AI Discussion (dev branch)

[fabrizio_t 58]

Consider the following case - You move slowly in a forest and one of your AI is detected by an enemy. Your AI sees the enemy as he draws his weapon and take an aim. The AI holds fire, the AI gets killed. That's not desired nor realistic. AI detection in long ranges and through obstacles is the issue here, not the AI response to being detected.

I agree on what variable says.

When some unit is detected and endangered it should be allowed to react (open fire) whatever the ROE. It works already so.

Only notable exception i would like to see to this behaviour is to allow to disengage / withdraw, or more in general to force move.

In this case movement should take priority over returning fire.

A force move command would suffice.

Edited November 5, 2014 by fabrizio_T

[froggyluv 2136]

When some unit is detected and endangered it should be allowed to react (open fire) whatever the ROE. It works already so.

Yes but isn't this done by allowing your unit whom was detected to just 'know he was detected ' and then open up? If thats the case I see that as a pretty big shortcut as that essentially ruins the true ambush. Also more needs to be done to let the player know his squaddie is goin rogue aka "F*ck, under fire!" or "Permission to open up" ideally while he's running to cover. Too often your trying to orchestrate a nicely sembled multi prong AI ambush attack with everyone on the "hold fire" only to have some numbskull ruin it by just firing without a peep requiring you to actually look thru your icons to determine who just broke command etc etc...

[chrismgtis 1]

You can always disable aimbot by giving AI lower skill, so this is not a problem. I had AI shooting at me frm 20 m and bullets landed everywhere but me. There is clearly a way, via mission config, server config and just scripting.

That is absolutely false.

Doing so has absolutely no effect on AI. The server is launched at the lowest setting every time.

I would like to see any evidence of you getting shot by anything from 1900m. I have never seen an AI land vehicle engage another land vehicle past 1km, and trust me when I say I have spent quite a lot of time observing AI behavior. I have seen unscripted ZSU-39 engage air targets out to 3km but only after acquiring a lock when the target was under 1km, and firing while holding that lock and a good knowsAbout.

Like it or not it happened, you can BS me all you want. I was looking through an AT launcher at 1900m and watched it happen once they realized I was firing on them. I was dead in less than 2 seconds of it noticing me from 1900m. The first or second round ended me from the MG.

As for people that think this is realistic, all I can say is, you're off your meds.

It would take a human quite a while to figure out where that fire had come from, to scan the area, to locate the target, to actually zero in at that distance (or ANY distance) and respond accurately. Either way they would mostly be firing suppression shots until they could get zeroed in. You aren't going to find a human in existence that can spin a turret around in <2 seconds from receiving fire directly at the head of the enemy, knowing where they are, and fire accurately, killing that person, all in less than 2 seconds. More than likely getting that kill from 1900m would end up taking well over 30 seconds. Honestly, it should at least be a case of AI spending a little time figuring out what is going on, dealing with a bit of panic and missing quite a lot of shots and MAYBE getting lucky now and then. They are nothing short of aimbots straight out of Call of Duty.

Edited November 5, 2014 by chrismgtis

[CaptainObvious 95]

I have doubts that the MG bullet in game can even travel 1900 meters in 2 seconds.

Regarding the zeroing, it's just aiming at the target and pushing a button IRL, nothing more.

[killzone_kid 1331]

That is absolutely false.

In this case allow me to support my absolutely false statement with absolutely fake video:

[miketim 20]

Video seems like solid proof to me,

May I ask, is the "AI skill slider" directly correlating to .01 to 1.0, because it doesnt seem so... like I feel like the slider gives a small slice of this ... assuming they are even setting the same thing.

Thanks.

[oukej 2911]

Video seems like solid proof to me,

May I ask, is the "AI skill slider" directly correlating to .01 to 1.0, because it doesnt seem so... like I feel like the slider gives a small slice of this ... assuming they are even setting the same thing.

Thanks.

The skill slider in the Insert Unit dialog gives you a range 0.2-1.0

[-Coulum- 35]

That is absolutely false.

Doing so has absolutely no effect on AI. The server is launched at the lowest setting every time.

