AI Discussion (dev branch)

[CaptainObvious 95]

I think the AI is way too good at pinpointing the enemy just by hearing it, i.e behind walls and bushes, I dare to say it's impossible for a normal human to hit the target just by listening to it.

[KeyCat 131]

I think the AI is way too good at pinpointing the enemy just by hearing it, i.e behind walls and bushes, I dare to say it's impossible for a normal human to hit the target just by listening to it.

When thinking about it there was a similar bug/issue many many moons ago in A1 that Suma & Co managed to fix/improve.

/KC

[OMAC 254]

Do these suggest that the suppressive effects of bullets are disabled by default? I woudn't think so, but I'm not sure... :confused:

suppressionRadiusHit - defines the max. distance at which the AI becomes suppressed by the projectile's impact or explosion. Default value -1 disables the suppressive effect

suppressionRadiusBulletClose - defines the max. distance at which the AI becomes suppressed by the bullet's pass. Default value -1 disables the suppressive effect (works only for bullets, no other projectiles)

[Guest]

I have discovered that the MIDDLE stance bug that causes units to not fire on enemies seems to be directly related to SAFE mode. This is easily tested by simply placing an opfor unit nearby the player facing away from him, put the below code into his Init field, and then in game wait roughly 5 seconds for the unit to go into middle stance, and walk out into his view - stay roughly 30 meters out or more.

This setBehaviour "SAFE";null=this spawn {Sleep 10;_This SetUnitPos "MIDDLE";};

I am producing this issue on every test.

This means that this can happen in any mission where units in safe mode are scripted to go into middle stance, regardless of them being set to Aware or Combat behavior immediately before the stance change unless a lengthy and unusable delay is set.

Examples : Units initially in safe mode that are scripted to take cover, using middle stance. Units initially in safe mode that are scripted to respond to some sort of base alert that sends them into middle stance. Patrols that are initially in safe mode that are scripted to go into middle stance due to combat conditions.

Testing has also revealed these bugged units do not recover from it (regardless of what behavior setting they end up in), they will not fire on a nearby sighted enemy unless the enemy gets very close to them or their stance is changed manually.

I have not found a true fix for this issue. A lengthy, and really unusable delay can be used in advance of the stance change in conjunction with a behavior change, yet again, I found a delay setting of roughly 5.0 seems reliable and unfortunately is so slow it is not usable for any sort of immediate combat response. Smaller delays resulted in random results of the unit not responding and responding to threats in middle stance.

This was just tested on the current development version.

Mission.sqm code for the test on Stratis is included in the spoiler tab:

version=12;

class Mission

{

addOns[]=

{

"A3_Characters_F_OPFOR",

"a3_characters_f",

"A3_Characters_F_BLUFOR",

"a3_map_stratis"

};

addOnsAuto[]=

{

"A3_Characters_F_OPFOR",

"a3_characters_f",

"A3_Characters_F_BLUFOR",

"a3_map_stratis"

};

randomSeed=1979511;

class Intel

{

timeOfChanges=1800.0002;

startWeather=0.30000001;

startWind=0.1;

startWaves=0.1;

forecastWeather=0.30000001;

forecastWind=0.1;

forecastWaves=0.1;

forecastLightnings=0.1;

year=2035;

month=7;

day=6;

hour=12;

minute=0;

startFogDecay=0.013;

forecastFogDecay=0.013;

};

class Groups

{

items=2;

class Item0

{

side="EAST";

class Vehicles

{

items=1;

class Item0

{

position[]={1616.1974,5.5,5334.4385};

azimut=448.27499;

id=0;

side="EAST";

vehicle="O_Soldier_F";

leader=1;

skill=0.60000002;

text="Guy1";

init="This setBehaviour ""SAFE"";null=this spawn {Sleep 10;_This SetUnitPos ""MIDDLE"";};";

};

};

};

class Item1

{

side="WEST";

class Vehicles

{

items=1;

class Item0

{

position[]={1604.4449,5.5,5299.1377};

azimut=18.758499;

id=1;

side="WEST";

vehicle="B_recon_M_F";

player="PLAYER COMMANDER";

leader=1;

skill=0.60000002;

init="this allowdamage false; This SetCaptive false;";

