AI Discussion (dev branch)

[fn_Quiksilver 1636]

19 hours ago, inlesco said:

 

sorry for the possible misunderstanding, but I sense some disappointment in this sentence of yours :|

And I really dig this, it's reasonable to be a little disappointed, especially considering the recent efforts BI has taken on refactoring the internal AI systems to make them testable, more flexible and maintainable
But it seems there's no end to the improvements of an in-game AI, you can go on for years, even when having a dedicated AI team working tirelessly.

 

of course there is some disappointment, that BIS has treated AI as a legacy feature from prior titles instead of advancing, innovating and improving their AI.

 

But we are very much out of the main development cycle, what was going to be done has already been done

[dragon01 902]

Hopefully they'll be able to make some fixes for Tanks DLC, at least. However, I think that major changes will only come with ArmA4 (new engine and all that). As far as ArmA goes, some paradigms have been here since OFP, which probably isn't the best way of handling things. That said, there's a new engine in the works, and a recent SITREP said that they're moving more and more of the team to work on it...

[Grumpy Old Man 3545]

3 minutes ago, dragon01 said:

Hopefully they'll be able to make some fixes for Tanks DLC, at least. However, I think that major changes will only come with ArmA4 (new engine and all that). As far as ArmA goes, some paradigms have been here since OFP, which probably isn't the best way of handling things. That said, there's a new engine in the works, and a recent SITREP said that they're moving more and more of the team to work on it...

 

That's what I hoped for the Jets DLC, a fix to AI behavior regarding aircraft.

Yet here we are, blackfish still engaging enemies using combat dives as if it was a fighter jet,

AI are still unable to follow the airfield taxiways and get stuck in the trench on the tanoan main airfield,

and don't you dare to make 2 aircraft land at the same airport at the same time, will end up in both planes colliding on the landing approach.

 

Tanks DLC will bring a new MBT for all factions, maybe 1 or 2 APCs/IFVs and probably some tweaked physx/tracks simulation which will be tampered with for 6-8 months just to be discontinued in a half working state (see wheeled AI driving "improvement" for comparison).

 

Cheers

 

[dragon01 902]

They do, however, behave better in dogfights and in general combat. Airfield stuff needs to be scripted, as it always has (as far as I know). And TBH, I given up on VTOLs having decent AI at that point (forget attacking, just try to have one of those land somewhere...). In SP, you can get decent results by unitCapture/unitPlay, at least. Oh, and landing two planes at the same airport at the same time IRL isn't gonna end well, either. The AI could probably handle it better, but it's up to mission designer to script those things.

 

I don't expect all issues with tanks to be fixed, but the most serious ones that affect their employment in combat should be. That includes much of the stuff related to driving around.

[Grumpy Old Man 3545]

13 minutes ago, dragon01 said:

They do, however, behave better in dogfights and in general combat. Airfield stuff needs to be scripted, as it always has (as far as I know). And TBH, I given up on VTOLs having decent AI at that point (forget attacking, just try to have one of those land somewhere...). In SP, you can get decent results by unitCapture/unitPlay, at least. Oh, and landing two planes at the same airport at the same time IRL isn't gonna end well, either. The AI could probably handle it better, but it's up to mission designer to script those things.

 

I don't expect all issues with tanks to be fixed, but the most serious ones that affect their employment in combat should be. That includes much of the stuff related to driving around.

I for one will be happy if they make tanks turn their front towards threats and the ability to reverse.

 

As for airfield scripting, if it would be possible I'd have done it long time ago. As of now you can't give planes on the ground waypoints or move commands, they will simply attempt to go to the nearest take-off coordinate on the map.

No way to override this behavior.

 

Cheers

[cyruz 103]

I've been convinced since the last patch AI skills are all over the place, just player feedback alone tells me some thing is broken. I did a quick test earlier on and I'm getting really weird results.

 

Someone else try this...

 

cursorObject setskill ["spotTime",0.4];

Check the skill with cursorTarget skill "spotTime" (still returns 0.4).

 

CfgAILevelPresets

skillAI = 1;

 

class CfgAISkill

spotTime[] = {0,0,1,1};

 

cursorTarget skillfinal "spotTime"

Returns 0.7

 

What's going on here, aimingAccuracy and aimingShake are all over the place too.