Through scripting it is very easy to do exactly what Killzone_Kid was saying. You can make the ai very bad. BI purposely limited the effect of ingame difficulty sliders so people don't unknowingly break the ai (I assume that was the reasoning at least).

Like it or not it happened, you can BS me all you want. I was looking through an AT launcher at 1900m and watched it happen once they realized I was firing on them. I was dead in less than 2 seconds of it noticing me from 1900m. The first or second round ended me from the MG.

If this did indeed happen exactly as you describe it, then there are two possibilities. Either it was an extremely rare occurrence. In which case it isn't really an issue because, well, in reality shit happens too. Or, it is a regularly occurring event. In which case, please record it and more importantly, make repro missions so that the devs can tackle the issue. Thats the best way to get the devs to change the ai.

And another thing to remember when dealing with the ai is to imagine it from their end. Sometimes people, incuding myself jump to conclusions without knowing all the facts. For example in your scenario, how do know that the ai hadn't been searching, and spotted you several minutes before you fired, and had their sights calibrated and focused on you the whole time. Then when you fired they knew you were hostile and took you out. Not saying that's what happened, but it could very well be a possibility.

Edited November 6, 2014 by -Coulum-

[froggyluv 2136]

Funny, I spent last night just sending squads with full skill slider bar charging against squads with fully depeleted in Vanilla at the airport runway just to see if the skills really mattered. Well must have done it 20+ times and also going thru it AI mod by mod. Now with Vanilla they fully charged squad always won and with 8 units per side was generally a 6-2 win every round. I say 2 because generally 2 of the losing team would just start wandering around out of range of the dominating team by rounds end -kinda like a loss of morale I guess.

Have to note that some AI mods seemed to completely even out or negate the skill slider as the fully depleted Blufor was still dominating, sometimes completely. Was interesting to see how different AI modded units behaved and have to say Vanilla also isnt too bad.

[old_painless 182]

I tested ambush scenarios yesterday. Regular difficulty, stable branch.

Placed myself and a single unit under my command prone up a hill among some bushes and shrubbery, while a patrol of 3 OPFORs had move waypoints across the hill down below from us. They had a good line-of-sight (LOS) to us, but as long as we stayed still and prone we were never detected. Before the patrol would appear, I had my subordinate go prone and put under Hold Fire. Once they appeared down the hill from us, he started calling out contacts, but did not engage. Ie. he detected them, but as they did not detect us no shots were fired.

My first few tests were with the OPFOR patrol on simple Move waypoints and they had a pace above walking (tactical pace?) as they passed down below from us. We were not detected. When I changed their waypoints to Seek+Destroy, they would move slower and scan the surroundings more and did detect us even when we were prone and still. As they started firing upon us my subordinate then of course fired at them. Which he should

[fn_Quiksilver 1636]

Enjoy!

// initServer.sqf

aiSetSkill = {

private ["_units","_skill","_aimingAccuracy","_aimingShake","_aimingSpeed","_commanding","_courage","_endurance","_general","_reloadSpeed","_spotDistance","_spotTime","_fleeing"];

//================================= THE WORST AI SETTINGS

if ((_this select 1) == 0) then {
	_aimingAccuracy = 0;
	_aimingShake = 0;
	_aimingSpeed = 0;
	_commanding = 0;
	_courage = 0;
	_endurance = 0;
	_general = 0;
	_reloadSpeed = 0;
	_spotDistance = 0;
	_spotTime = 0;
	_fleeing = 1;				// Is this necessary with 0 courage?
};

//================================= THE SUPER AI SETTINGS

if ((_this select 1) == 1) then {
	_aimingAccuracy = 1;
	_aimingShake = 1;
	_aimingSpeed = 1;
	_commanding = 1;
	_courage = 1;
	_endurance = 1;
	_general = 1;
	_reloadSpeed = 1;
	_spotDistance = 1;
	_spotTime = 1;
	_fleeing = 0;
};