};

};

};

};

class Sensors

{

items=2;

class Item0

{

position[]={1662.3829,5.5,5295.4492};

a=0;

b=0;

angle=133.047;

activationBy="ALPHA";

repeating=1;

interruptable=1;

age="UNKNOWN";

text="knows about";

expActiv="player sidechat format [""Guy1 knows about player %1"", (Guy1 KnowsAbout Player)];player sidechat format [""Guy1 Behaviour is %1"", (Behaviour Guy1)];";

class Effects

{

};

};

class Item1

{

position[]={1615.8875,5.5,5334.0972};

interruptable=1;

age="UNKNOWN";

class Effects

{

};

};

};

};

class Intro

{

addOns[]=

{

"a3_map_stratis"

};

addOnsAuto[]=

{

"a3_map_stratis"

};

randomSeed=14998652;

class Intel

{

timeOfChanges=1800.0002;

startWeather=0.30000001;

startWind=0.1;

startWaves=0.1;

forecastWeather=0.30000001;

forecastWind=0.1;

forecastWaves=0.1;

forecastLightnings=0.1;

year=2035;

month=7;

day=6;

hour=12;

minute=0;

startFogDecay=0.013;

forecastFogDecay=0.013;

};

};

class OutroWin

{

addOns[]=

{

"a3_map_stratis"

};

addOnsAuto[]=

{

"a3_map_stratis"

};

randomSeed=8356023;

class Intel

{

timeOfChanges=1800.0002;

startWeather=0.30000001;

startWind=0.1;

startWaves=0.1;

forecastWeather=0.30000001;

forecastWind=0.1;

forecastWaves=0.1;

forecastLightnings=0.1;

year=2035;

month=7;

day=6;

hour=12;

minute=0;

startFogDecay=0.013;

forecastFogDecay=0.013;

};

};

class OutroLoose

{

addOns[]=

{

"a3_map_stratis"

};

addOnsAuto[]=

{

"a3_map_stratis"

};

randomSeed=15327673;

class Intel

{

timeOfChanges=1800.0002;

startWeather=0.30000001;

startWind=0.1;

startWaves=0.1;

forecastWeather=0.30000001;

forecastWind=0.1;

forecastWaves=0.1;

forecastLightnings=0.1;

year=2035;

month=7;

day=6;

hour=12;

minute=0;

startFogDecay=0.013;

forecastFogDecay=0.013;

};

};

I have posted a full list of findings in detail during various tests regarding this issue here-

Third post on main page:

AI Not Firing In Middle Stance

Edited March 22, 2015 by Guest

[chortles 263]

@ OMAC: oukej has alluded to the possibility that the AI settings (specifically skill) in the Infantry Showcase are actually in the friendly AI's favor.

[Jona33 51]

AI suppression is definitely producing longer firefights, the opening encounter in Drawdown 2035 turned into a hell of a fight, just about everyone ran out of ammo by the end.

[OMAC 254]

Having some fun playing around with dev branch:

[oukej 2911]

I wonder if the new suppression decreases courage value, which would in turn make units more likely to flee?

The update only includes the penalization of aiming. Also the sub-skills are fixed AI attributes that do not change over the course of events.

...and/or 2) the aiRateOfFireDispersion param default settings degrade AI effectiveness ...

It shouldn't. The aiRateOfFireDispersion only affects the periodicity of firing (so the AI fires in a more natural fashion).

Were the missions too easy because of AI not firing at all or being too inaccurate?

Has anyone else having issues with dead AI speaking ?

Video

Whoa. Do you have any details? (mission, respawning AI,...)

Do these suggest that the suppressive effects of bullets are disabled by default? I woudn't think so, but I'm not sure... :confused:

They are but they also are configured to a relatively small and safe distance in the bullet base class.

Spotting someone (ghillie or no ghille) in above scenario within ~20 sec (here I notice an improvement, a couple of months ago they spotted you almost instantly after turning around) after hearing 1-2 shots from behind is humanly impossible.

