. shit happens...

Calm down.

Definitions? You are talking about "EXACTLY KNOWING" and "PINPOINTING", which are completely a differend matters than "QUICK TURN" and "APPROXIMATE LOCATION".

I'm trying to make BI aware of this issue too, but being aggressive and babbling about "definitions" and "being pedant" doesn't help.

to set this straight. i'm not the one rambling about definitions. yes i said "exactly knowing" because that is how the player will experience it, and i made the difference clear before. unless you have another interpretation of an AI turning 180° in an instant and opening fire.

it wouldn't have gotten heated, if the fact, that the insta turn happens and can be easily reproduced, would've been acknowledged right from the start. instead it was tried to accuse me of making things up. i wish i was. honestly.

Sometimes it takes 3-4 wounding

ok sorry please don't take this the wrong way but that's exactly why math matters and why this statement isn't accurate. when i say use 2 shots than for an obvious reason: if already 4 shots to the ground can make the AI turn and shoot you (by using their normal means), then how is not trying to kill with the least amount of shots (one shot kill aside) helping the repro at all? so using 2 shots will ensure that not their normal pin point mechanisms will make them turn but the broken one that is triggered by the kill that you are trying to repro. i hope that's clear now.

And they do "quick turn" if you only wound them. It just takes few seconds more.

well a delay can make things seem more human and i didn't test this specific aspect because it's not as problematic too me since it at least seems more human. although it could be the same behavior with an added delay. to know for sure you'd have to be more precise and tell us, if you wounded the AI with one shot and then didn't shoot after that at all. that would imply that the problem is bigger and already happens when wounding but is hidden by a delay.

AND the helping is the "QUICK TURN"?

Or/and "pinpointing" and "exact location"?

the "QUICK TURN" is the sole problem. what is/was driving me nuts is saying "nah it just needs balance". because there is no "timing" involved whatsoever. it's just instant. that's it. to me it's totally fine that they can spot you instantly if they look at you. the problem is and always was that the engine will just turn them to your exact (drumroll) DIRECTION and make the spotting instant this way. no other factors involved. it'll be just triggered right after the kill (as has been shown). it's probably more fitting to say direction than position if you want to be more precise. i can admit that.

All I'm saying that I do not think that they pinpoint you when one group member is killed, while some say they do.

They know your approximate location by hearing, or by the hits.

you yourself said that you had them even quick turn after a one shot kill, which i myself couldn't repro yet. which is even worse. you say they know an approximate position by hearing and hits and still you don't see the difference between 5 shots to the ground and your new record of a one (1!) shot kill that triggers it?

to me it never was about the position acquiring process because the auto insta turn totally ignores all thresholds and delays and methods that are used otherwise. when it happens it'll be instantly. i realise that there is a quick turn in the cases with delay but i have no problem with those because the delays create an illusion of target aquiring.

the core fact still is the difference between killing and not killing. i know there are other issues but that's what I was talking about.

You obviously think that body hits reveal too much about your location to the AI.

that is, looking at the past pages, probably an overstatement. as i said before. "knowsabout" and "last-known-position" aside. it's an instant turn towards the player, right after the kill shot. so those beautiful concepts ( "knowsabout" and "last-known-position") the AI uses in other cases are ignored due to this bug in that specific case.

I could even say that is realistic. If your buddy is shot in the back, while he is watching the same direction you are watching, that would reveal that the shooter must be somewhere behind you. If you are prone, and his legs are hit, same thing.

i know there are ways to make sense of this. in any case insta auto turn is BAD. period.

And, again, if your group members are being killed, the reaction should be instant.

why? of course A reaction should be instant but why does the fact that one member gets killed trigger instant auto turn? how could anyone want that? it's what makes AI look robotic and seem like they have no real perception.

EDIT:

Use AI_hive_brain-repro.

Get to the top of the hill, go prone in the grass, so you can shoot at the AI but they do not see you. Kill one of them, no matter if it takes one shot or four shots. Watch for a while.