//================================================ APPLY THE ABOVE

{
	_x setSkill ["aimingAccuracy",_aimingAccuracy];
	_x setSkill ["aimingShake",_aimingShake];
	_x setSkill ["aimingSpeed",_aimingSpeed];
	_x setSkill ["commanding",_commanding];
	_x setSkill ["courage",_courage];
	_x setSkill ["endurance",_endurance];
	_x setSkill ["general",_general];
	_x setSkill ["reloadSpeed",_reloadSpeed];
	_x setSkill ["spotDistance",_spotDistance];
	_x setSkill ["spotTime",_spotTime];
	_x allowFleeing _fleeing;
} count (_this select 0);
};

[] spawn {
aiTest01 = TRUE;
while {aiTest01} do {
	// uncomment one of the below lines to run the skill function. 1 = super AI, 0 = politician AI
	//[allUnits,1] call aiSetSkill;
	//[allUnits,0] call aiSetSkill;
	sleep 10;
};
};

// Bonus code below

//================================= GLOBAL KNOWLEDGE

aiReveal = {
{
	(_this select 0) reveal [_x,4];
} count allUnits;
};

[] spawn {
aiTest02 = FALSE;
       waitUntil {sleep 0.1; (aiTest02)};
while {aiTest02} do {
	{
		[_x] call aiReveal;
		sleep 0.1;
	} count allUnits;
	sleep 1;
};
};

^ Paste that into the "initServer.sqf" of your scenario and all units put down will get the skill.

Edited November 6, 2014 by MDCCLXXVI

[havatan19 10]

hey, i need help regarding AI.

1. if i play zeus (i assume the problem is there without zeus too) and place few blufor and few opfor tanks/cars/vehicles and send them into a village, the AI reacts only if they are very near each other. i mean they shoot each other if they are very near even when they are in sight each other.

2. for some reason, the AI in gunners seat in vehicles are looking in the wrong direction when i send them somewhere. they do not look forward even when enemie is standing in front of them (enemie AI gunners looks in wrong direction too) and then it takes few times for the AI to see each other and react.

3. i never saw the AI using the M5 sandstorm MLRS, sometimes they started to target but only a few times and even then, they dont shoot.

is there a fix for it or a AI mod ? faster reaction time, proper use of M5 sandstorm MLRS, reaction at far distance (both friendly and enemie AI vehicles are even parking sometimes next to each and do not fire, even if they see theyr target, only after in about 1 minute).

[Ristar 10]

OK. First off, I'd like to say that this forum is as broken as the game, because I am unable to post new threads. This is the first time that I have seen a forum like that.

Now, the AI is extremely lousy and the game is very buggy.

1. The AI runs away when asked to engage a target. And when the player shoots deserters, the player is the bad guy, because the AI are stupid.

2. As a small fry (non leader) in the squad, which happens in the campaign, the player can keep screaming "Injured" until the cows come home, and a leader will keep saying "Call support", but the player will be unable to actually call support because for whatever reason, BI overlooked this.

In addition, in real life, the medic WOULD respond to the fellow calling for help when he is able, not wait for the leader to tell the injured person that he should call support and then wait for the injured person to actually call for help.

When the medic sees an injured soldier and the squad is not busy shooting at somebody, the medic would also give first aid to the soldier automatically, not wait for some guy that's bleeding profusely to ask for help before he renders it, because the guy may be unable to call for help.

3. The AI are too stupid to take cover properly automatically.

4. The AI are too stupid to follow the player properly. They move too slowly because they like to act smart. the leader should be able to tell them to "hurry the f up or I will shoot you", or something to that effect.

5. The AI does not do evasive maneuvers. Look, lets face it, when players fly the totally unrealistic and crappy helicopter, he'd want to be the gunner because the AI cant hit a thing and is basically very stupid. Now, BI has written the game in such a way that the player can not function both as the helicopter's pilot AND gunner at the same time, so the player has to fly to wherever he wants, release controls (as if he's parking the thing in the air), and then use the weapons. But since the AI is so stupid, the helicopter would be shot down before the player can be effective.

6. The AI can see through hills. Fantastic X ray vision in 2035! For the die hard fanboys that would defend BI to the death, I request that you guys turn on "Enemy Tag" and then try looking for enemies through the hill. If you can see them, the AI can also see whoever's on the other side of the hill.

-

Now, lets talk about the flight element in the game.