Edit: Added test mission.

Tried and it was 50:50 for me - sometimes the AI estimated my position somewhere off and then went pursuing it, which was quite believable.

Thanks! Will use it as a testcase and see if it can be improved.

The AI skill in the editor is default when placing an infantry group (min 0.20 - max 0.46).

This has been changed some time ago

04-12-2013

EXE rev. 113178

Skill of a unit of a group inserted in the editor now ranges from 0.4 (Pvt.) to 0.7 (Col.)

Fact is that e.g. the mentioned Showcase Infantry uses the previous distribution of skills in a group inserted in the editor.

[OMAC 254]

It shouldn't. The aiRateOfFireDispersion only affects the periodicity of firing (so the AI fires in a more natural fashion).

Were the missions too easy because of AI not firing at all or being too inaccurate?

Seems to me that aiRateOfFireDispersion could impact AI effectiveness (relative to skill) if they are not applying as much fire as before. Previously, when attacking, they would apply consistent, withering fire. Now I'm not so sure. Hopefully, when skill = 1, the ROFD param results in a similar ROF to what it was before 1.40.

In Infantry Showcase, the CSAT AI did fire, and one NATO squad member was killed. But it was amazing how fast CSAT soldiers were detected, engaged, and killed by NATO squad. CSAT weren't firing very often relative to NATO, and when they did, their aim must have been faulty. It appeared as if ~5 CSAT soldiers had been removed from mission, which I think is not the case. NATO behaved as ninjas with impenetrable body armor.

What someone should do is play the showcase with 1.40 stable and compare results with recent dev branch playthroughs... Perhaps I will do it. But BI QA team should do it also! ;)

This has been changed some time ago

Fact is that e.g. the mentioned Showcase Infantry uses the previous distribution of skills in a group inserted in the editor.

What was the previous distribution? I asked before what the relative skills of CSAT and NATO are in the showcase. You said NATO skill = 1. Is CSAT skill less than that generally, or the same? If CSAT skill is less, then I wonder why CSAT destroyed NATO 95% of the time before recent dev branch changes? I used to wonder if it was something regarding FSM scripting in the mission....

[fareast 20]

Has anyone else having issues with dead AI speaking ?

Video

yep..dead ai giving order and shit..happens to me a lot in CTI mod..

[2nd ranger 282]

Whoa. Do you have any details? (mission, respawning AI,...)

It happens pretty much all the time in co-op, but if it helps I have noticed it happening in the stock Combined Arms co-op mission, client on a hosted server, no mods. I can hear it but the server can't.

[five_seven5-7 56]

Is it possible due to the supression effect, the opposite force starting shooting with dispersion creating also a supression with ours forces? In Combined Arms Showcase the blufor starts to be without ammo too fast, looks it is created a effect movie like this:http://i.imgur.com/WRFXYFi.gif :D

[killzone_kid 1331]

Any news on when AI driving will be fixed or at least how far are we from it?

[-Coulum- 35]

Is it possible due to the supression effect, the opposite force starting shooting with dispersion creating also a supression with ours forces? In Combined Arms Showcase the blufor starts to be without ammo too fast, looks it is created a effect movie like this:http://i.imgur.com/WRFXYFi.gif

Yeah that's basically how it works. One shoots at the other, causing inaccuracy, the other returns inaccurate fire but still enough to suppress the first. And then a stalemate kind of ensues. This is alot like reality though, but you have taking cover and hiding also thrown in the mix (AI don't really do that). Its why outmanoeuvring the enemy, having artilery/airsupport/armour, or just bringing bigger more accurate fire power is really important.

However suppression related ai aiming error is a bit broken now. Basically suppressed ai simply can't hit. Like not even a remote possibility. They always shoot to the far extremes of their "cone of fire":

Some unwanted behavior making the AI fire only in the extremes of the imprecision cone slipped in :/

Leading to situations like your gif, or like MAXZY pointed out:

Once that is fixed things will probably be alot better. Currently its pretty much unplayable IMO. Way too easy.

