Player can be driver and gunner at the same time... only solution

[[evo] dan 79]

Explain how it ruins the game. Really. Name one serious difference.

THE CONTROLS ARE THE SAME. You give the exact same orders. THE CAPABILITIES ARE THE SAME. The difference is that you're simulating a human driver... with a human driver. Instead of a human driver... with a computer that can only move in straight lines if it's lucky.

So a human driver makes a tank a super-maneuverable machine of doom? And by the way, a turned out driver has better situational awareness than a scoped-in commander. So a manual driving tank is still less useful than having a real driver. But it somehow ruins the game? Just because BF does it? You are a fanatic.

But the AI is useless. And you know it will never be improved so that it can stand in for a player. Seriously, pressing W to give a move forward order is the same as pressing W to move forward directly. Except the former is fucking broken because the AI doesn't know how to back up. REALISM!

NO ONE has suggested that manual driving be made standard or anything more than an option. NO ONE has suggested crewing tanks with only one soldier.

This thread is a good acid test of ArmA fanboy idiocy.

Spoken as someone who loves pretty much every bit of obscure realism that ACE churns out. But you can't sabotage gameplay for the appearance of realism.

^this tbh. Having you control the AI would be almost the same as it would now, except that you wouldn't have the annoying forwards, left messages popping up, those really annoyed me in Iron Front when driving tanks. Hell even putting a slight delay on the commands might help. But the AI still needs to have improved driving skills.

Also with the new armor setup, you could kill the driver, mean that you would have to actually switch to drive don't forget. So as long as you have to have an AI driving, I am happy for a 'manual drive' option.

[motorizer 12]

Agree 100% with the OP, this has been the worst problem in the series for me right from day 1 and it puts me off ever using tanks.

What he's asking for can be seen as giving orders to the driver that he follows, rather than orders that he doesn't follow as it is now...

Not sure what the people who say "play with real people then" are even doing posting in this thread, if they only play multiplayer, it doesn't affect them either way.

Edited November 13, 2013 by motorizer

[laverniusregalis 10]

Alright, how about a different solution? Why don't we just smooth out the existing system we use to give orders to the AI manually, so there's a timeout on the voices so there isn't as much "FORWARD - FAST - LEFT - FAST - RIGHT - FAST - RIGHT - FAST", and there's a smaller delay between pressing and the action being executed? We won't have to add a player-is-commander/gunner-and-driver-at-same-time system in, then.

Edited November 13, 2013 by steamtex

[-Gews- 1]

I find the biggest problem is when turning. It's very clunky and imprecise.

[Kerc Kasha 102]

Except the commander can't reach the fucking controls from his seat, and he isn't about to climb out of his seat in battle?

What does that have to do with anything I said?

How it currently works:

WSAD Orders AI to move in the direction you want, occasionally glitching out due to how the AI's driving reacts poorly

How it can work by having an AI driver allow the command to directly WSAD bypassing AI entirely:

WSAD orders the AI to move in a direction you want, without glitching because it works the same as if you were driving it.

Now maybe I'm just the dumbest man alive but how is the second option any less realistic than it is currently? Or are you seriously trying to argue that the AI's poor driving skills are 'realistic'

[rundll.exe 12]

Just one little note: We fixed this in the OFP CTI community with a very simple mod: We simply removed the sound files (and proper config I guess) of the LEFT RIGHT FORWARD (etc) and it turned out, you get the exact same behavior as direct control! (The driver responds with an action AFTER the voice command has played, so there's no delay anymore.)

Now I'm not surprised if this would still work in A3, and I'd welcome such a mod, because without it, it's just really really really annoying to drive a tank by voice commands. I've completely abandoned tanks actually, just because of the frustration with the incompetent AI.

Actually, I'd like BIS to do this, until they fix their horrible AI driving...

[nicolasroger 11]

Kasha: the problem with manual driving is that it will be too instantaneous. Like way more then real life would be. Hope in a tank with a friend and try it (using a mic). You will see that it is no easy task to communicate clear instructions to the driver.

Manual driving would be ridicuslously too easy. Soo much that, yes, we actual prefer a clunky AI to an arcady system like that.

And yes I would like the AI behavior to be greatly improved too.

