Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
fabrizio_t

[WIP] bCombat infantry AI Mod [SP]

How do you rate your first bCombat experience  

55 members have voted

  1. 1. How do you rate your first bCombat experience

    • Very disappointing
      2
    • Mediocre
      4
    • Average
      2
    • Good
      16
    • Very good
      31


Recommended Posts

I'll be home soon (stayed at my parents house with the kids for the weekend) and I'll be testing away tonight. Can't wait to get back into it!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just played Assault on Charkia and had no noticeable performance loss. I usually get between 24-30 fps on that scenario (except at the very beginning) and that's what I saw while running bCombat. So, if this is your unoptimized version of the mod, bravo!

Edit: I'd say, without the mod, I get about 4fps more on average - 28-32fps.

Edited by ebarstad

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Played a lot of the campaign with it on tonight. No game breakers. AI on both sides survive much longer. Firefights are actually fun again. :D

I especially noticed this on the mission while heading to Maxwell the first time. AI were bounding from tree to tree, staying in cover and firing from it as much as possible. Also seems like they're much better at staying together and covering each other.

IMO, this is how the campaign needs to be played.

I am getting random various "XXX.SQF not found"s. It seems like it's only the three unpackaged scripts in the main folder that pop up like that though. And when they do, I don't notice anything wrong.

Edited by TheCapulet

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A few observations from a quick run though of the campaign

- Noticable fps hit/sluggish controls compared to vanilla on some of the campaign missions, particularly forest and night missions

- Squads sometimes appear to be getting stuck in combat mode even though no enemies present

- when reloading a saved game or reverting a mission after getting killed - units sometimes seem to be inheriting the previous bcombat state. For example if I revert the mission they will still be in combat mode at start of mission and using bounding overwatch despite the fact they aren't aware of enemies.

- Units in guard towers seem to get stuck in prone if supressed. They don't pop back up and take shots like they do in vanilla.

Tipping point mission:

- Debugging balls without corresponding units appearing inside town side entrance to camp.

The above require further testing to verify.

Edited by stun

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are testers locked in for now? I'd definitely like to take a look at this. I've been playing Arma for a couple years now, almost exclusively in the editor.

I'm curious about the fire and movement changes. I started another thread about it, but would another option to be to prioritize movement over anything in certain situations? This is doctrine for most modern militaries. Say you are in a combined arms ambush where the enemy is opening up from a treeline while dropping mortars, the BIS AI would immediately seek cover and attempt to return fire, regardless of accurate IDF hitting them. That would call for your units to charge into the ambush in reality to get within minimum range of the mortars and within hand grenade range, however the AI act much too cautiously.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With the full vanilla Episode 1 fresh in mind, i tested bCombat. Both in regular difficulty. Left all settings in default.

Here's my report: (preliminary, i wanted to have some more time with it to test specifics)

- Group leader rushes to the front a bit too much, hard to keep up with him - First noticed at "Situation Normal" and then in "Radio Silence" after Mike 26 clearing

- Some enemy AI facing walls inside buildings, two of them, didn't notice it when vanilla but might have been just bad luck - During 2nd group engagement in "Crossing Paths"

- Morale appeared to have affected my AI group towards the end in "Tipping Point", slowing them down significantly,

they were still operational which is good, it does not look overdone, it falls on the mission badly just because of the urge for the player to advance so much to avoid the mortar,

i was worried this could get AI stuck waiting for me to fall back and rejoin, but they ultimately catched up with me

- Overall stance use was noticeable, enemy AI hid themselves better (can be placebo effect), but they appeared to crouch on the tower structures to better effect, making player's life more difficult (good)

- Only once, after an area was clear, it appeared to have taken some time to release danger behaviour due to the script, but if so, it did release

Lastly not sure if due to bCombat, but in the Maxell camp just before "Tipping Point", some Ai was like:

... i've seen this before, just not recall it in A3 so far. (Could it be leftovers from previous mission AI behaviour state?)

I'll try to use bCombat in some more strict tests, in any case your use of morale to gauge/affect AI reactiveness looks promising. Some tests i did some time ago upon which i had my eyes on morale, left me very intrigued, it appears to conceal some relevant vanila AI stuff (aside of merely triggering some fleeing behaviour).