1. There is no "distance to target", which is totally wrong.

2. IR missiles do not cause the RWR to make noise.

3. There are no chaffs, and this is touted as a military simulation? ha.

4. totally unrealistic controls, crappy instruments, etc. After flying combat flight simulators for many years, I can only say that ARMA 3 flight stuff are arcade-grade, only much less enjoyable, and is anything BUT a military simulation.

5. No distinction between air and ground targets.

6. No distinction between active radar, passive radar and IR weapons.

7. No advanced SAMs, no advanced anti SAM weapons. Now, I am not asking for laser weapons, but has anyone in BI ever heard of Patriots, SA 20s, AGM-88 HARMs, etc? seriously?

8. see point 5 about the AI.

9. real ranges of "modern" aircraft are greater than supposed "high tech" new aircraft in year 2035? Oh please!

10. no, LOAL, and LOBL, and target objects on the other side of the hill like how the AH64 D would.

All in all, the flight element is extremely shallow, unrealistic, arcade-ish, very much nerfed and not enjoyable at all.

-

Now, regarding the infantry loadout...

1. There are no FLIR goggles because...?

2. There are no armoured infantry that are augmented by exo-skeletons because...? Remember TALOS? Remember the exoskeletons that can give mobility back to the disabled and strengthen able people? Face it, all BI has done is to give the weapons and whatever thing new names, a different model, but there's nothing new when compared to technology in the 60s.

3. The NATO forces wear old school camouflage instead of pixelised uniforms because...?

4. The supposed screen at the tactical glasses are totally useless, because it does nothing and is there just for show to make it look high tech and be functionally useless.

5. default loadout has too little ammo. and the AI squanders whatever little ammo it has and cry about not having any.

-

Regarding the military rank in this "military simulator"...

1. It is totally wrong. In fact, it is so wrong that it is laughable. You do not call a NCO "Sir", unless he is a Warrant Officer. You salute only Commissioned Officers that are ranked higher than yourself, not a lowly Corporal like the NPCs in the game.

2. You try not to salute somebody in a warzone unless you want his head to disappear.

3. In the first mission after NATO invades Altis where Kerry is supposedly guarding a "dump", "Crossroads" say report to your "CO". That is absolutely wrong. A Commanding Officer is the officer that commands the battalion. Not the officer in charge of a Platoon. That is called a Platoon Commander.

-

Now, cue the trolling fanboys that'd ask me to "gtfo", or "go back to COD".

heh.

What I will say is this: BI sells this as a military simulator, but all we get is a unrealistic buggy game with severely brain damaged AI on the friendly side, and god-like AI on the enemy's side.

Edited November 15, 2014 by Ristar

[strangere 2]

What I will say is this: BI sells this as a military simulator.

And where did you get that? No advertising speeks of Arma as military simulator nor devs....

[Maio 293]

OK. First off, I'd like to say that this forum is as broken as the game, because I am unable to post new threads. This is the first time that I have seen a forum like that.

...

Now, cue the trolling fanboys that'd ask me to "gtfo", or "go back to COD".

Welcome to the forums Ristar.

Quote from the forum rules:

Note:

1. New member's posts are auto-moderated, please don't re-post the same message over&over again.

2. New members are required to fill captcha before posting new answers/threads.

3. New members are limited in editing/accessing variety of profile & forum features.

These limitations are removed for regular forum users.

The part highlighted in bold is why you are not able to post your own thread. It's one of the anti spam features. Once you reach 5 posts, you can create your own thread.

As for the trolling fanboys, I'm afraid that their uprising was crushed by the "Confederacy of Independent Haters" and "Paying Customer Forum Empire"... Now witness the might of my fully armed and operational request for you to not end your post by baiting other forum members.

Also please focus on the AI as this is an AI related thread.

[KeyCat 131]

Maybe it's to early but I'm curious if we will we see fixed/improved AI detection routines in the upcoming Marksmen DLC? I'm especially thinking on the ghillie suit as well as hiding in dense vegetation issue.