 

 

[Vasily.B 529]

I wonder why they did this skill "improvments". Right now all pre-pai patch made missions are almost unplayable. THIS NEED ADJUSTING. Al ai are snipers right now, i dont play any workshop content, as even militia are snipers now. Please revert this option, or give us a choice.

[cyruz 103]

Ticket for above example:

 

https://feedback.bistudio.com/T126795

[Vasily.B 529]

I get it, but why skills for precission of 0.35 is now sniper? I mean missions created before this patch on workshop (scenarios, campaigns) with militia, low trained units etc, not to mention those units which have precission set to 0.50 - all of mentioned units is taking you down with one shot from 400M (headshots?). I played great campaign "Red Hammer".... it was unbeliveable hard to complete it thanks to new skills changes. Before patch it was OK. Its not even that problem for player alone (except he become target NO 1 on battlefield whenever he appears and enemy see him, ignoring even some AI shooting to them), but for teammates which become killed in first part of the mission, which ruins immersion and climatic of some scenarios, sometimes even leading to break further triggers, and in final making mission complete impossible.

Whats more strange, when i set ai precision to 0.35 in editor it works as it should - they miss target most of time. Problem is onlly on missions created before patch 1.76 and its "old 0.35 precission" working now as 0.80.

[autigergrad 2034]

I'm really hoping for some legitimate improvement of multi-vehicle groups and their driving skills.

 

As of now...watching a 4 tank section travel across the map is pure hilarity...running into each other, slingshotting, crashing into walls, not changing their formation dynamically to deal with roads and obstacles, etc.

 

This has been an issue for far too long IMO.

[krycek 349]

I decided to reinstall A2OA and recreate my A3 test from previous page. Apart from the instant melancholy well lo and behold the AI doesn't abandon their vehicles after group switch and we can have the luxury of actually being backed up by AI armor support.

Unlike those spongebobs in A3 that run for the hills on the next second you switched from them like a non-stop reenactment of 2014 iraqi army abandoning their hardware in Mosul.

Why this wasn't fixed 4 years later apart from "meh don't care,it's on our bottom of the bottom list,we added water temp indicator to the suv"?

 

[Vasily.B 529]

21 hours ago, krycek said:

 

 

Lol, they were also keeping formation, there were cool dust in the air after vehicles move..... Good old A2......

[b00tsy 28]

On 23-9-2017 at 0:55 PM, Grumpy Old Man said:

I for one will be happy if they make tanks turn their front towards threats and the ability to reverse.

 

As for airfield scripting, if it would be possible I'd have done it long time ago. As of now you can't give planes on the ground waypoints or move commands, they will simply attempt to go to the nearest take-off coordinate on the map.

No way to override this behavior.

 

Cheers

Actually, I made a jet mission (Total Wipeout) on Altis (before jets DLC) where I was able to have jets taxi and then take off and also multiple AI jets landing on the runway all done with normal waypoints and timers. It took some fiddling to not have them crash and stuff, but it worked in the end. Only thing I was not able to do is taxi an AI jet after landing (so I just deleted them after they did their ambience landing). It would have been nice if there was a taxi and land waypoint for jets.

[teabagginpeople 398]

please add a new command "do as i do" . for the love of god if not this arma 4.

 

This is a strict override  command that makes the ai teamates copy your stance,  only fire after being fired at or if the lead fires( get in a vehicle if you get in one).  

 

 

[das attorney 858]

3 hours ago, teabagginpeople said:

please add a new command "do as i do" . for the love of god if not this arma 4.

 

This is a strict override  command that makes the ai teamates copy your stance,  only fire after being fired at or if the lead fires( get in a vehicle if you get in one).  

 

 

 

Hi,

 

Not trying to shout you down, but I think this kind of command would be extremely situational.

 

It would work well if you are in open fields and came under fire, but if you consider building-to-building combat, then it would be really messy.  Let's say you are crouched, then you would have some units in good cover suitable to their (and by extension, your stance), but then some other units crouching behind high (6' +  tall objects).  And the worst would be units crouching behind things they could go prone behind.

 

But yes,agreed that sometimes you want them to do stuff and they act like dummies and stand there waiting to be mowed down.