Keep it up fabrizio. :)

Edited by gammadust

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does bCombat execute on AI unit that is ordered to move by the player? Like selecting the AI using F keys and click on map.. I don't notice much difference from vanilla.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know if this is a bug, per se, but I noticed that if my squad is in AWARE mode and I toss a smoke grenade or light near them, they will go into COMBAT mode.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello gentlemen,

good to see that feedback is converging onto some issues:

-Only one issue spotted so far and that is that AI squad leaders are very suicidal compared with vanilla.

I've looked into this a bit more and noticed that the greatest danger period for the squad leader seems to be after they call "area clear". The SL has a tendancy to sprint at max speed without caution as soon as he calls area clear. The rest of the squad still act cautiously for a while and so end up being far away from the leader. In my test missions this means that after the initial engagement the SL runs off on his own straight into the next set of enemies.

Hopefully reverting the priorities for leaders will do the trick.

With the full vanilla Episode 1 fresh in mind, i tested bCombat. Both in regular difficulty. Left all settings in default.

- Group leader rushes to the front a bit too much, hard to keep up with him - First noticed at "Situation Normal" and then in "Radio Silence" after Mike 26 clearing

This is going to be addressed by switching back to vanilla fore vs. movement logics for leaders only.

So i'm positive issue will be easily fixed.

- when reloading a saved game or reverting a mission after getting killed - units sometimes seem to be inheriting the previous bcombat state. For example if I revert the mission they will still be in combat mode at start of mission and using bounding overwatch despite the fact they aren't aware of enemies.

- Squads sometimes appear to be getting stuck in combat mode even though no enemies present

Lastly not sure if due to bCombat, but in the Maxell camp just before "Tipping Point", some Ai was like

... i've seen this before, just not recall it in A3 so far. (Could it be leftovers from previous mission AI behaviour state?)

I don't know if this is a bug, per se, but I noticed that if my squad is in AWARE mode and I toss a smoke grenade or light near them, they will go into COMBAT mode.

Looks to me all these issues are closely related.

Units switch to danger mode only when fired upon OR when some core AI event is triggered.

Probbaly some stuff, such as dropping smoke grenades as well as lights causes some event to be raised (Explosion maybe?), which is incorrectly interpreted as enemy by bCombat. I'm going to look into this.

Edited by fabrizio_T

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another idea to make the AI more 'human-like': it would be great if you can reduce order spamming by AI group leader, maybe use enableAttack false then sleep for a few secs to simulate the AI leader developing the situation.... but I guess that goes into bCommand scope, since it handles with leaders and commanding...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some answers:

Does bCombat execute on AI unit that is ordered to move by the player? Like selecting the AI using F keys and click on map.. I don't notice much difference from vanilla.

If you mean playing as group leader then yes, bCombat works as well (i usually play that way).

When in combat mode, you should be able to spot quite some difference in the way units move when ordered to.

They do move a lot faster, since they limit themselves to return fire IF attacked and to engage at medium-to-short distance (< 150m.).

- Some enemy AI facing walls inside buildings, two of them, didn't notice it when vanilla but might have been just bad luck - During 2nd group engagement in "Crossing Paths"

- Morale appeared to have affected my AI group towards the end in "Tipping Point", slowing them down significantly,

they were still operational which is good, it does not look overdone, it falls on the mission badly just because of the urge for the player to advance so much to avoid the mortar,

i was worried this could get AI stuck waiting for me to fall back and rejoin, but they ultimately catched up with me

- Only once, after an area was clear, it appeared to have taken some time to release danger behaviour due to the script, but if so, it did release

- if you have hearing on, units having no target may watch towards the general direction of the noise. It may look a bit weird, but i'm in doubt if it's worth to fix it in term of computational effort. Without hearing on i see no cause for this within bCombat.

- Care to elaborate about the "slowing down", i'm interested in this ? You mean your men were mostly crawling OR returning fire OR sticking to cover OR both things ?

- Danger to Aware switch on "area clear" is handled by default AI, bCombat is not interfering with this

Are testers locked in for now? I'd definitely like to take a look at this. I've been playing Arma for a couple years now, almost exclusively in the editor.

