AI Discussion (dev branch)

[becubed 24]

AModern Russian helicopters, and any other nation's modern heli, has the weapons needed for stand off engagements, which are far safer for the pilots. In 2035 I wouldn't expect any modern military to do helicopter gun runs against anything other than isolated infantry.

From what I remember in Apache (cracking good book by the way, and I'm not a helicopter buff) the usual thing for them was to fly circles around 4km out from the target and engage with the cannon, with short runs for the rockets. The idea was they had no trouble operating at those ranges, infantry didn't have much that could shoot back and you had some time if there were missiles.

[instagoat 133]

From what I remember in Apache (cracking good book by the way, and I'm not a helicopter buff) the usual thing for them was to fly circles around 4km out from the target and engage with the cannon, with short runs for the rockets. The idea was they had no trouble operating at those ranges, infantry didn't have much that could shoot back and you had some time if there were missiles.

Back when they envisioned the Attack helicopter that became the AH-64, they envisioned it to engage from 2 - 3 kilometers, and not get any closer. They even designed the weapons (initially TOW + 30mm cannon, then the Hellfires) to work together at that range. Helicopters need -much- larger engagement ranges. Best they should have a spotting distance of 5 km against moving vehicles, 3~ against "hot" vehicles with engine running and infantry in the open, and engagement range of 3 km, with minimum engagement range of 1 km (they should break off once they get that close, right now they fly right over the target.). The set object rendering distance should be the hard cap, though, to make helicopters on par with players.

[msy 22]

stealth mode make me want to kill my AI teamates...

[KingoftheSandbox 10]

why?=)

[NordKindchen 12]

So, if I fire from, say, 300m away, AI's guess of my x, y position is based on a default guess error (of 100m) plus my distance (300m) multiplied by a coefficient (0.25), plus a random value (between 0 and 1, applied to x and y).

This individual calculation doesn't currently factor in my weapon type, but my visibility remains a product of that, so - if I've used, say, an enormous sniper rifle instead of an smg - the AI is more likely to spot me, when looking in the right place.

Well - it seems there are missing a few unfluences. For example the stance of the shooting person and if he is near cover/in a house (Obviously the current system handles someone shooting out of a 2cm big gap of a window the same as someone laying on plain field). Also the likeliness of detection should be dependable of the weapon optics of the searching AI.

------------------

New topic: Helicopters as the AH6 and the iranian transport chopper seem to spot targets way to fast. If you fly the iranian chopper yourself youll notice that its

A: impossible to spot soldiers under your helicopter since you cannot look there.

B: very hard to see soldiers laying on the ground when flying fast

Of course attack chopper have their own gunner position with freelook so thats a different story.

But for choppers without a gunner position the detection radius and angle must be adjusted.

-------------

another topic: I found that in the night mission I was not engaged by enemy soldiers when driving the enemy transports.

Is this because they look at the equipment as friendly and since they cannot see the driver they wont shoot or is it simply a bug?

If its the first case I have to say: Great work!

------------------

AI soldiers that take effective fire and dont know the direction from where they get shot should at first try to find any near cover.

If the enemy fire however is uneffective the current behavior of lying down and spotting is fitting.

Greetz!

[spamurai 3]

It would be great if the AI had more systems in-game to help players understand and configure the AI better.

Debug Mode (for testing):

Imagine a visual set of in-game tools that reveal what the AI code is thinking, not just what it is trying to simulate. Something kind of like a Metal Gear Solid type of system where a set of icons appears above AI units. "Z" to mark an AI that is idle, but a player is within it's detection radius. A "?" when an AI aware of a Player, but pretending to not know who the player is. A "!" to indicate that AI is trying to engage the player. That way a player can test if the AI is behaving as expected, or if there is a problem, what is wrong. For example, if an AI is not behaving as expected, is it because there is a problem with the code (a bug in the AI) or is it a matter of how the AI is configured for the mission (Skill level too low, mission waypoint problem ect). Sometimes AI problems at not the fault of the AI code itself, but could be related to a bad script on the server or in the mission. The Server is taking to long to process AI tasks and instructions.

