Jump to content

Recommended Posts

i still dont understand his post..

anyway back to topic once more, AI in danger mode are slow as **** even when there is no enemy present.

same as stealth... they just stop too much and look at the **** floor

i waited literally 25mins for an enemy group to get to our location when i put him no more than 600m away and tried this on stealth mode and danger and they both the same

---------- Post added at 19:49 ---------- Previous post was at 19:44 ----------

will the loiter waypoint ever work for infantry? - i.e. just hang around this area so like a radius of 50 or something

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the post was hinting that Arma 2 (prior OA) AI was capable to kill you on the spot when sighted in close range

while Arma 3 isn't , so the simple logic tells there is some regression preventing the correct outcome

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ahhh cheers understood now

the post was hinting that Arma 2 (prior OA) AI was capable to kill you on the spot when sighted in close range

while Arma 3 isn't , so the simple logic tells there is some regression preventing the correct outcome

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
the post was hinting that Arma 2 (prior OA) AI was capable to kill you on the spot when sighted in close range

while Arma 3 isn't , so the simple logic tells there is some regression preventing the correct outcome

Can't agree more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

what about the stupidly slow moving AI on stealth and danger :/

anyway back to topic once more, AI in danger mode are slow as **** even when there is no enemy present.

same as stealth... they just stop too much and look at the **** floor

i waited literally 25mins for an enemy group to get to our location when i put him no more than 600m away and tried this on stealth mode and danger and they both the same

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
the post was hinting that Arma 2 (prior OA) AI was capable to kill you on the spot when sighted in close range

while Arma 3 isn't , so the simple logic tells there is some regression preventing the correct outcome

Oh well, sorry for the miss understanding then :p

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is the headless client stuff being looked at as a possible remedy to the problems with AI performance?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Is the headless client stuff being looked at as a possible remedy to the problems with AI performance?

You should be able to download a free version that can only be used for headless client.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I noticed that AI drivers get really confused with roads that change "material", so when moving from tar top to dirt road, they probably see the dirt road as some sort of obstacle and break hard before leaving the tarmac, sometimes driving to the side first before going on

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

AI orientation still seems to be a problem. Example: I set myself as leader of AT squad in valley portion of Agia Marina with an enemy armour coming at me from the West and at a higher elevation. Since I knew what direction armour was coming from, I first faced the exact direction it was coming from and yelled out "Take cover!" -surprisingly my guys took left and right facing cover though I was under the assumption that if no threat was directly realized they would use the direction the squad commander (player) was facing?

Worse still, the armour finally peaked over the crest and killed me immediately -that's all well and good but the problem is that watching my AT AI guys, they never left their wrong facing cover direction even while they were being shot at. In fact, they survived a while out of sheer luck but never, not once, faced the armour. that would be fine if they were trying to readjust cover positions first, but watching them lean out to non-existent threat directions while under fire was a bit...odd. This shouldn't happen with only 1 enemy AI on the whole map - I could understand if there were multiple targets from various angles.

When I run same scenario on wide open space such as an airfield they do their job properly and launch AT's in mass but when they are caught unawares they look silly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AI orientation still seems to be a problem. Example: I set myself as leader of AT squad in valley portion of Agia Marina with an enemy armour coming at me from the West and at a higher elevation. Since I knew what direction armour was coming from, I first faced the exact direction it was coming from and yelled out "Take cover!" -surprisingly my guys took left and right facing cover though I was under the assumption that if no threat was directly realized they would use the direction the squad commander (player) was facing?

Worse still, the armour finally peaked over the crest and killed me immediately -that's all well and good but the problem is that watching my AT AI guys, they never left their wrong facing cover direction even while they were being shot at. In fact, they survived a while out of sheer luck but never, not once, faced the armour. that would be fine if they were trying to readjust cover positions first, but watching them lean out to non-existent threat directions while under fire was a bit...odd. This shouldn't happen with only 1 enemy AI on the whole map - I could understand if there were multiple targets from various angles.

When I run same scenario on wide open space such as an airfield they do their job properly and launch AT's in mass but when they are caught unawares they look silly.

I believe the AI take their directional cue from direction of travel not current facing direction. So you'll probably find that they organised themselves according to the direction you just arrived from.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The "headless client" should not exist. The users management of the server is not processor intensive, 500 AI should be easily managed by the processing power today. Optimizations are needed rather then a "distributed server"...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The "headless client" should not exist. The users management of the server is not processor intensive, 500 AI should be easily managed by the processing power today. Optimizations are needed rather then a "distributed server"...