I'm curious about the fire and movement changes. I started another thread about it, but would another option to be to prioritize movement over anything in certain situations? This is doctrine for most modern militaries. Say you are in a combined arms ambush where the enemy is opening up from a treeline while dropping mortars, the BIS AI would immediately seek cover and attempt to return fire, regardless of accurate IDF hitting them. That would call for your units to charge into the ambush in reality to get within minimum range of the mortars and within hand grenade range, however the AI act much too cautiously.

Some insight posted here:

http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?167288-bCombat-test-candidates&p=2548054&viewfull=1#post2548054

Ambush behaviour involves much decision-making, which is out of the scope of bCombat actually.

That said bCombat does implement some experimental rush / assault behaviour (which is disabled by default).

Interestingly it was originally coded specifically for better advancing in combat mode under artillery fire.

I'll hopefully write about it later.

I'll add you to the testers list, you will receive next testing package, v0.12.

- Noticable fps hit/sluggish controls compared to vanilla on some of the campaign missions, particularly forest and night missions

- Units in guard towers seem to get stuck in prone if supressed. They don't pop back up and take shots like they do in vanilla.

- Hearing on or off? Can anybody else can confirm massive FPS hit? Early to deal with it and can't reproduce myself, but i'm interested to know.

- Good find with guard towers. Units are not stuck, but they pass much more time prone, units not moving AND recently under fire are commanded this way for safety. I think i'm going to force units to crouch rather than go prone whenever under fire and into buildings. Makes sense?

I am getting random various "XXX.SQF not found"s. It seems like it's only the three unpackaged scripts in the main folder that pop up like that though. And when they do, I don't notice anything wrong.

Not good. Please tell the file names for those .SQF files, i'm failing to reproduce the problem.

I just played Assault on Charkia and had no noticeable performance loss. I usually get between 24-30 fps on that scenario (except at the very beginning) and that's what I saw while running bCombat. So, if this is your unoptimized version of the mod, bravo!

Edit: I'd say, without the mod, I get about 4fps more on average - 28-32fps.

It's about what i see by running the same mission.

Usually i do see 15% peak overhead, with about 80 units battling at once.

Obviusly this kind overhead exists only in combat, when a lot of bullets fly by.

With no actual combat involved bCombat should average to give than 2% overhead: this is the advantage of event driven logic.

- Debugging balls without corresponding units appearing inside town side entrance to camp.

I'm positive that's simply a debug glitch: balls stay on spot when units enter vehicles.

---------- Post added at 15:05 ---------- Previous post was at 15:00 ----------

Another idea to make the AI more 'human-like': it would be great if you can reduce order spamming by AI group leader, maybe use enableAttack false then sleep for a few secs to simulate the AI leader developing the situation.... but I guess that goes into bCommand scope, since it handles with leaders and commanding...

Yes, there are many options, but that's more in the scope of a bCommand mod.

Edited by fabrizio_T

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
- Care to elaborate about the "slowing down", i'm interested in this ? You mean your men were mostly crawling OR returning fire OR sticking to cover OR both things ?

No significant crawling, they were returning fire and using cover.

In more detail, when running from the mortars just after Girna:

- The whole team started from the same ridge, by the time i had reached the second ridge, the rest of the team was still going down the hill. I was being assigned targets by our leader. I cleared the paras, noticed my budies where also engaging them, to then advance to the 3rd ridge, our gap increased. Our leader got killed by a mortar, which i believe further delayed them. My budies weren't crawling, they were simply in bounding overwatch movement, but took what looked like an eternity (i had already cleared the second wave of paras) and waited about 5 minutes before they finally rejoined near the exfil beach.

I have to say that i did not actually dislike their behaviour, it's just that the mission forces the player to rush a lot, what is there to dislike is mission specific i guess. Knowing how a group losing a leader affects morale significantly i layed the blame on that fact for the slow down.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No significant crawling, they were returning fire and using cover.

In more detail, when running from the mortars just after Girna:

- The whole team started from the same ridge, by the time i had reached the second ridge, the rest of the team was still going down the hill. I was being assigned targets by our leader. I cleared the paras, noticed my budies where also engaging them, to then advance to the 3rd ridge, our gap increased. Our leader got killed by a mortar, which i believe further delayed them. My budies weren't crawling, they were simply in bounding overwatch movement, but took what looked like an eternity (i had already cleared the second wave of paras) and waited about 5 minutes before they finally rejoined near the exfil beach.