 

This game could really have done with some sort of cover-node system (defined in the models and used by the ai routines), but it looks like the left hand wasn't talking to the right hand, so all the objects got made, and then the guys that program the ai were told "that's what you've got, now make it work" xD

 

 

 

edit:  I meant to say that there was a mod for this back in Arma 2 (so you see how long people have wanted this)!  It worked ok, but the criticism above applied.  For your interest:

 

http://www.armaholic.com/page.php?id=8484

[xxgetbuck123 945]

On 02/10/2017 at 2:37 AM, krycek said:

I decided to reinstall A2OA and recreate my A3 test from previous page. Apart from the instant melancholy well lo and behold the AI doesn't abandon their vehicles after group switch and we can have the luxury of actually being backed up by AI armor support.

Unlike those spongebobs in A3 that run for the hills on the next second you switched from them like a non-stop reenactment of 2014 iraqi army abandoning their hardware in Mosul.

Why this wasn't fixed 4 years later apart from "meh don't care,it's on our bottom of the bottom list,we added water temp indicator to the suv"?

 

 

Holy shit never seen the AI comes to a slow break in a tank before!

 

What happened to the over extending attempting to break followed by the 180 back to your position 30m down the road only to sit at some random angle next to you? 

[fn_Quiksilver 1636]

If any devs are looking for some low-hanging (easy to implement) ideas for AI improvement, send us AI designers some AI event handlers.

 

"CombatModeChanged"    // group, oldstate, newstate

"BehaviourChanged"     // group, oldstate, newstate

"LifeStateChanged"    // unit, oldstate, newstate

"OnFleeing"   // unit, fleeingstate

"Suppression"   (when getSuppression value hits 1)

 

and also a script command for us to return what an AI unit is aiming/shooting at, since (assignedTarget) doesn't work for this unless the AI unit is shooting at its assignedTarget.

 

<unit> addEventHandler [
	'FiredMan',
	{
		_assignedtarget = assignedTarget (_this select 0);	// objNull???
		/*/ what is he shooting at??? /*/
	}
];

^ an example use-case is in-script deciding whether the target needs to be just shot at, or needs to be further suppressed with "commandsuppressivefire"

 

We understand more complex things like driving and infantry behavior require more resources to attend to, but the above should be an afternoons work at most :)

 

Also this would be helpful for those of us who script medical systems and want to command AI units to "treat" units who may be unconscious

 

https://feedback.bistudio.com/T126026

 

Give us this "Treat Rifleman" option also when the unit is unconscious (lifeState == "INCAPACITATED")

 

 

 

At the moment it looks like this (no "Heal" option)

 

 

Yes im not expecting devs to implement AI revive, but allowing us simply to "Heal" with no other default effects, would allow designers to script their own revive using the "HandleHeal" event handler

[teabagginpeople 398]

11 hours ago, das attorney said:

 

Hi,

 

Not trying to shout you down, but I think this kind of command would be extremely situational.

 

No I totally get it would be situational.  And your points are very valid. 

 

I just think a strict command like this could be useful at times to chop out alot of unnecessary micro management.  And should the ai be doing the order strictly that I issued and die. at least I can happily blame myself . 

[das attorney 858]

6 hours ago, fn_Quiksilver said:

If any devs are looking for some low-hanging (easy to implement) ideas for AI improvement, send us AI designers some AI event handlers.

 

"CombatModeChanged"    // group, oldstate, newstate

"BehaviourChanged"     // group, oldstate, newstate

"LifeStateChanged"    // unit, oldstate, newstate

"OnFleeing"   // unit, fleeingstate

"Suppression"   (when getSuppression value hits 1)

 

 

That's cool - "behaviourChanged" would be very useful imo.

 

The "lifestateChanged" can be approximated for the moment by doing:

 

this addEventHandler ["hit",{
    if (lifeState (_this select 0) == "unconscious") then {
        // stuff
    }
}];

 

However, you still won't know when a unit is revived (from that code at least).  You could then combine with an anim EH to see when they stop writhing around on the floor.

 

this addEventHandler ["hit",{
    if (lifeState (_this select 0) == "unconscious") then {
        // ko'd
        // code for unconscious here
        _idx = (_this select 0) addEventHandler ["AnimChanged",{
            if (_this select 1 != "nameOfanim") then {
                // revived
                // code for revive here
                _idx = (_this select 0) getVariable ["getUpIndex",0];
                (_this select 0) removeEventHandler ["animDone",_idx];
                (_this select 0) setVariable ["getUpIndex",nil];
            } 
        }];
        (_this select 0) setVariable ["getUpIndex",_idx];
    }
}];

 

[Antilochos 106]

AI should be improved since last dlc to be more likely fire at tanks etc.