[Kerc Kasha 102]

Kasha: the problem with manual driving is that it will be too instantaneous. Like way more then real life would be. Hope in a tank with a friend and try it (using a mic). You will see that it is no easy task to communicate clear instructions to the driver.

Manual driving would be ridicuslously too easy. Soo much that, yes, we actual prefer a clunky AI to an arcady system like that.

And yes I would like the AI behavior to be greatly improved too.

I do all the time play with a player driver, and it's usually 500% easier to do so as you can communicate exactly what you want them to do and pay more attention spotting/gunning rather than worrying about the direction you are driving.

Add a delay in, there's barely any delay right now with the AI it's easily less than a second

[laverniusregalis 10]

Just one little note: We fixed this in the OFP CTI community with a very simple mod: We simply removed the sound files (and proper config I guess) of the LEFT RIGHT FORWARD (etc) and it turned out, you get the exact same behavior as direct control! (The driver responds with an action AFTER the voice command has played, so there's no delay anymore.)

Now I'm not surprised if this would still work in A3, and I'd welcome such a mod, because without it, it's just really really really annoying to drive a tank by voice commands. I've completely abandoned tanks actually, just because of the frustration with the incompetent AI.

Actually, I'd like BIS to do this, until they fix their horrible AI driving...

That's actually a good idea, remove the fast/left/right messages.

[nettrucker 142]

. . .

Actually, I'd like BIS to do this, until they fix their horrible AI driving...

BIS didn't fix the issue for 12 years, because it's a flaw dating back to OFP times. I do not have any hopes that this issue will ever get fixed. Most probably it's not possible otherwise I can't explain myself why the AI driving is still retarded.

[maturin 12]

Kasha: the problem with manual driving is that it will be too instantaneous. Like way more then real life would be. Hope in a tank with a friend and try it (using a mic). You will see that it is no easy task to communicate clear instructions to the driver.

Manual driving would be ridicuslously too easy. Soo much that, yes, we actual prefer a clunky AI to an arcady system like that.

.

Yes, it really is easy.

I have twice driven tanks for Unit 19 in Rolling Thunder massive PvP battles, crewing for people who serve in real-world armored forces.

There is no substitute for a human driver; it has practically every advantage over manually driving from a commander or gunner's position.

We need clunky AI drivers for following waypoints, and then we need to be able to take over for them in combat so we can carry out real-world tank tactics that rely on reversing and carefully navigating cramped areas. The AI isn't good enough for this yet, and probably won't ever be, but a manual drive option can be patched in practically instantly.

[-=seany=- 5]

I think the OP's idea is a good one. As long as there is a player controlled AI in the driver position, as they also mentioned. With that clause, I see no reason why any one should complain about realism. It would be exactly the same as now...except..your tank would actually go where you want it to..Amazing!

You should make a ticket for the tracker, if there inst one yet.

[maturin 12]

Suggest a difficult mode setting as well.

[CaptainObvious 95]

I think the OP's idea is a good one. As long as there is a player controlled AI in the driver position, as they also mentioned. With that clause, I see no reason why any one should complain about realism. It would be exactly the same as now...except..your tank would actually go where you want it to..Amazing!

You should make a ticket for the tracker, if there inst one yet.

This and maturin's comment on three fingers on WASD sums this up pretty well IMO :dance:

[[aps]gnat 28]

I think the OP's idea is a good one. As long as there is a player controlled AI in the driver position, as they also mentioned. With that clause, I see no reason why any one should complain about realism. It would be exactly the same as now...except..your tank would actually go where you want it to..Amazing!

Sounds like a good compromise for all, until you get people arguing about what they expect the AI to do .....

"The AI is STUPID!! The bastard won't let me drive over the top of the car/tree/bunker/chopper (etc) !!

[progamer 14]

I would like it more if the AI let me focus on shooting with the cannon while they drove.

[maturin 12]

Gnat;2557463']Sounds like a good compromise for all' date=' until you get people arguing about what they expect the AI to do .....

"[i']The AI is STUPID!! The bastard won't let me drive over the top of the car/tree/bunker/chopper (etc) !![/i]

Tanks CAN drive over cars.

What the AI actually does is refuse to reverse faster than 0.5 km/h because there's a fucking sunflower stalk next to the left track. And then we die because I was trying to shoot and scoot from hull-down like a real tank.

[metalcraze 290]

Explain how it ruins the game. Really. Name one serious difference.

