AI Discussion (dev branch)

[pawelkpl 29]

Hey, AIs still drive tanks (not wheeled) like sh...t, they just do not follow roads and go off road, on the contrary AIs can drive wheeled armor and follow roads correctly. Why do not add, for not wheeled tanks and armors drivers, options too choose:

1. Follow Road

2. Go Offroad

just an idea... :j:

[NeMeSiS 11]

Hey, AIs still drive tanks (not wheeled) like sh...t, they just do not follow roads and go off road, on the contrary AIs can drive wheeled armor and follow roads correctly. Why do not add, for not wheeled tanks and armors drivers, options too choose:

1. Follow Road

2. Go Offroad

just an idea... :j:

Look at this. :)

[Bouben 3]

Look at this. :)

Impossible to use in combat because of automatic behaviour switching.

[NeMeSiS 11]

Impossible to use in combat because of automatic behaviour switching.

Obviously, but it is rare that someone wants tanks to use roads during combat, and apparently he is fine with the wheeled vehicle behavior. Which strikes me as odd, because AFAIK they are pretty much the same, except possibly for some formation distance stuff. I just figured he compared a situation of a safe wheeled convoy with an aware/combat group of tanks, without knowledge of the difference between them.

Edited December 11, 2013 by NeMeSiS

[fabrizio_t 58]

;2575129']Good point. Would be great if BI could give modders the ability to tweak that behavior via scripting to test' date=' learn and figure out good ways to.[/quote']

Well it is already possible to some extents, but a bit unpractical.

It requires overriding danger.fsm through an addon and putting in-place some alternative logic.

I've already coded some alternative behaviour, picking up many unhandled AI events.

I'd love to have some scripting command able to override currentCommand, that would help a lot.

Edited December 11, 2013 by fabrizio_T

[instagoat 133]

Something AI vehicles need to learn is to scan their environments instead of just staring straight ahead all the time. They also need to have their spotting distances against other vehicles tweaked. Vehicles in a hull-down position, out of view of the attacker, should not get surprised even by a player when they roll through the same position as the AI does. Because, contrary to friendly AI, the player WILL spot the hull down vehicle, and shoot it before even turning its turret.

http://pastebin.com/6zj7sUre

Pasted a mission.sqm here. It´s two defensive, static T-100 vs two mobile, slowly incoming M2A1s. The Merkavas will crest the hill at the road, and will be very obvious even without binoculars for a good while from the vantage point of the T-100s. With optics, they will be -very- obvious. Yet, in my tests, the tanks did not engage each other at that distance most of the time, and only engaged each other when the M2s were behind the T-100s, at around 300~ meters distance.

Edit: Also note, different vehicles give distinctly different results. Is this related to AI settings? When using the Kuma it doesn`T even spot the approaching tanks. The T-100 at least notices them, but does not identify them as enemy.

Edited December 11, 2013 by InstaGoat

[Bouben 3]

Something AI vehicles need to learn is to scan their environments instead of just staring straight ahead all the time. They also need to have their spotting distances against other vehicles tweaked. Vehicles in a hull-down position, out of view of the attacker, should not get surprised even by a player when they roll through the same position as the AI does. Because, contrary to friendly AI, the player WILL spot the hull down vehicle, and shoot it before even turning its turret.

http://pastebin.com/6zj7sUre

Pasted a mission.sqm here. It´s two defensive, static T-100 vs two mobile, slowly incoming M2A1s. The Merkavas will crest the hill at the road, and will be very obvious even without binoculars for a good while from the vantage point of the T-100s. With optics, they will be -very- obvious. Yet, in my tests, the tanks did not engage each other at that distance most of the time, and only engaged each other when the M2s were behind the T-100s, at around 300~ meters distance.

Edit: Also note, different vehicles give distinctly different results. Is this related to AI settings? When using the Kuma it doesn`T even spot the approaching tanks. The T-100 at least notices them, but does not identify them as enemy.

On the other hand, the turrets' ability to pinpoint infantry very fast and precisely should be toned down. There should be some possibility of a mistake from an AI gunner when aiming or scanning for an infantry in grass etc. Right now it behaves more like a sentry gun with a super-reflexes than a manned turret. This is something I wanted to have fixed since OFP. It would be more realistic, more fun.

[Tonci87 163]

On the other hand, the turrets' ability to pinpoint infantry very fast and precisely should be toned down. There should be some possibility of a mistake from an AI gunner when aiming or scanning for an infantry in grass etc. Right now it behaves more like a sentry gun with a super-reflexes than a manned turret. This is something I wanted to have fixed since OFP. It would be more realistic, more fun.

NO.

The yneed to be even better at fighting infantry, they have FLIR after all.

The Tank showcase has shown me one thing. The gunner is blind, or not using his FLIR. I was able to spot countless targets through my FLIR.

Do it, play the Tank showcase as commander with your FLIR on. This will be your reaction: FPDR

[Smurf 12]

The thing is: vehicles behave just like infantry both on tactics and fire\movement. They don't use very well their advantages on long distances and are clunky when assaulting on tighter spaces because of that.

IMO, writing a "early branching" on AI behaivor that divide them on an agressive (forward and flanking, focused on near targets, force move when the area is no clear) or defensive (well, the oposite, closer to what they do now) could improve that and more.

[maturin 12]

Vehicles should be made enormously trigger happy, spraying bullets at any target they catch a slight glimpse of.