Well, I don't see that happening. Just got 60 men (10 carrrying AT launchers) slaughtered by 1 single panther. I mean, come on BI, should be better then that right?

 

At least fix this before the tank dlc. What's the point of that dlc if this does not work well?

[froggyluv 2136]

5 hours ago, Antilochos said:

AI should be improved since last dlc to be more likely fire at tanks etc.

Well, I don't see that happening. Just got 60 men (10 carrrying AT launchers) slaughtered by 1 single panther. I mean, come on BI, should be better then that right?

 

At least fix this before the tank dlc. What's the point of that dlc if this does not work well?

 

 While I agree the AT AI is often way too timid -your gonna need to show a video to make your case and just stating that your guys didnt fire doesnt show how it went down. Were they given Engage at Will commands to basically do it on their own or were you placing them exactly were you thought they should have good LOS? Were the engines of the tanks on to permit an AT lock? Was there foliage obscuring targeting for your AT men?

 

List goes on and on but frankly shows that in these cases you must well...make a case :)

 

Personally I would like more AI control to insist they arm their AT and not auto switch between rifle and launcher in their spammy way (another argument to have an "Thats an Order!" qualifier button to overide auto AI when needed). Also the ability to just have them fire, at anything we point at as at least some damage or suppression  may occur -there is literally nothing worse than an AT soldier who has the ability to take a shot -not take the shot -and your entire squad dies. This AI imo, is key to upgrading the Tank vs Infantry experience. Also the need for AI to make small lateral adjustments as often he only need move a few feet for a decent shot but if given the draconian "Engage AT Will"....get ready for Benny Hill level shennangins as he runs off 400m or so looking for a good looking shot place - oh what goes on in those poor AI brains..

[Antilochos 106]

17 hours ago, froggyluv said:

 

 

You are right that a lot of things depend on how a confrontation (like the one I mentioned for example) plays out in the game, but my point still stands even without going into such detail or showing a video.

 

First I do say that I like my AI's make their own decisions when in a battle and don't feel like it to give every single unit specific orders in the middle of a heated fight (that takes away the experience and fun). Especially when I'm not the group leader (wich was also the case in my example). When on "engage at will", it does happen that the AI starts walking around like a mime player, making two steps, arm launcher, arm riffle again without firing launcher, crouch, stand and take binoculars, arm launcher again and wait for the enemy tank to blast the hell out of the very artistic but brain damaged soldier.

 

I might exaggerate, but believe my point is clear; the AI infantry does not act natural towards the dangerous tanks.

 

[fn_Quiksilver 1636]

https://community.bistudio.com/wiki/landAt alternative syntax does nothing

heli landAt helipad        Since Arma 3 v1.68

 

[h - 169]

13 hours ago, fn_Quiksilver said:

https://community.bistudio.com/wiki/landAt alternative syntax does nothing

heli landAt helipad        Since Arma 3 v1.68

 

Actually that does work.
You have to give the chopper landing instructions first:

_heli1 land "LAND";
_heli1 landAt _helipad;

 

[fn_Quiksilver 1636]

21 hours ago, h - said:

Actually that does work.
You have to give the chopper landing instructions first:

_heli1 land "LAND";
_heli1 landAt _helipad;

 

 

have you tested it or just glancing at the wiki?

 

please dont "actually" someone until you have tested.

 

repro for you

 

// VR
0 spawn {
	comment "This helipad is close";
	_helipad_1 = createVehicle ["Land_HelipadCircle_F",(player getRelPos [25,0]),[],0,"NONE"];
	comment "This helipad is far";
	_helipad_2 = createVehicle ["Land_HelipadSquare_F",(player getRelPos [75,0]),[],0,"NONE"];
	comment "Helicopter spawns farther";
	_heli = createVehicle ["B_Heli_Light_01_F",(player getRelPos [125,0]),[],0,"FLY"];
	createVehicleCrew _heli;
	sleep 1;
	_heli land "LAND";
	_heli landAt _helipad_1;
};

chopper should land at circle pad, according to the command. let me know where it lands.