Easy.

It will be possible to easily maneuver in tight spaces (city or forest), it will be possible to immediately hide from AT dude taking an aim at you or even dodge rockets once you spot him. Not to mention you are talking gunner + driver combo here. That's in addition to the game having these things called TAB lock and 3rd person.

This will lead to a tank outmaneuvering/outgunning infantry in tight quarters which is nonsense. IRL a driver has trouble seeing what's to his flanks, let alone to the rear where he is blind. Give the ability for the gunner to drive and you get the supermaneuverable machine of death. In contrast to IRL where tanks are very vulnerable in cities/forests and generally avoid those areas.

I mean why you even ask this question? There are many games that include arcade 1 man tanks and they all show the same result - a decent tanker wiping out whole squads in towns.

Either that or you and other people don't know that in ArmA you can already control the driver with WASD, the difference is that there's a slight delay between you giving the order and executing it (which is how it should be). He will also turn the tank with A and D for as long as you hold those keys down without "left - left - left" spam.

Edited November 15, 2013 by metalcraze

[Bouben 3]

Easy.

It will be possible to easily maneuver in tight spaces (city or forest), it will be possible to immediately hide from AT dude taking an aim at you or even dodge rockets once you spot him. Not to mention you are talking gunner + driver combo here.

Well, I must admit that this is a good point to be considered, metalcraze.

Seems to me then, it would have to be a compromise between AI and direct control. Therefore making it like in ECP for OFP where your driver would do EXACTLY what you've told them to do. Therefore even running a tank into a sea if you, as a commander, wanted him to do so. And yes, it worked very well in ECP back those days. The drivers were just direct, moved over walls, trees etc. It was good.

Maybe a possibility to switch (through the command menu) your driver behaviour between straightforward/autonomous would do the trick. Straightforward ("just trust me" - move over everything, into everything) and autonomous (current standard behvaiour).

In both behaviours the delay between a command and execution of the command would be preserved. Just the execution of the order would behave differently.

[maturin 12]

Easy.

It will be possible to easily maneuver in tight spaces (city or forest), it will be possible to immediately hide from AT dude taking an aim at you or even dodge rockets once you spot him.

Dodge rockets? In a tank? lolwut? A human driver will always drive better than a gunner-driver. They can turn out and look where they're going, instead of squinting at the enemy down the scope. Maneuvering in tight spaces is a laughable prospect when my turret is swung 90 degrees off-center and I'm spraying MG fire all over the place. There's a microscopic delay in movements that will go away, but that's it. In all other cases the human driver is better and the AI driver is just too gamebreakingly worthless to compensate.

That's in addition to the game having these things called TAB lock and 3rd person.

So why don't you remove those and stop trying to ruin the game by shackling us to the awful AI?

This will lead to a tank outmaneuvering/outgunning infantry in tight quarters which is nonsense.

I don't think you even believe that. You can't shoot and rive in confined spaces at the same time because the gunner has the narrowest FOV of all. You're just locked into arguing this doctrinaire position with religious fervor.

IRL a driver has trouble seeing what's to his flanks, let alone to the rear where he is blind.

IRL the driver has mirrors, periscopes and cameras. Only in ArmA's non-existent tank simulation is he restricted to a tiny viewport on the glacis. His situational awareness up close should be even better than the gunner's is now. You have ceased to argue for realism, and just try to defend the unrealistic status quo.

I mean why you even ask this question? There are many games that include arcade 1 man tanks and they all show the same result - a decent tanker wiping out whole squads in towns.

And it's all due to the gunner being able to drive. That's the most worthless excuse for an argument I have ever heard on this forum, at least in a post with halfway decent grammar.

He will also turn the tank with A and D for as long as you hold those keys down without "left - left - left" spam.

No, there is always leftrightleftrightleftright spam as I make slight heading adjustments on the move. Also, I dare you to say that the current situation is acceptable. I freaking dare you.

Also, I've been wanting to tell you how bullshit your signature is. ArmA 2 had no bleeding and no threat of death from wounds, as you fucking perfectly well no. And no need to pull bodies anywhere, unless you used the uselessly glitched injury module that no one ever turned on outside the campaign. Stop comparing ArmA 3 to ArmA 2 ACE.