Edited March 22, 2015 by -Coulum-

[rübe 127]

What someone should do is play the showcase with 1.40 stable and compare results with recent dev branch playthroughs... Perhaps I will do it. But BI QA team should do it also! ;)

Yeah, it's super hard on stable (I always though that I just got old and slow and poor at gaming in general... :(), while now on the dev branch it's a piece of cake. Sure, it's much too easy, but it feels way better, than having a team that just dies around you and you can't do anything, and then you're all on your own. And then you die... Anyways.

NATO definitely feels like some kind of super power, compared to talib.. eh, CSAT (it's not like they're underequipped...). But it's rather hard to tell, why that is.

That AI doesn't hit too well any longer, fine. But why that discrepancy between NATO and CSAT? Just the individual skill levels? Is there some player/friendly bonus, screwing with the skill levels (or maybe the other way around, punishing non-friendlies?). At least I don't think it's anything situational (like coming over that hill there vs. being down in that valley, or what not).

I also just played the first third of the campagin (survive) on dev branch, and it was all much easier, for sure. So one more hint, that there is most likely some config problem or similar, rather than just bad luck for the CSAT/enemy side.

But, again: overall this is surely the right direction to go; firefights will be so much better and more interesting with these latest skill and AI tweaks (working supression! yay!). And don't forget how new fatigue still is (and then bipods and what not...): ArmA just got tactical on a whole new level. And it's amazing. :cool:

[oukej 2911]

But why that discrepancy between NATO and CSAT? Just the individual skill levels?

Yup, just the individual skills.

[chortles 263]

I knew it! Although, assuming that the Infantry Showcase infantry don't have their gear swapped (i.e. none of them getting Navids or SPMGs in the future or Cyruses and EMRs, just the pre-existing MX SWs/MXMs vs. Zafir/Rahim), your answer suggests that skill settings will now be even more crucial than before to the ultimate outcome of any given "head-on" AI force-on-force encounter, to a degree eclipsing any caliber disparity...

[five_seven5-7 56]

I knew it! Although, assuming that the Infantry Showcase infantry don't have their gear swapped (i.e. none of them getting Navids or SPMGs in the future or Cyruses and EMRs, just the pre-existing MX SWs/MXMs vs. Zafir/Rahim), your answer suggests that skill settings will now be even more crucial than before to the ultimate outcome of any given "head-on" AI force-on-force encounter, to a degree eclipsing any caliber disparity...

Some classes in bluefor already have the new armor chassis which proves a great improvement in battle, waiting also for the weapons overhaul.

[bonham 10]

Curiosity of the day: enemy divers will engage targets from below the surface with frag grenades. Ticket #18367

Edited March 23, 2015 by bonham
changed link to first report

[OMAC 254]

Suppression + ROF dispersion + weapon resting/deployment = biggest, most awesome changes to Arma since 2009. :cool:

And oukej reports that connections between buildings and terrains are being fixed (almost done), which should vastly reduce the impact of, and possibly eliminate entirely, the issue of stuck AI. This is unbelievably awesome as well. If anyone sees stuck AI in dev branch, please report the location of the stuck person in this ticket.

---------- Post added at 09:46 AM ---------- Previous post was at 09:43 AM ----------

Yeah, it's super hard on stable (I always though that I just got old and slow and poor at gaming in general... :(), while now on the dev branch it's a piece of cake. Sure, it's much too easy, but it feels way better, than having a team that just dies around you and you can't do anything, and then you're all on your own. And then you die... Anyways.

NATO definitely feels like some kind of super power, compared to talib.. eh, CSAT (it's not like they're underequipped...). But it's rather hard to tell, why that is.

That AI doesn't hit too well any longer, fine. But why that discrepancy between NATO and CSAT? Just the individual skill levels? Is there some player/friendly bonus, screwing with the skill levels (or maybe the other way around, punishing non-friendlies?). At least I don't think it's anything situational (like coming over that hill there vs. being down in that valley, or what not).

I also just played the first third of the campagin (survive) on dev branch, and it was all much easier, for sure. So one more hint, that there is most likely some config problem or similar, rather than just bad luck for the CSAT/enemy side.