AI is looking around, like they don't see you and know where the shot came from, as long as you stay hidden.

While they are looking away, with no possible way to see you, stand up and whoops, they turn immediately and see you (as long as the knowsabout is 1.5, and not yet 0).

Now, how the hell would they know that I stood up.

could you reupload the mission with your shooting position marked or something? because in my repros and my videos i went to the ridge (going prone before) and shot from there. killing a unit from there caused insta turn. i know it can be fragile conditions but my results were pretty clear. note that i never used terrain as concealment.

what you describe sounds exactly like the problems that are caused by bandaid fixes. my interpretation of what happened is that they already "knew" (read with caution!) where you were but were forced to ignore based on your stance and maybe underlying surface.

what you described is probably another incarnation of the same problem.

Edited August 25, 2013 by Bad Benson

[gammadust 12]

(...)

Repro:

Use AI_hive_brain-repro.

Get to the top of the hill, go prone in the grass, so you can shoot at the AI but they do not see you. Kill one of them, no matter if it takes one shot or four shots. Watch for a while.

AI is looking around, like they don't see you and know where the shot came from, as long as you stay hidden.

While they are looking away, with no possible way to see you, stand up and whoops, they turn immediately and see you (as long as the knowsabout is 1.5, and not yet 0).

Now, how the hell would they know that I stood up.

After many trials i was able to reproduce this issue. When I say many i mean really a lot of tests until AI would estimate my position to be somewhere on the other side of my actual position so that AI would be turning their back when looking for me based on the initial estimate. And indeed, while out of their supposed* peripheral vision, as soon as I stand up and moved, they immediatly turned to me and started shooting in a behaviour that can be considered unfair.

* i say supposed because we really can't say if any exists or if the engine tries to represent a wider angle than common sense advises.

AS REPRODUCED IN BETA BRANCH (NOT DEV)

Edit:

(...)

2. Wounding an AI makes them immediately turn towards the sound of the muzzle blast. This is correct behavior, but it shows an inconsistency in AI reactions. When shooting the ground at their feet or in the air, they are confused or slow to react to the sound. This is an inconsistency that should be evaluated by the devs, as it seems somewhat 'under the hood.' (Although gammadust, you may have the knowhow for this topic)

Not yet :/. what i can say is that both the shots falling on ground nearby an AI or the shots hiting a nearby friendly are placed where the sound originates (ie. away from the player), how the engine lets the AI proceed from there i can only guess, but i wouldn't expect this to inform an AI too much of an enemy's position. As i was able to check it is more relevant to help the AI detection the occurrence of a Fire cause, which indeed is placed where the fire originates and consequently pinpointing the location of the target. What I don't expect in this case is that the only requirement is for the enemy to be within LoS, this should additionally be restricted to a Peripheral vision angle, which is indeed present on a first contact. In the following incidences there appears to be no limit.

I should also stress that I am in Beta branch and am a bit out of my place here...

Edited August 26, 2013 by gammadust

[maturin 12]

Gammadust, you seem to have found more evidence for your peripheral vision issue there. I would be very curious to see whether you can have the AI detect you from greater than 180 degrees. That is, from 4 or 8 o'clock.

As it stands, we have no evidence that FOV is a factor in the quick detection issue.

And I'm surprised that you're on beta branch. After all, the dev branch has changelog items that address the very issue we are discussing here today, although the differences are not great.

Query: If an AI squad hears a gunshot from 6 o'clock, should every member of that squad turn to face 6 o'clock and scan the horizon for enemies? Yes or no?

BadBenson, it's been hours. You've read the thread, now answer the question.

[gammadust 12]

Gammadust, you seem to have found more evidence for your peripheral vision issue there. I would be very curious to see whether you can have the AI detect you from greater than 180 degrees. That is, from 4 or 8 o'clock.

As it stands, we have no evidence that FOV is a factor in the quick detection issue.