You missed the point. HC is not used to offload CPU, it's used to offload network traffic management from the server.

Also, AI's action's are known to clog the RAM. There is also the fact that AI cannot be distributed on multiple cores.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You missed the point. HC is not used to offload CPU, it's used to offload network traffic management from the server.

Also, AI's action's are known to clog the RAM. There is also the fact that AI cannot be distributed on multiple cores.

I'm pretty sure it's used to offload the CPU since the game utilizes a server-client architecture and not a client-client-server, I.E. there is no offload of network traffic because even though the HC process's the AI it still is sent to the server and then from the server to every other client. It's not like AI network related traffic is somehow magically split from the server and sent to you via the HC, it all still passes through the server and from the server to the client. The HC simply acts as a client to the server with the locality of all AI in the mission assigned to the HC in order to offload AI processing from the server to a separate pseudo-server client. That's all it really does.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the AI should use crouch stance when moving under fire/combat mode. Unless they are moving to a new position that is more than lets say 50m away, they should use crouch stance. Or how about this, they should move while prone for about 3m -5m and decided its to slow, and move while crouch for 10m - 15m and decided still to slow, then move on to standing stance and run to a new position. At least that's how I personally usually do while in ARMA virtual combat...

Personally I like the first one when they first introduced the new AI preference of crouch stance while in combat... The second one probably the most balanced one... IMHO

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AI in danger mode are slow as **** even when there is no enemy present.

same as stealth... they just stop too much and look at the **** floor

i waited literally 25mins for an enemy group to get to our location when i put him no more than 600m away and tried this on stealth mode and danger and they both the same

Why do you put them in a "stealth" mode? Or even "combat" mode if you want them to move hundreds of meters?

In "stealth" and "combat" behaviour they'll act Like there was enemy present.

The "no change" is "aware". They will go to "combat" mode only when they have a contact with the enemy automatically.

Don't blame AI for being slow if you make them to go slow.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just a quick note. It really helps us in this thread when you provide considered feedback to the changes in progress, or clean repros missions that highlight some repeatable AI behaviour.

Our programmers tend to get lost when the discussions trail off into other areas, like headless client, etc. This thread can't both function as a place for feature requests and discussion and as a place to discuss the active development. It's one or the other, gents, and I'd like to be able to pass as much useful info to our guys as possible! :)

Anyway, I'd also like to thank you guys that have provided feedback and repros (beyond those examples I've linked to above). When we get this balance right, we can really make modest refinements that improve AI behaviour.

Best,

RiE

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

After last update

decrease the AI's use of crouching

Seems that crouch usage been decreased too much, as ai now stand 80% of time during combat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The AI really needs some "rapid action mode" or "panic reaction" when bumping in to a very near enemy.

Now it tries to be "smarter" and get behind a cover or find a good line of fire further away, or get a good aim first...which all takes too much time.

And gets killed like the swordsman in Indiana Jones, while it Should just stop and shoot. Maybe like Chuck Norris-style ..forget the aim, just let the bullets fly. :/

Edited by Azzur33

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The AI really needs some "rapid action mode" or "panic reaction" when bumping in to a very near enemy.

Now it tries to be "smarter" and get behind a cover or find a good line on fire further away, or get a good aim first...which all takes too much time.

And gets killed like the swordsman in Indiana Jones, while it Should just stop and shoot. Maybe like Chuck Norris-style ..forget the aim, just let the bullets fly. :/

Definitely. As I posted earlier (again with the caveat that I know nothing of AI programing) it seems the AI needs an "over-ride" which is "I've seen an enemy, it's less than x metres away, I will not do anything other than fire at that enemy" It can then evaluate it's surroundings etc... I'm sure it's complex etc.. but that one thing would fix sooo much of the experience of an engagement.

Thanks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...And in the interests of getting back on topic, let's dive face-first into that horrific video :)

.