Visible Nav-Path:

When the player gives a waypoint order to an AI, the exact connected path of Nav-Nodes is revealed. The entire map is a grid of Nav-Nodes spaced 1m(?) a part and whenever the AI is given an order it is always searching and literally trying to connect the dots to complete the move to a new position. Revealing what the AI is thinking and what it sees would be a useful tool in understanding where pathfinding problems exist. For example, if you give a vehicle a simple Move-To order from one end of Altis runway to the opposite end, the AI will not drive a straight line as expected, but will zig-zag from left to right to left again as it visibly tries to connect the Nav-Nodes into a path. Or a vehicle will suddenly veer off a road it was driving down because the path of Nav-Nodes it was following doesn't line up with the road texture.

Black-box Mode (for testing):

In another type of debug mode, you should be able to check the status of any AI at any moment. You can check the AI's sensors by asking it what do you know? (I know there are 3 allied units, 4 unknowns and 1 enemy units inside my detection radius). How are you? (I am 100% health. %40 supply. I have 68% accuracy. I have killed 3 enemy units). What Are you doing? (I am in combat mode. I am tracking 1 enemy unit. I have no direct task assigned).

In-Game UI Configuration screens.

There are numerous variables that can be adjusted by the player to configure and customize the AI. Most of these are not accessible without editing a config file outside of the game. All of these settings should be unmasked and accessible through the UI in the game. There should be a game configuration screen with tabs. Each difficulty level should have it's own tab. On the tab are all the adjustable sliders to set AI skill attributes like aimingTime and aimingPrecision. When playing the game, these settings should reveal what the mission or the server has set the AI skill attributes too.

[royaltyinexile 175]

Well - it seems there are missing a few unfluences. For example the stance of the shooting person and if he is near cover/in a house (Obviously the current system handles someone shooting out of a 2cm big gap of a window the same as someone laying on plain field). Also the likeliness of detection should be dependable of the weapon optics of the searching AI.

It's affected by two separate things. The reveal of position is the general area the shot is fired from. This means the AI will start looking for a threat in this location. This is what the fix affected; it made the area a bit less precise and it now also factors in range, too.

After that, the unit's visibility (which is derived from a bunch of factors, including stance, weapon fired, the cover/clutter he's in) determines the chance/speed that the AI will actually 'find' and target the threat.

Best,

RiE

[froggyluv 2130]

After that, the unit's visibility (which is derived from a bunch of factors, including stance, weapon fired, the cover/clutter he's in) determines the chance/speed that the AI will actually 'find' and target the threat.

RiE

Interesting. Would leaning out slightly from an interior window pane count as clutter? My worry is that indoors is treated no differently than outdoors as generally it's just harder to see someone peeking out of a window. Since in reality the player would be standing (+ enemy LOS) and not really in "clutter (+enemy LOS), where would the penalty play out in the AI's calculation? Maybe the window pane itself (intact) could count as clutter due to lighting distortion/reflection?

[ebarstad 18]

I'm playing on the stable branch, but the most frustrating AI behaviour for me is their interaction with buildings. I've got a mission I play in Agia Marina and the AI constantly get stuck in buildings and on or under bridges. For example, if you tell a unit to go into one of the buildings labelled "Bungalow", he typically won't come out again. Here's a basic repro:

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/519559/AI%20Stuck.jpg (302 kB)

[Masharra 10]

another topic: I found that in the night mission I was not engaged by enemy soldiers when driving the enemy transports.

Is this because they look at the equipment as friendly and since they cannot see the driver they wont shoot or is it simply a bug?

If its the first case I have to say: Great work!

This is evident in A2 also, I think, they will start yelling unknown transport 003033 then as you get it gets closer it is confirmed friendly or hostile.

Its not because its not hostile its because they have to identify if it is friendly first. You should be able to test the same with fog and on foot. They will detect you but not fire until they confirm the target. I.E Hold

This waypoint type will cause the group will move to and stay at this position indefinitely. Only a Switch type trigger or script command will move the group from the waypoint. While waiting, any unknown targets are checked (group moves in the direction of the target) and any recognized enemies are engaged.