And I'm surprised that you're on beta branch. After all, the dev branch has changelog items that address the very issue we are discussing here today, although the differences are not great.

I am trying to stay asap (as stable as possible). And beta branch was updated recently to wane my worries in regards to eventual corrections in latest dev. I said somewhere i am not so much interested in bug hunting as i am in understanding AI behaviours. I was trying to keep a froggyluv stance on the latest discussion but the subject derived into one of my pet issues.

"As it stands, we have no evidence that FOV is a factor in the quick detection issue." I have to agree, the evidence i've seen in this regard the FOV issue does not present itself (ie. the shot is within sight of detecting AI, which makes sense to accellerate the detection comparatively to when there is no shot or movement).

The FOV issue should earn a ticket tomorrow.

[maturin 12]

If you prefer to study the AI's workings, do you have any insights to share on detection? Maybe someone else could explain how hearing and vision works better than I.

Actually, I have an excellent mission for ArmA (I forget who made it) that represents the AI's perceived position (including area guesses) with colored smoke. It would be extremely useful for both of our purposes because it allows you to examine AI hearing.

However, the simple script doesn't work in A2. If you're interested, I could send it to you. Maybe you'd see how to fix it. I think it just needs new references to the smoke objects.

[gammadust 12]

Any help is appreaciated (feel free to pm), but i'll have to keep information intake doses in check. What I have found so far is going to this thread.

[Azzur33 1]

instead it was tried to accuse me of making things up. i wish i was. honestly.

We all can and could see the "insta-turn" and experience that ourselves. It was just the "pinpoint" "exact" that created the confusion.

I can't remember anyone denying "insta" or "quickie". I didn't do it either.

ok sorry please don't take this the wrong way but that's exactly why math matters and why this statement isn't accurate. i hope that's clear now.

I'm not sure. I just kill. No matter how much bullets I waste. The kill gives me the "insta-turn". Wounding gives me delayed "quickturn".

(And I hate maths.)

well a delay can make things seem more human. be more precise and tell us, if you wounded the AI with one shot and then didn't shoot after that at all.

For example, one shot. In a leg. It takes seconds, then "quick turn". That just doesn't seem human.

I said "needs little tweaking as it doesn't feel natural". And that is one of the things that feels unnatural.

the "QUICK TURN" is the sole problem.

Yes. The way it works now, is problematic.

you yourself said that you had them even quick turn after a one shot kill, which i myself couldn't repro yet. which is even worse. you say they know an approximate position by hearing and hits and still you don't see the difference between 5 shots to the ground and your new record of a one (1!) shot kill that triggers it?

I haven't noticed any difference between 1 or multiple shots, if the kill happens. They turn quickly.

I've said ages and pages ago, that the AI not reacting to the missed shots is a problem.

They react when they hear the shot, with delay, it doesn't have to hit the ground, it doesn't need 5 shots. They just need to hear them/it.

If you shoot at them from out of their hearing range, and hit the ground, you won't have any reaction.

when it happens it'll be instantly. i realise that there is a quick turn in the cases with delay but i have no problem with those because the delays create an illusion of target aquiring.

the core fact still is the difference between killing and not killing.

Even with the delay, it often doesn't feel that right. It's like "we have no idea what's going on...damn ... OH I GOT IT NOW, LETS TURN QUICKLY!".

The "insta-turn" after a kill almost feels more natural sometimes. Like a reflex action.

why? of course A reaction should be instant but why does the fact that one member gets killed trigger instant auto turn? how could anyone want that? it's what makes AI look robotic and seem like they have no real perception.

If we think about the delay, which in the case of killed member, is very short, and bigger when only wounding, or only hearing a shot.

Then it doesn't override anything, because the SAME "quickturn" happens just earlier when the danger is really high.

If this is what's going on, then the delay after one member killed, should be ...about 1 second?

Or should there be a bit slower turn speed?

By the way, if I remember correctly, when I was really close behind them (under 100 meters), there is NO "quick turn".