/KC

[old_painless 182]

Oh yes, excellent idea. Splendid occasion to get rid of the sorry midrange textures too, since they do not play well with camouflaged units (unless you count sinking into the terrain among Arma's greatest features). Cf. this old thread for what proper midrange textures can do for camouflaged gameplay: http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?150645-midrange-terrain-texture-replacement

Edited November 17, 2014 by Old_Painless

[killzone_kid 1331]

something wrong with setFormDir and AI underdoing it by 30 degrees : http://feedback.arma3.com/view.php?id=21792

[ceeeb 147]

I'm having a lot of trouble with my subordinate AI autonomously deciding to go into buildings getting stuck around doors and stairs of buildings. They simply refuse to leave this position once they get into it (maybe pathfinding becomes limited to the paths of the building?)

I haven't really played Arma 3 for a while, but I don't remember this being a problem last time I played.

[Ristar 10]

one more issue in my mind, and im pretty sure it's easy to fix/change.

im sure players are smart enough to turn off lights on their rifles (and not equipping it altogether) because turning the light on is essentially saying "come kill me", but the AI does that.

worse, the AI turns on the lights for vehicles as well. i always make sure that all lights are off, but after i disembark, the AI will turn the light on. why? do they have a death wish or something?

can BI make the AI more disciplined when it comes to light? in a convoy making a lot of noise, on the MSR, light is fine. but offroad, trying to kill ppl when they're unaware and the AI runs around with lights like it's Xmas? who does that, especially when they have NVGs?

also, can BI give us an option to turn off all other lights on the vehicles?

or is there already a way that im unaware of?

Edited November 22, 2014 by Ristar

[fn_Quiksilver 1636]

something wrong with setFormDir and AI underdoing it by 30 degrees : http://feedback.arma3.com/view.php?id=21792

If you place two grouped units and apply that code, what are their respective directions? If unit 1 is offset 30 degrees and unit 2 is offset -30 degrees, then it makes sense in terms of group formation.

It also seems a bit strange to use setFormDir when trying to place a single unit, when setDir is available. Also strange why you are setting the formation direction then deriving unit direction. Should you not use https://community.bistudio.com/wiki/formationDirection as counterpart for setFormDir?

Speculation that units in formation do not orient direction of travel unless moving. IE in wedge formation, the soldiers often are offset to what could be +- 30 degrees. EDIT: Brief test shows when setFormDir 180 on wedge formation, units other than the leader are offset by 45 degrees to either side (135 and 225). There is also some slack it appears in formationDirection, setFormDir 180 and then add some more units to the group, resulted in formationDirection of 183.

Also remember that units spawn with a default group formation (wedge i believe), there is no null formation, so there is always a formation position calculation built into createUnit.

On that note, is there any way to input new group formations? I have brefly played around with cfgFormations in missionConfigFile with no luck. Trying to create a more practical wedge formation for the Altis terrain ... Specifically, wider separation between units.

Edited November 22, 2014 by MDCCLXXVI

[killzone_kid 1331]

If you place two grouped units and apply that code, what are their respective directions? If unit 1 is offset 30 degrees and unit 2 is offset -30 degrees, then it makes sense in terms of group formation.

It also seems a bit strange to use setFormDir when trying to place a single unit, when setDir is available. Also strange why you are setting the formation direction then deriving unit direction. Should you not use https://community.bistudio.com/wiki/formationDirection as counterpart for setFormDir?

Speculation that units in formation do not orient direction of travel unless moving. IE in wedge formation, the soldiers often are offset to what could be +- 30 degrees. EDIT: Brief test shows when setFormDir 180 on wedge formation, units other than the leader are offset by 45 degrees to either side (135 and 225). There is also some slack it appears in formationDirection, setFormDir 180 and then add some more units to the group, resulted in formationDirection of 183.

Also remember that units spawn with a default group formation (wedge i believe), there is no null formation, so there is always a formation position calculation built into createUnit.

On that note, is there any way to input new group formations? I have brefly played around with cfgFormations in missionConfigFile with no luck. Trying to create a more practical wedge formation for the Altis terrain ... Specifically, wider separation between units.

I understand what you are saying, so I will explain.