But, again: overall this is surely the right direction to go; firefights will be so much better and more interesting with these latest skill and AI tweaks (working supression! yay!). And don't forget how new fatigue still is (and then bipods and what not...): ArmA just got tactical on a whole new level. And it's amazing. :cool:

Excellent post, and thanks for testing! :)

[rübe 127]

Yup, just the individual skills.

Okay, time for some fun in the editor. ;)

Just played around with a simple setting: NATO default squad vs. CSAT default squad (seek and destroy->cycle ontop of some location, walking in from opposing sides). And me as a player (some private rifleman/ammobearer, not shooting too much). Changing sides, starting points and then playing with the skill slider of individual units.

I still am under the impression, that NATO is in some kind of advantage vs. CSAT with equal skill levels (default, or maxed), but that might not be true at all (no time to do a proper experiment, as in science, sorry :().

What I'm sure is that the skill slider has now a larger, easily noticeable effect (way larger than I remember using it the last time, well, of course...) and that in many different ways (fatigue, shooting, spotting, ...) which is lovely, and as such it seems to work fine and allows for a rather broad range of skill-representation (from total derps to super deadly killermachines); especially if you consider the more elaborate setSkill array command, which allows for some fine-tuning.

Thus it's most likely indeed just a matter of adapting (individual) skill-levels in existing missions, like the showcase ones or the campaign. And mission makers probably need to be way more careful in future with respect to the skill-slider(s).

For instance, I'm pretty sure that infantry showcase mission would be hard as heck again, if you'd simply max the skill of all CSAT units (please don't do that, ha; I just did that earlier with the scenario described above, got spotted from like 600m away and then I was dead...).

In general (or as currently is) it's no fun to play vs. skill-maxed AI, let alone a full group of them. They spot and hit you way too good. :o But it's still very important to be able to set skill this high; some few high-skill enemies here and there are certainly a nice tool for any mission designer, to spice things up quite a bit (and there might be even some interesting partially maxed subskill combos for specific roles, like good spotting, yet still bad at shooting or what not). IMHO skill is integral in modeling warfare (or just a fun mission), and has been neglected for way too long, so again: I really like what I'm seeing. :D

tl;dr: just raise skill of CSAT units in showcase/campaign up a tad (or two, but not too much - it was IMHO definitely too hard earlier on stable), but not until things have settled for the most part (and then it might look different again anways...). Or in other words: stop worrying too much about existing missions being too easy for now.

Edited March 23, 2015 by ruebe

[old_painless 182]

Suppression + ROF dispersion + weapon resting/deployment = biggest, most awesome changes to Arma since 2009. :cool:

Very much so, and AI will find COVER too as part of suppression (I was under the impression that may not be in scope but apparently is) !

-OP

Edited March 23, 2015 by Old_Painless

[Imperator[TFD] 444]

Agreed. Firefights with the AI are fantastic now. No longer do you have to put every round on target to try and stay alive. Autorifleman and MGer's can now provide suppression from their base of fire position while friendly forces flank.

April 8th cannot come soon enough.

[HaZZarD 2]

After trying the dev build with bipods, weapon resting, suppressive fire etc I find impossible to go back to regular build lol

Awesome !

gg

[-Coulum- 35]

Well suppression is great, but its a bit to harsh on the ai right now because it makes them shoot wildly left right high and low of you. A suppressed ai simply cannot hit you at all. It makes it a bit unfair for the ai, and takes away alot of fear and risk for the player because he knows his suppression is always 100% effective, and he will never be shot by someone he is shooting at rapidly.

Once that gets fixed though I think things are going to be hella awesome.

Very much so, and AI will find COVER too as part of suppression (I was under the impression that may not be in scope but apparently is) !

Well in theory. For the most part I have not noticed any exceptional use of cover by the ai. I think its pretty much the same old. However I have noticed that they will avoid certain routes if you hose those routes down with fire. Overall I think cover taking and ai is something that still needs alot of work.

Edited March 26, 2015 by -Coulum-