They turn "slowishly" (compared to "quickturn").

If the distance is over 100 meters, then "insta-quick-turn" happens.

Put the guys "in formation", and formation "line", facing away from you. And you about 50 meters behind them. Kill one.

Their knowsabout is maximum 4 instantly, and they slowly turn to kill you. And if you wound one, it will be 4 with a delay.

[maturin 12]

If, after the quickturn, the AI didn't actually see you, but dropped to the ground to cover their teammates sprinting to cover, there would be no problem.

The 'quickturn' (I'll try not to whince at this term) is ideal behavior. What happens in the split second after is the problem.

In other words, they should turn instantly and resolutely towards the sound of the gunshot, and then exhibit that prone, horizon-scanning behavior that occurs when you shoot the ground at their feet.

[Azzur33 1]

If, after the quickturn, the AI didn't actually see you, but dropped to the ground to cover their teammates sprinting to cover, there would be no problem.

The 'quickturn' (I'll try not to whince at this term) is ideal behavior. What happens in the split second after is the problem.

In other words, they should turn instantly and resolutely towards the sound of the gunshot, and then exhibit that prone, horizon-scanning behavior that occurs when you shoot the ground at their feet.

They actually do that when the shooter is far. I did experience this behaviour a lot before, shooting 300+ meters away. They scan the horizon, because it's difficult to see the enemy that far. And I thought it was indeed "ideal behaviour".

Now testing with short (200>) distances, I can see why this feels unfair.

When the "quick turn" happens, they will see the shooter the moment they turn.

They don't need any scopes or binoculars, they can see you as well as if you started the mission where you put AI close and facing you.

You are dead in a second.

If they wouldn't see the close enemy right away when they look at his direction, of if they reacted slower when they see the enemy, there would be lots of whining about how unresponsive the AI is, again.

Of course, experienced players, when they want to play "seriously", wouldn't put themselves in that situation - engaging close enemy group on the open terrain, alone.

The odd behaviour when killing from a concealed position, then moving to a position they could see you or simply just standing up, while they All are watching away from you and have no chance of Seeing you - and suddenly knowing that you are not hiding anymore and "quick turn" as they had eyes on the back of their heads ...that bothers me most at the moment. That just should not happen, it has no rational explanation in reality.

And the delay thing. It feels unnatural at the moment.

If they hear the shot, but no-one is hurt, they just stand like nothing happened, and then, after 5+(?) seconds, they'll do the "quick turn". If you wound someone, they'll go prone, and seconds go by, then The Turn.

If they would even crouch when they hear the shot.

The delay from hearing the shot or/and wounding a group member, and reacting by turning, should be shorter, and reacting to a kill, just a bit longer. That would make it feel more natural.

Edited August 26, 2013 by Azzur33

[old_painless 182]

AI update on its way in today's download! Oh, and something they call Altis.

[dale0404 5]

AI update on its way in today's download! Oh, and something they call Altis.

I have heard that the update today is ~ 2.5GB, that's a big update just for the AI....

[royaltyinexile 175]

Recently, the guys dedicated some effort towards addressing AI behaviour performance in (chiefly) 'CQB' situations. These changes should now all be merged into today's development branch.

Dr Hladik has already released some fixes that enable the AI to stop and engage threats when they discover them while en route to cover. That fix goes hand-in-hand with the rotation speed of AI, which - in the previous state - felt rather awkward and slow.