[laverniusregalis 10]

Dodge rockets? In a tank? lolwut? A human driver will always drive better than a gunner-driver. They can turn out and look where they're going, instead of squinting at the enemy down the scope. Maneuvering in tight spaces is a laughable prospect when my turret is swung 90 degrees off-center and I'm spraying MG fire all over the place. There's a microscopic delay in movements that will go away, but that's it. In all other cases the human driver is better and the AI driver is just too gamebreakingly worthless to compensate.

So why don't you remove those and stop trying to ruin the game by shackling us to the awful AI?

I don't think you even believe that. You can't shoot and rive in confined spaces at the same time because the gunner has the narrowest FOV of all. You're just locked into arguing this doctrinaire position with religious fervor.

IRL the driver has mirrors, periscopes and cameras. Only in ArmA's non-existent tank simulation is he restricted to a tiny viewport on the glacis. His situational awareness up close should be even better than the gunner's is now. You have ceased to argue for realism, and just try to defend the unrealistic status quo.

And it's all due to the gunner being able to drive. That's the most worthless excuse for an argument I have ever heard on this forum, at least in a post with halfway decent grammar.

No, there is always leftrightleftrightleftright spam as I make slight heading adjustments on the move. Also, I dare you to say that the current situation is acceptable. I freaking dare you.

Also, I've been wanting to tell you how bullshit your signature is. ArmA 2 had no bleeding and no threat of death from wounds, as you fucking perfectly well no. And no need to pull bodies anywhere, unless you used the uselessly glitched injury module that no one ever turned on outside the campaign. Stop comparing ArmA 3 to ArmA 2 ACE.

Just gonna remind you guys that the controls are stupid because your guy waits until he's done talking for AI to register his orders and won't give another until he finishes saying his last.

[maturin 12]

The controls are stupid because the AI can't avoid hitting things, can't reverse and can't drive as fast.

And before anyone says this is realistic, it's not. The AI always knows where all static objects on the map are. It is perfectly aware of every large heavy obstacle it smashes into.

Shit, I don't care, make us wait for a small delay before we can manually drive the tank, BUT MAKE THE CONTROLS THE SAME. It's just about impossible to fine-tune your heading because the controls are a game of telephone, where every order is distorted by the time it is carried out. I can tell a human to drive a heading, but the AI can only wobble around chaotically. The AI driver should be following my every key press by rote, as if I was driving. Make a microscopic delay and the result is the same, except we don't have to deal with their retardation.

At the end of the day, the ONLY thing that matters is whether you can carry out real-life tactics in the games' tanks. If these tactics are impossible because of the AI, then the simulation as failed. This is the only definition of realism that matters.

[nicolasroger 11]

Well, I must admit that this is a good point to be considered, metalcraze.

Seems to me then, it would have to be a compromise between AI and direct control. Therefore making it like in ECP for OFP where your driver would do EXACTLY what you've told them to do. Therefore even running a tank into a sea if you, as a commander, wanted him to do so. And yes, it worked very well in ECP back those days. The drivers were just direct, moved over walls, trees etc. It was good.

Maybe a possibility to switch (through the command menu) your driver behaviour between straightforward/autonomous would do the trick. Straightforward ("just trust me" - move over everything, into everything) and autonomous (current standard behvaiour).

In both behaviours the delay between a command and execution of the command would be preserved. Just the execution of the order would behave differently.

I agree with that. And make sure that if you press Foward once, the tank keep moving foward until you press Stop (not until the W button is released). This would prevent people from actualy micromanaging the tank position 10 times a seconds like an arcade game but would still preserve the ability to have good control over the tank movement.

[progamer 14]

Take a look at this ticket I have create here: http://feedback.arma3.com/view.php?id=16102 It is for two new commands "setDriverOverride" and "driverOverride". These commands are from VBS and do exactly what people are asking for in this thread.

And before you say anything because they are from VBS, see this: http://feedback.arma3.com/print_bug_page.php?bug_id=4573

From Moricky:

"We don't want to simply port everything from VBS, as many functions wouldn't make sense in Arma. If you have any specific requests, please create a request for every each of them with explaining why you want them."

I believe this is the best solution to solve these problems and keep both sides happy.

[blackjacktom 10]

Removing the delay just for turning would at least make ordering the driver manageable.

I would be happy with just that and having the AI actually do what I ask (like being able to reverse).