Thoughts about the AI

[marez12 17]

Hi everybody; 

I started playing combat mission a couple of months ago CMSF2 to be more precise. And I walked through it's mission editor, something blew my mind, with basics command it was pretty easy to set up an AI battle plan, against a player. And I thought why not doing the same for the arma 3 AI? 

AI modder as far as I can tell want the AI to be as independent as possible, so it doesn't require much to do from the mission maker to set up group and defenses. It's great in a way that it requires less work from a mission maker or a zeus editor to control the AI, and they can focus on other parts of the scenario. Even though so far those mods have been great, I started to wonder if we did focus on the wrong things. I mean would it be possible to just focus on the  basics AI individual movement and group movement and then thanks to some commands, waypoints and markers allow them to execute some  complex maneuver, or use covers. 

For exemple: 

I set up a group with 9 soldiers in it:

1) I set up an attack waypoint. 

2) I put markers over position in wich the AI will use to take cover and make fire and maneuver. Like: Position A, Position B... Or infiltration routes. 

3) Set up an area in wich the AI will be looking for enemy contact around the attack objectives. Like: An area marker with a line to activate a S&D mission in said area. 

4) Let the AI hunker down in said area. 

 

This would allow the AI thanks to those simple set up, use fire and maneuver tactics, supressive fire...  without too much calculation, like finding a path for the AI to take etc.. 

 

An other thought I had about this, is when I saw LAMBS AI mod, and the way we can use CBA object Building position, to make the AI use the terrain more effectively. Like setting an area in wich the AI will be able to take cover thanks to the terrain. Setting up an area marker in wich we place building position so if the AI is under attack it can decide to use this place as cover. 

 

I know performant AI is tough to run due to the amount of calculation needed. But i was wondering if it would make things run smoother this way. 

 

Thanks for your answers! 

[Jackal326 1172]

I fully appreciate what you're saying and I see where you're coming from. However, wouldn't your method lead missions to be less replay-able due to the AI reacting in an almost identical fashion every playthrough? One of the huge draws of the ArmA franchise in my opinion is its replayability and somewhat unpredictability with regards to how missions play out.

Even such a simple scenario of having 2x 12-man squads shooting it out on a runway 100m apart can have widely differing results each time.

Your method would certainly make for a more entertaining and immersive experience for the player and would definitely make a nice option - but I'm glad it isn't a mandatory method as it would certainly curtail the broader replay options, not to mention adding a lot more micro-management to mission-making.

[marez12 17]

I know it would make things less replay-able; but there is a nice design option that is showcased in Combat mission. It's to allow the ai to choose from a couple of paths. And yeah for public server missions it would be definitly a no go, it makes things more linear for sure. But for mission played just once, it would improve significantly the AI effectiveness.

Tbh I'd love to see that as an option!

 Just to give you an idea of what I'm talking about.

[Jackal326 1172]

On 9/19/2021 at 2:42 PM, marez12 said:

But for mission played just once, it would improve significantly the AI effectiveness.

I agree 100%. A multi-player group I used to be a part of used to hold weekly operations with deep over-arching storylines that ran for several weeks or months. Having better (and certainly more predictable) AI would have helped us achieve so much more without the need for one or more of us playing as certain members of the OPFOR to achieve something more closely resembling human-like behaviour. That said, I often used to volunteer for such roles as I really enjoyed the tense nature of the scenarios but that is drifting a little off topic.

Again, I just want to reiterate I'm certainly not against this as an option, but I'm glad its not the main (and only) method.