Rather than simply increase the speed at which AI turn and engage, we've attempted a slightly more subtle fix, pegging rotation speed to various factors and tying accuracy to rotation speed:

• AI rotation speed increased
  
• AI rotation speed dependent on encumbrance (more encumbered, slower rotation)
  
• AI rotation speed dependent on stance (prone rotation ~3x slower than standing)
  
• AI rotation speed dependent on speed of movement (AI that has been moving fast will turn slower than those that are static)
  
• AI accuracy influence by rotation (faster rotation, less precision)
  
• AI accuracy influenced by shooting (more shooting, less precision)
  
• AI accuracy influenced by movement (more movement, less precision)
  
• AI accuracy influenced more logically in proportion to skill
  

As we've said before, the changes we're able to implement now are considered to be modest refinements rather than entire overhauls, but we hope if offers a bit more depth/authenticity to close engagements (not that I'm taking away anything from Klamacz's late nights of code-diving!) :)

My first impression (using the repro mission created before any of the CQB fixes) was that it was really a fun challenge from one point of view, and totally brutal from another. The initial state of the repro (which should be still reproducible in the default branch) was that the enemies weren't able to engage me when I was revealed and sometimes struggled to move around the corner effectively. Now (in dev branch state) the AI will sometimes actually get a couple of shots off in the initial phase and be far more effective when coming around the corner.

Compared to the previous state, it might seem the AI is 'overpowered'; however, when I compare it to experiences in other shooters, it seems like 'correct' behaviour (ok, maybe on a 'hard' difficulty): reactive and deadly at short range! :cool:

With this in mind, we've got a proposal for an overhauled AI difficulty settings for the game options, which we'll share when we can. For now, let us know what you think (ideally using my repro to begin with).

Best,

RiE

[[evo] dan 79]

The drone AI needs working on. The darter does not like following waypoints when it detects enemies, which makes it a pain to use.

[liquidpinky 11]

Dan;2479446']The drone AI needs working on. The darter does not like following waypoints when it detects enemies' date=' which makes it a pain to use.[/quote']

Indeed, they need to have no self worth of their own lives instead of being like the skittish little foals they are now in their behaviour.

[maddogx 13]

*** Lots of awesome AI goodness. ***

Best,

RiE

This sounds pretty amazing, and at the very least it should make it impossible to run circles around the AI when up close. :D

I look forward to testing this extensively.

[windies 11]

Recently, the guys dedicated some effort towards addressing AI behaviour performance in (chiefly) 'CQB' situations. These changes should now all be merged into today's development branch.

Dr Hladik has already released some fixes that enable the AI to stop and engage threats when they discover them while en route to cover. That fix goes hand-in-hand with the rotation speed of AI, which - in the previous state - felt rather awkward and slow.

Rather than simply increase the speed at which AI turn and engage, we've attempted a slightly more subtle fix, pegging rotation speed to various factors and tying accuracy to rotation speed:

• AI rotation speed increased
  
• AI rotation speed dependent on encumbrance (more encumbered, slower rotation)
  
• AI rotation speed dependent on stance (prone rotation ~3x slower than standing)
  
• AI rotation speed dependent on speed of movement (AI that has been moving fast will turn slower than those that are static)
  
• AI accuracy influence by rotation (faster rotation, less precision)
  
• AI accuracy influenced by shooting (more shooting, less precision)
  
• AI accuracy influenced by movement (more movement, less precision)
  
• AI accuracy influenced more logically in proportion to skill
  

As we've said before, the changes we're able to implement now are considered to be modest refinements rather than entire overhauls, but we hope if offers a bit more depth/authenticity to close engagements (not that I'm taking away anything from Klamacz's late nights of code-diving!) :)

My first impression (using the repro mission created before any of the CQB fixes) was that it was really a fun challenge from one point of view, and totally brutal from another. The initial state of the repro (which should be still reproducible in the default branch) was that the enemies weren't able to engage me when I was revealed and sometimes struggled to move around the corner effectively. Now (in dev branch state) the AI will sometimes actually get a couple of shots off in the initial phase and be far more effective when coming around the corner.

Compared to the previous state, it might seem the AI is 'overpowered'; however, when I compare it to experiences in other shooters, it seems like 'correct' behaviour (ok, maybe on a 'hard' difficulty): reactive and deadly at short range! :cool:

With this in mind, we've got a proposal for an overhauled AI difficulty settings for the game options, which we'll share when we can. For now, let us know what you think (ideally using my repro to begin with).