You cannot set direction on AI unit just with setDir, it will auto turn back to the direction of its formation. So the only way to actually have the AI unit pointing where you want it, is to turn the formation. But as you can see, it will not be exact. So I did an experiment, it looks like setDir is needed as well for precise heading. It looks like as long as unit is +- 30 from the formationDirection, setDir works:

unit setFormDir 45;

unit setDir 45;

will do the trick for a single unit.

There are different formations and you can set them with setFormation, however there is also a formation leader. I get what you're saying about units in formation having different direction offsets, but the leader of the formation should be pointing where formation is pointing, but this is not the case. And a single unit in formation is the leader.

[fn_Quiksilver 1636]

...but the leader of the formation should be pointing where formation is pointing...

Discussion: Should he? If it's a combat formation ("WEDGE"), your torso doesn't face direction of travel, there is slight torso offset and footwork overstep to accommodate a rifle shooting stance. In A3 thats roughly a 30 deg +offset, rifle sight picture vs torso dir, with legs somewhere in the middle and slight rightleg overstep.

^ In terms of this setFormDir discussion, ignore this paragraph, just conversation.

With respect to setFormDir

I tend to agree that if there is a single unit they should not be subscribed to formation algos.

Wasn't aware that couldn't setDir units, that explains some things. TY. Could be a bug, more likely just a high-hanging fruit during AI development, still something that could be addressed it seems.

Edited November 22, 2014 by MDCCLXXVI

[killzone_kid 1331]

Discussion: Should he? If it's a combat formation ("WEDGE"), your torso doesn't face direction of travel, there is slight torso offset and footwork overstep to accommodate a rifle shooting stance. In A3 thats roughly a 30 deg +offset, rifle sight picture vs torso dir, with legs somewhere in the middle and slight rightleg overstep.

Direction of the unit (getDir unit or direction unit) does not equal direction of unit torso or footwork.

[Alwarren 2767]

Since someone seems to think that issues only get addressed if they were filed under the right thread, here is a bunch of issues that are currently making my Arma life miserable. Apologies if they have been mentioned before, but IMO they are gamebreaking for any sufficiently complex singleplayer or coop scenario. (Quote from other thread):

May I then mention these very frustrating AI issues that are in dire need of fixing?

- Divers are detected underwater by everyone as if they were standing in an open field. Making a water insertion undetected is impossible, since everybody sees your SDV, or even a single diver, even if deeply submerged. They need to be virtually undetectable.

- Mines are way too easily detected by both players and AI. Making a convoy ambush mission with mines is next to impossible. Also, satchel charges are immediately recognized by AI and easily avoided, making any convoy ambush moot.

- More generically, vehicles should not automatically pop up on a chopper's radar just because an enemy is in it. Getting into a civilian car will immediately trigger any AI helicopter to come to you and shoot you. I don't mind things popping up on radar, just don't make it immediately hostile.

- AI Chopper pilots are completely inept at landing. A hot inserting into any area, or a stealthy insertion behind a hill or large structure is pointless since they flare up so high that everybody can and will see and engage them.

- AI drivers should really learn to corner. They have no perception of speed. I had a mission where I tried to have a convoy go around a 90 degree corner on a downhill roat, and the lead vehicle (Marshall APC) never made the corner, not even once. It would always overspeed and fly out of the corner, eventually wrecking the vehicle, with all the following vehicles comically going behind it like ducklings. The recent GTA video with the "worst driver ever" would probably have ended quite differently in Arma - namely, the AI would have driven against something, tried to floor the pedal, and finally said "can't get there". Yeah, as you can see, I am very frustrated about this.

- AI under player control is extremely slow to react to commands. A human team leader's orders should seriously be followed without questioning. If I order my AI to get into a vehicle, they should do that without doing their usual "run-go prone-get up-run" routine.

Seriously, these issues are regularly spoiling missions. Not only that, they are spoiling concepts. More than once I had to scrap a promising mission idea just because it was impossible to implement because of the AI. I appreciate the fact that there has been work done on the AI, but I feel like some very pressing issues have been completely ignored, for whatever reason.

Maybe it is because they're not needed in Altis Life, but I beg to remember that Arma used to be a military shooter, and not only do the above issues very much affect Co-Op in a negative way, they also very much ruin the game for a lot of single player scenarios.

If need be, I will happily provide repro missions for any of these issues.