One thing that is actually good in the video is that, at around 14s, the AI react quickly and try to shoot the player. It's actually going well up to this point. Without actually debugging the values, I'd guess that:

  1. The AI heard the player approaching
  2. Fired when they knew that the target was an enemy
  3. Continued to fire where they 'guess' they player was, after they lost line of sight
  4. Take out their pistols when they know it's a CQB situation*

One way or another, all 'as designed' so far. It starts to get real ugly when they move and engage. We'll try to get a clean repro of this problem. We've tried to repeat the situation internally, in case you missed the post:

I tried the exact same setup (except the waypoint directly on the group leader, that may cause some issues on its own) and the result was pretty much the same as yours. BUT. The AI had quite low AI skill setting. Raising it to 1 made them flank the building and shoot me from behind, while 3 guys guarded their side of the building, holding their ground and opening fire as soon as I turned the corner. [emphasis mine]

1. Turn speed. You are still able to follow an AI who can't shoot at you.

2. Flee conditions. Sometimes AI refuses to shoot at you, sometimes even running away. Is it flee? If so, make it drop the weapon or an explicit surrender animation. Else make it shoot.

3. Gunshot/sounds detection - they don't care if you shoot behind them, they don't turn around to check sometimes. If you shoot after corner they get past the corner not looking.

4. Cover detection - related to enemy direction.

I think AFP is right in highlighting these four issues and, again, if we can get a clean repro of each that demonstrates the behaviour, we can debug that and find out what's going wrong.

We can 'design' AI behaviour in the abstract, at the descriptive level (the given that general situation, the ai should usually react like this'), but we need to debug what's actually going on (these specific inputs resulted in this set of actions).

Bring a programmer a story, his eyes will glaze over; bring him a repro, he can try to teach the AI correct behaviour.

Damn... really tried to insert 'fish' into that sentence. :cool:

Best,

RiE

*which you might disagree with, but it's a simple config value, which determines if and when they'll switch to the side arm - making that a data issue, rather than a program one (hello, Task Force Balance

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

but what if you want the AI to be more than aware but move at the same time.. aware just looks like "yeahhh i dont care lets go" im looking for "right lets move, but keep your eyes peeled and stay on guard"

Why do you put them in a "stealth" mode? Or even "combat" mode if you want them to move hundreds of meters?

In "stealth" and "combat" behaviour they'll act Like there was enemy present.

The "no change" is "aware". They will go to "combat" mode only when they have a contact with the enemy automatically.

Don't blame AI for being slow if you make them to go slow.

---------- Post added at 12:26 ---------- Previous post was at 12:23 ----------

i also notice this, its like they go ermmmm hmmm dirt road to road lol

I noticed that AI drivers get really confused with roads that change "material", so when moving from tar top to dirt road, they probably see the dirt road as some sort of obstacle and break hard before leaving the tarmac, sometimes driving to the side first before going on

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think AFP is right in highlighting these four issues and, again, if we can get a clean repro of each that demonstrates the behaviour, we can debug that and find out what's going wrong.

Let me add one:

5. Decision to heal - AI might decide to use FAK in the middle of combat, without cover

I tried this situation as afp outlined it, and intentionally injured some of the AI. The AI sometimes decides to start using FAK's in plain view, out in the open, with me standing actually in front of them. They seem oblivious to the fact that I am there, making them easy targets.

Since (unfortunately) there is no real bleeding in Arma 3 ( as in, you start to lose blood when you are hit and consequently use health), there is no real reason to use a FAK in the middle of combat since there is no time pressure involved, so in this case AI should first seek cover or wait until after combat in order to heal up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"2. Flee conditions. Sometimes AI refuses to shoot at you, sometimes even running away. Is it flee?"

I tried several times about the same scenario like in the video. But having 4 enemy, one move waypoint near them, "no change".

I play with rather high enemy skill, and they do try to flank, with at least one staying low ready to shoot if I peek around the corner.

The problem: one of them just went in front of me, seeing me, then run further trying to get behind the sandbags, which I generously allowed.

The one flanking me from behind, did the same, instead of shooting me while he had the chance, he went searching for cover from the sandbags, then tried to sneak closer, and died.

---------- Post added at 11:55 ---------- Previous post was at 11:41 ----------

but what if you want the AI to be more than aware but move at the same time.. aware just looks like "yeahhh i dont care lets go" im looking for "right lets move, but keep your eyes peeled and stay on guard"

They'll do that when they are aware. They are immediately on a combat/danger mode it they spot the enemy. They Do care.

Edited by Azzur33

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now

×