Best,

RiE

In regards to the bolded point above, if we could have a good explanation of how the game settings difficulty settings interact with the editor skill settings, and have a better way of controlling aspects of the AI like segregating their decision making from precision and courage from precision etc... and have them all as global settings, I think that would be perfect.

[zimms 22]

@ Drone AI discussion

Isn't it possible to set the behaviour to careless?

[ProfTournesol 956]

This sounds pretty amazing, and at the very least it should make it impossible to run circles around the AI when up close. :D

I look forward to testing this extensively.

God yes, one of the best news sofar. AI needs so more love.

[bigpickle 0]

Recently, the guys dedicated some effort towards addressing AI behaviour performance in (chiefly) 'CQB' situations. These changes should now all be merged into today's development branch.

Dr Hladik has already released some fixes that enable the AI to stop and engage threats when they discover them while en route to cover. That fix goes hand-in-hand with the rotation speed of AI, which - in the previous state - felt rather awkward and slow.

Rather than simply increase the speed at which AI turn and engage, we've attempted a slightly more subtle fix, pegging rotation speed to various factors and tying accuracy to rotation speed:

• AI rotation speed increased
  
• AI rotation speed dependent on encumbrance (more encumbered, slower rotation)
  
• AI rotation speed dependent on stance (prone rotation ~3x slower than standing)
  
• AI rotation speed dependent on speed of movement (AI that has been moving fast will turn slower than those that are static)
  
• AI accuracy influence by rotation (faster rotation, less precision)
  
• AI accuracy influenced by shooting (more shooting, less precision)
  
• AI accuracy influenced by movement (more movement, less precision)
  
• AI accuracy influenced more logically in proportion to skill
  

As we've said before, the changes we're able to implement now are considered to be modest refinements rather than entire overhauls, but we hope if offers a bit more depth/authenticity to close engagements (not that I'm taking away anything from Klamacz's late nights of code-diving!) :)

My first impression (using the repro mission created before any of the CQB fixes) was that it was really a fun challenge from one point of view, and totally brutal from another. The initial state of the repro (which should be still reproducible in the default branch) was that the enemies weren't able to engage me when I was revealed and sometimes struggled to move around the corner effectively. Now (in dev branch state) the AI will sometimes actually get a couple of shots off in the initial phase and be far more effective when coming around the corner.

Compared to the previous state, it might seem the AI is 'overpowered'; however, when I compare it to experiences in other shooters, it seems like 'correct' behaviour (ok, maybe on a 'hard' difficulty): reactive and deadly at short range! :cool:

With this in mind, we've got a proposal for an overhauled AI difficulty settings for the game options, which we'll share when we can. For now, let us know what you think (ideally using my repro to begin with).

Best,

RiE

Great news for close range AI! Do these fixes also fix AI being able to dead eye you from long ranges where they really should be inaccurate.

[Azzur33 1]

• AI rotation speed dependent on encumbrance (more encumbered, slower rotation)
  
• AI rotation speed dependent on stance (prone rotation ~3x slower than standing)
  
• AI rotation speed dependent on speed of movement (AI that has been moving fast will turn slower than those that are static)
  
• AI accuracy influence by rotation (faster rotation, less precision)
  
• AI accuracy influenced by shooting (more shooting, less precision)
  
• AI accuracy influenced by movement (more movement, less precision)
  

These sound really, REALLY good.

And considering the issue that caused the "heated argumentation" that has been going on for several pages now, this may help a lot, making it feel more natural:

• AI rotation speed dependent on stance (prone rotation ~3x slower than standing).
  

[[evo] dan 79]

@ Drone AI discussion

Isn't it possible to set the behaviour to careless?

nope, not any option they give you.

[down8 30]

Recently, the guys dedicated some effort towards addressing AI behaviour performance in (chiefly) 'CQB' situations.......

Amazing! great job.