[Shagulon 1]

Hi,

Played a few goes on the combined arms showcase, and am really starting to see things play much better. The AFV lasted until the end three times. It patrolled along the top of the mountain ridge above the base, out of range of most infantry threats, it was a joy to watch. Infantry go prone when required and take up good covered positions. The only down side to this is when they go prone behind cover which they can never hope to shoot over (not while under heavy fire when this might make perfect sense).

Are you guys sneaking in AI updates and not listing them?

Keep moving along the same lines you are, and this will be a very enjoyable release :)

[ericfr 0]

AI still get stuck with pistol, switch to that AI and when you shoot PD7, the M320 (on my back) fires.

This bug has been there for years and even in 2035 it is still present congratulations BI.

[jiltedjock 10]

the biggest problem with the ai is that they use only 1 cpu core

please make it so that the ai calculateb by 2 or more cpu cores

is it at least not possible to calculate the ai from blufor and opfor on core 2

and the ai from resistance and civilians on cpu core 3

it would be nice if could the mission creator in this scenario can choose which cpu core calculate

which ai factions

Minimum requirements are dual core.

It would be nice if there was an in-game or startup switch to define which cores were used for per faction AI though.

[gossamersolid 155]

is it at least not possible to calculate the ai from blufor and opfor on core 2

and the ai from resistance and civilians on cpu core 3

That's such a bad idea...

I'll let you re-read what you posted and figure out why.

[sqb-sma 66]

That's such a bad idea...

I'll let you re-read what you posted and figure out why.

Lots of people don't know how inter-thread communication works, or why it's so hard for games to spread tasks out between cores. No need to be so harsh. (remember the 10,000!)

[Masharra 10]

Ai dont seem to be able to reverse? Ordering them to go backwards makes them try to turn around

[xendance 3]

Lots of people don't know how inter-thread communication works, or why it's so hard for games to spread tasks out between cores. No need to be so harsh. (remember the 10,000!)

Higher level AI behaviour, like squad/platoon tactics and behaviour would probably be a good candidate for offloading to another core.

[kremator 1064]

Still can't understand why the minimum spec is dual core. I don't know any gamers who doesn't have at least a quad core. Time to update the game for quad core and use it to it's maximum to help out the AI.

[squeeze 22]

just noticed the "debug console" in MP, has this slipped in by mistake or a added feature for awhile.

oops wrong thread:o

Edited August 8, 2013 by Squeeze

[TSAndrey 1]

Still can't understand why the minimum spec is dual core. I don't know any gamers who doesn't have at least a quad core. Time to update the game for quad core and use it to it's maximum to help out the AI.

Most of my friends have Dual Core (including me). Stop acting like everyone is Bill Gates...

[doln 10]

Most of my friends have Dual Core (including me). Stop acting like everyone is Bill Gates...

Quad cores aren't exactly a luxury item, they're quite cheap now. Perhaps its time for an upgrade?

[best2nd 10]

just noticed the "debug console" in MP, has this slipped in by mistake or a added feature for awhile.

oops wrong thread:o

I believe if you are a logged in admin it's available. Not sure.

[jiltedjock 10]

Lots of people don't know how inter-thread communication works, or why it's so hard for games to spread tasks out between cores. No need to be so harsh. (remember the 10,000!)

I don't think that is what he meant. For example it is already possible to split the AI processing up like this using a dedicated server, headless client and AI localisation all running on one PC. And I mean playing as single player too so this is a potential model for optimization. However it does seem a poor idea to have bluefor and opfor on the same core.

[maturin 12]

NOT GOING TO HAPPEN FOR ARMA 3 1.0

Can we please stop making this thread uselessly off-topic?

[chrisb 196]

Dev build: 75/717

Lost the AI reaction to unseen gunfire and grenade explosions, close by. This seemed to have been rectified last time, but now its gone back to how it was, would be nice if a dev commented on the progress of basic AI reactions.

:(

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vicdgVsilQM