[Bouben 3]

NO.

The yneed to be even better at fighting infantry, they have FLIR after all.

The Tank showcase has shown me one thing. The gunner is blind, or not using his FLIR. I was able to spot countless targets through my FLIR.

Do it, play the Tank showcase as commander with your FLIR on. This will be your reaction: FPDR

They can have FLIR or SuperAutomaticSpottingMachine100000 but a gunner IRL still has to press buttons on a joystick or whatever. That means mistakes in aiming and it also means taking more time with aiming. And that is what I am talking about. Vehicles with FLIR should not have aim bot and vehicles without FLIR should have more problem spotting and also - no aim bot.

Manned turrets should be spraying, not sniping.

Edited December 12, 2013 by Bouben

[Tonci87 163]

They can have FLIR or SuperAutomaticSpottingMachine100000 but a gunner IRL still has to press buttons on a joystick or whatever. That means mistakes in aiming and it also means taking more time with aiming. And that is what I am talking about. Vehicles with FLIR should not have aim bot and vehicles without FLIR should have more problem spotting and also - no aim bot.

Manned turrets should be spraying, not sniping.

Yeah, the gunner has to press two buttons. First the laser rangefinder (wich we don´t have ingame) and then the trigger. There isn´t really much room for error or mistakes when dealing with infantry that is a few hunderd meters away. Tanks with FLIR are incredibly effective against infantry without AT weapons. The AI doesn´t live up to that.

[Bouben 3]

Yeah, the gunner has to press two buttons. First the laser rangefinder (wich we don´t have ingame) and then the trigger. There isn´t really much room for error or mistakes when dealing with infantry that is a few hunderd meters away. Tanks with FLIR are incredibly effective against infantry without AT weapons. The AI doesn´t live up to that.

It does not matter how many buttons the gunner has to press IRL. What matters is a sensitivity of his controller that makes him less precise IRL than in Arma (not even mentioning combat stress etc.). As you can miss a target by aiming with your mouse the same thing can and should happen to AI turret crews with their joysticks.

So yes, make them more effective in spotting with FLIR but give them aiming errors so that they can not snipe. The way it is now is not realistic at all. Look up some videos of turrets targeting infantry (Syria is a good source now). There is a lot of corrections happening when leading a turret on a target before the gunner starts firing. That should be in Arma too.

[-Coulum- 35]

When it comes to turret handling the ai should have just as much trouble as the player. Right now it is dead easy for a player with FLIR to take out entire squads. The ai should not be handicapped in comparison.

What I have more a problem with is the ai doesn't seem to have a narrow FOV when in vehicles - however I haven't really tested tis out recently so I am just going with the "gut feeling that I get".

[maturin 12]

The AI does have FOV limitations in tracked vehicles, just not wheeled ones. There's a ticket.

[.kju 3245]

For the record/for those missed it: http://community.bistudio.com/wiki/skillFinal

Can be used for debugging/to learn better what subskill values AI units end up with.

[Make Love Not War 10]

;2577542']For the record/for those missed it: http://community.bistudio.com/wiki/skillFinal

Can be used for debugging/to learn better what subskill values AI units end up with.

Ooh, extremely useful. These are exactly the type of tools we need. Thanks, BIS! :)

[Bouben 3]

When it comes to turret handling the ai should have just as much trouble as the player. Right now it is dead easy for a player with FLIR to take out entire squads. The ai should not be handicapped in comparison.

Definitely, but I as a player am able to miss sometimes so AI has to be too. And there needs to be that delay that would make turret crew human-like and not sentry-gun-like.

[maturin 12]

The AI can miss.

...

[Bouben 3]

The AI can miss.

...

Not enough. And they aim too fast with their turrets.

[Guest Ti0n3r]

Any plans on improving AI navigation skills after the holidays? I am mainly referring to their inability to avoid driving head on into rocks, trees, buildings and people.

Edited December 17, 2013 by Ti0n3r

[oktyabr 12]

I'd like to know if there is a way to fine tune AI ROE? Mission: four blufor special ops infiltrating enemy base. We took small arms fire from 400+ meters away quite quickly and while I'm still not happy about how AI regular infantry can make Friend OR Foe judgements (take advanced optics out of the question) at least they missed. What ended the mission in frustration was an APC lobbing 30mm from 600m away with laser beam precision... but the real topic of this post is that they did it while we were *within* an enemy base and even when we took cover behind a supply truck they blew that up as well. In effect they fired on their own base and destroyed their own assets (I'm not sure if any opfor were killed with us but I expect so) rather than let the forces that were MUCH closer to us engage us instead.

[f2k sel 164]

Any plans on improving AI navigation skills after the holidays? I am mainly referring to their inability to avoid driving head on into rocks, trees, buildings and people.

After 13years of waiting I think defeat has to be admitted.

In the last test I did it seems as bad as ever, AI over run turns, they don't brake for corners , if in convoy AI slam into the vehicles in front or swerve in to walls trying to avoid a crash and once out of position it becomes a right mess.

[Tonci87 163]

Even better: Altis has roads where the AI simply can´t drive without getting stuck or outright breaking the vehicle. Great, isn´t it? :p

[kremator 1065]

If by great you mean, absolutely crap then yeah! I hope that the DEVs do read this and are able to give us an idea when the AI will be able to drive better please !