I have to say that i did not actually dislike their behaviour, it's just that the mission forces the player to rush a lot, what is there to dislike is mission specific i guess. Knowing how a group losing a leader affects morale significantly i layed the blame on that fact for the slow down.

I see.

If you care to check it out, you may change , within bcombat.sqf:

if(isNil "bcombat_allow_fast_move") then { bcombat_allow_fast_move = false; };

to

if(isNil "bcombat_allow_fast_move") then { bcombat_allow_fast_move = true; };

Then you may simply command your units to MOVE to some point instead to lead them, whenever some rush is desirable.

By doing so movement is prioritized against fire and units move faster, taking some more risks.

I mean units will end up moving towards destination ignoring formation and using cover individually.

They'll avoid engaging targets of opportunity farther than 150 meters away, while still return fire if attacked.

By the way, also AI led groups will take opportunity to move the same way, breaking formation and flanking more, acting individually.

Try assault on Charkia with bcombat_allow_fast_move = true and look at other BLUFOR groups, you'll see what i mean.

"Fast move" behaviour for AI led groups is still under review, consider actual implementation alpha state.

now i'd like to apologize to Mr_Centipede, i stated above that:

If you mean playing as group leader then yes, bCombat works as well (i usually play that way).

When in combat mode, you should be able to spot quite some difference in the way units move when ordered to.

They do move a lot faster, since they limit themselves to return fire IF attacked and to engage at medium-to-short distance (< 150m.).

But this info was just plain wrong.

There's a misconfiguration within current package, making that kind of enhancement disabled if you don't set explicitly bcombat_allow_fast_move = true;

So Mr_Centipede, you were right, sorry.

Problem will be fixed into next package, in the meantime please try the above code.

Edited by fabrizio_T

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

- Hearing on or off? Can anybody else can confirm massive FPS hit? Early to deal with it and can't reproduce myself, but i'm interested to know.

Hearing false.

It's not so much an FPS drop, but more the choppy feel Arma 3 gets when scripts or graphics processing is pushing the CPU cores to 100% I will try to do some more comparison testing between modded and vanilla. May be hard to measure though as the choppiness isn't really down to a raw fps drop.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Alright, got some testing time,

@Gammadust, (the following is because of your previous thread testing AIvsAI and the testing package you had for download) any way your AIvsAI mission could be used to test ai? from what i remember it is like fab's as it enables a different danger.fsm. If i dont launch with the addon from your AIvsAI package, and launch with bCombat, are there going to be any conflicts of interest. IE. are there any scripts that you have in the mission folder that would alter the AI's behavior. I ask because that is a quick and easy, fairly standardized test that could be easly used to see the differences. IE. One squad using bcombat and one default ai, similar to your tests but just replacing your scirpting and danger.fsm with fab's?

I also set up a 50vs50 ai mission in a city and one in the plains.

I am going to go and basically run a mission a few times and record the results. then run the same mission with bCombat and record. then go back and watch side by side and look for the differences. posting the video is a different story one its not going to be great quality, and two, I dont have any editing software to splice them together into one video. I would be uploading a ton of videos...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
your AIvsAI mission could be used to test ai? from what i remember it is like fab's as it enables a different danger.fsm.

They can and is exacly it's purpose, you guessed, these approaches implement concurrent danger.fsms but only so far as a small AI behaviour modification and debugging, which we can pass without.

If i dont launch with the addon from your AIvsAI package, and launch with bCombat, are there going to be any conflicts of interest. IE. are there any scripts that you have in the mission folder that would alter the AI's behavior. I ask because that is a quick and easy, fairly standardized test that could be easly used to see the differences. IE. One squad using bcombat and one default ai, similar to your tests but just replacing your scirpting and danger.fsm with fab's?

There may be because of unkowns, but unlikely as far as the mission alone does not affect AI at all, it only sets up the contest, basically it is possible, from my package you only use the mission itself (and ignore the mod part), but there is another requirement for the tests be relevant:

bCombat or any other mod that modifies AI would need to selectively apply itself to specific units/sides, those to be facing each other (perfectly doable). In current state "One squad using bcombat and one default ai" can't happen unless fabrizio tweaks bCombat for the effect. This mostly so because the modification is made at the level of danger.fsm which is of a config type. I would be happy if that mission script helps in any way, and i am totally willing to adapt it according to needs if necessary. It would be a fine time for that project to wake up. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
In current state "One squad using bcombat and one default ai" can't happen unless fabrizio tweaks bCombat for the effect.

Correct. This is a planned feature.

EDIT:

consider that a Vanilla AI vs bCombat AI clash would not be meaningful.

Vanilla AI would miss the enhancements, but it would not not suffer any bCombat morale hit.

bCombat AI is designed to be BETTER or WORSE than vanilla, depending on situation.

---------- Post added at 09:35 ---------- Previous post was at 09:22 ----------

I've further investigated the issue with AI units apparently stuck in combat mode without reason.

As expected reason does exists, some "garbage" AI events are raised into danger.fsm.

I'm positive it is possible to filter them out, though i hope BIS will take a look there some day ...

Just as an example, here are some interesting events raised during the campaign prologue (till mounting the truck):

"231.579 [bcombat v0.11] Frame:47866 L1: bcombat_fnc_process_danger_queue() - Unit=BIS_guide, Enemy=<NULL-object>, Cause=0, Penalty=30, Penalty sum=30, distance=1e+010"

Unit BIS_guide detected some enemy, but no enemy object.

"233.214 [bcombat v0.11] Frame:47923 L1: bcombat_fnc_process_danger_queue() - Unit=BIS_AA1Ambient4, Enemy=<NULL-object>, Cause=6, Penalty=0, Penalty sum=0, distance=1e+010"

Unit BIS_AA1Ambient4 detected an enemy dead body (?).

"249.355 [bcombat v0.11] Frame:52781 L1: bcombat_fnc_process_danger_queue() - Unit=BIS_logistics, Enemy=<NULL-object>, Cause=0, Penalty=30, Penalty sum=30, distance=1e+010"

Again, enemy detected, still no enemy object.

"256.105 [bcombat v0.11] Frame:58668 L1: bcombat_fnc_process_danger_queue() - Unit=BIS_logistics, Enemy=<NULL-object>, Cause=6, Penalty=0, Penalty sum=0, distance=1e+010"

Unit BIS_logistics saw another dead enemy ...

Edited by fabrizio_T

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Currently working on v0.12, to be hopefully released by the end of this week.

Here is the candidate changelog:

[b]v0.12[/b]
-----

Core:

* Better filtering of BIS core AI events raised into danger.fsm. 
* Distance limit of 500m. from source for event collection. 
* Minor tweaks and bugfixes.
* More configuration variables introduced:

	* bcombat_allowed_sides
	* bcombat_allowed_groups
	* bcombat_allowed_units

Gameplay:

* Balancing: Lessening of morale hits, about 15-20% in average.
* AI Group leaders reverted to default fire vs. movement prioritization. They should move as in vanilla, except for morale effects. This was done to avoid rushing.
* AI Units positioned over terrain level (e.g. guard posts, some buildings) should prefer crouching instead of going prone, when fired upon.
* "Fast move" enabled by default on Player led groups. This should make units under player command move faster while in combat mode.

Performance:

* Faster / lighter line-of-sight checks
* Basic code optimization for most functions

Edited by fabrizio_T

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Currently working on v0.12, to be hopefully released by the end of this week.

Ehmm..

Do you mean public available or..closed tests??..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ehmm..

Do you mean public available or..closed tests??..

Sorry if it wasn't clear, still private testing.

Next release is going to fix most of the issues currently reported, so we may begin balancing / optimizing stuff.

EDIT:

to anybody interested, i'm willing to allow 3 more testers in, to reach 20 total.

Some dedication needed. Read first post for requirements.

Edited by fabrizio_T

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

pretty sure were still doing closed tests.

ok, time to report some of my observations.

for starters i launched everything default style, with most differences being noticed in the 50v50AI mission. Honestly it was hard to notice the difference. After a few missions i could see that the AI were Not flanking as effectively, they often hung out too long(getting them killed) at corners facing the wrong dir( facing the wall or object). They were not readily engaging targets. their rules of engagement seriously limited their fire. You could almost see the gears grinding when they had clear line of site, but wouldnt shoot. Often times getting themselves killed because, "they couldnt take the shot" (morale speaking, they had LOS). This would also happen a lot getting them killed. Including what others have said about the team/squad lead going rambo. He(SL/TL) often hangs out in the open to long on first contact, getting himself killed almost every mission almost every time.

so then i enabled AI_hearing. Honestly didnt notice a thing. I have seen an enemy kill a team mate of an AI, while they were close.. the surviving friendly team mate never once moved/ looked to where the shooter was, again, often resulting in the death of that unit... The killer would be no more then 20m away gunshots are very audible, however, the AI seems completely unaware that his buddy was just shot by someone directly left/right/front/rear, based on sound. only until the friendly survivor has LOS does he engage(per moral/engagement rules) however, it would seem that if you mis-fire at a distance they will hear that.... kinda wierd..

then i enabled fast_turn. because of above i thought it might have been a "turning to enguage" issue. Enabled, I noticed that the AI would Twitch, tward their target. and by twitch i mean. they would turn, then suddenly snap back to their previous pos(+ a few deg), then turn again and snap back(again close to their original angle, plus a few degrees). Once disabled this behavior dissipered. something is buggy in your turning function.

then i enabled fast_move for rushing. AI were borderline suicidal, turned it back of.

I then enabled tight_formation. AI would be way to close to each other. as if they were constantly put in "FILE" formation. They would all get mowed down. turned it off

It wasnt until i enabled debug balls that i saw something to play with. The supression settings, needed to be tweekd. IMHO

I ended up lowering most of the values. What i noticed was that a small firefight would completely drain their moral. I would see a lot of red debug balls, sometimes they would turn purple , the ai would run away (away from the enemy ) and then after a few hundred meters their debug ball would turn white again. As if they were in a short tactical retreat to regain moral. then they would come back to the fight ( i have fleeing and surrender Disabled).

most of my supression values are now:

// Suppression-related params

bcombat_penalty_bullet = 0.25

bcombat_penalty_flanking = 1

bcombat_penalty_scream = 0.25

bcombat_penalty_enemy_unknown = 5

bcombat_penalty_enemy_contact = 10

bcombat_penalty_enemy_close = -10

bcombat_penalty_casualty = 25

bcombat_penalty_wounded = 5

bcombat_penalty_fire = .25

bcombat_penalty_recovery = 1

so far i see that this has GREAT potential!!!!! In general i can see the rules of enguagement hindering AI, in some situations. I have seen many times the AI had Clear LOS. but didnt take the shot. I imagine that it was a moral issue. but after enableing the debug i could see that some of them were a %100 percent moral and they wouldnt shoot to save themselves.. and often died or got a team mate killed by not killing the enemy.

I can see how this might "slow ai down" as they tend to hang back instead of keep moving (as soon as their in contact)

One issue i would like to point out. At one point in my testing i had my EnemySkill set really low = 0.2.. and FriendlySkill = 0.6... I was on Blufor, and I noticed that we were getting Slaughtered.. I mean F'd up. from an enemy that was .4 less skillfull. On a scale of 0-1 thats a decent chunk of skill's.. And it would seem that they were at a skill level of 1. Almost every time blufor was whiped out.

I went ahead and even'd up the score and set them all to skill =0.6 in my profile. now for some reason things seem to be balanced.. its about 50/50 chance that one side or the other will win.

With the tweeked Supression settings. The Attacking force has to keep the heat on for the enemy to loose moral.. if they slow down or allow time for the enemy to regoup and recoup then they might just survive...

VERY NICE WORK FAB!!!!

Cant wait to get the next patch

I know this isn't a part of the testing.. but i know that this is going to conflict with TPWCAS. any plans of integrating LOS and suppression as it is in tpwcas into bcombat.. If not, is there a way to "stack" the bdetect_callback function? I ask because i can already see the potential for these mods to work together, but since they both use bDetect, there is going to be issues. Any insite. I did a quick test and the only observable issue was the Callback function..

Edited by Lordprimate

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

×