AIs behaviour/improvement

[funnyguy1 0]

Did you notice that many mission in it take place at terrains that aren't much bigger than those from GhostRecon or BiA?

Good point lecho...and they`ve already stated that ArmA will be quite close to ofp in terms of units number on battlefield.

The whole `big battlefield with lots of units` thingy is in fact game2 with the dynamic real time war going on...

Besides, the missions we mailny play now are made by community missionmakers, and when you look at those from the oryginal campaigns there are even less units used.

[lecholas 2]

I had to add one more thing about so called 'scriptig'. Many people scream that if human-like behaviour of AI (like in COD) is achived by 'scripting' it is lame. As I said before all AI behaviours are scripted. They can be hardcoded or mission-relative. I think most of you agree that AI in OFP will not act resonably if you just open the mission editor and put some groups on the map. You can give them famous guard waypoint but even then they won't act like reall soldiers. To see something really happening you have to add some waypoints, triggers, scripts, synchronise them etc. Now tell me: is it much different than predefining path nodes in BIA or places where AI can take cover in COD? In my opinion it's not that different. We have to remeber only that scripts can be done better or worse. The more sensitive to player's moves scripts the better.

One more thing is that AI as it is 'artificial' doesn't always need to be smart. In many cases it only has to pretend it's smart using as someone said before me at least statistical 'echanisms. AI doesn't have to be more efficient neither. It has to be a bit less predictible.

Much of that pretending can be achived by nice animations (looking around, different variants of one animation, panicking anims, taking cover etc)

[Friedchiken 0]

Regards to scripting:

What I think would be cool if you could place "hint" markers to help direct the core AI towards specific tasks.

Something like "if this happens do this", would present some realistic looking decisions while keeping the AI reactions fairly free form.

[Second 0]

I just Don't Get it. Have you people played OFP just with Ai skilllevel at 0.1-0.4. Expert (skill 1.0) react far more quicker to threats. Remeber skill around 0.3 does have nearly any combat experience. Many humans react in firefights as Rambo (running, shooting from hip), as they are fresh. Some dock and grap to their pants... In OFP Experts react by terrain better than novices. ofcourse there are limits and stupidness, as OFPs AI has to handle big array of things.

It is up to editor how them behave. If squad detects enemy, it can be ordered to stop and find cover. With minor things AI can be boosted much, as generaly AI works well.

Btw. AI ain't that formation loving if it behaviour is assigned to combat. But hey in true life formation really has meaning, you won't run to some one elses fireline forexample.

If you are in wide open, moving is best defence as moving targets are difficult targets. Much harder than lying targets. AIs orders are still to move to next waypoint (mission completion might count on it). Machinegunners actually cover others movement for a while (short). AI finds cover, but in many cases it is more effective and safe to start shooting immediatly. Something also trained in military. OFPs general problem was too open areas (for sake of CPUs).

I'm happy with AI, i understand that it can't be better than me as i've played over 2 years intensively. I just try to think ways to boost it.

But then again my expetations for AA are mainly in AI. and if AI is the same (or just bit boosted) it might be that i won't buy AA.

[NeMeSiS 11]

I just Don't Get it. Have you people played OFP just with Ai skilllevel at 0.1-0.4. Expert (skill 1.0) react far more quicker to threats. Remeber skill around 0.3 does have nearly any combat experience. Many humans react in firefights as Rambo (running, shooting from hip), as they are fresh. Some dock and grap to their pants... In OFP Experts react by terrain better than novices. ofcourse there are limits and stupidness, as OFPs AI has to handle big array of things.

Very true, i always give the squad leader a skill of 1, then his squad behaves much better, and he gives more orders (so no more sending 1 men to the enemy)

[bravo 6 0]

i always give skill 1 to all ais

but they still act strange and stupid. hehe

thats why they need to be improved

[NeMeSiS 11]

i always give skill 1 to all ais  

but they still act strange and stupid. hehe

thats why they need to be improved

Well that is just strange, i always hated that "super AI" setting, as everyone is suddenly equally smart/good, which is just weird as a special forces soldier should be noticeably better then someone whos holding a rifle for the first time

[jj29 0]

The ai in opf was far better than such games as delta force 2 or 3 which were released around 2001.So let's believe that the ai in ama will also be good enough for a game released in 2006

[Sarge6754 0]

BIS! Please put in SENTIENT AI, that actually knows it exists and can actually feel emotions. I want to be able to charm my enemies into submission if possible! I want my enemy AIs to get distracted during battle because they are actually thinking about food while waiting to ambush the convoy! It can't be that hard!

But seriously, we do need a little bit more humanism in the Arma AI system. Nothing much more, but perhaps enemies that hit the dirt when battle starts or spray enemy locations with bullets if their 'skill level' is set low. That would strike a nice balance and definitely make me happy for another 5 years until game 2 comes out.

[NeMeSiS 11]

BIS! Please put in SENTIENT AI, that actually knows it exists and can actually feel emotions. I want to be able to charm my enemies into submission if possible!  I want my enemy AIs to get distracted during battle because they are actually thinking about food while waiting to ambush the convoy! It can't be that hard!

But seriously, we do need a little bit more humanism in the Arma AI system. Nothing much more, but perhaps enemies that hit the dirt when battle starts or spray enemy locations with bullets if their 'skill level' is set low. That would strike a nice balance and definitely make me happy for another 5 years until game 2 comes out.

Well, even small things like them saying "Run for your life!" when they are fleeing help alot, right now they might aswell just be running the wrong way, as you cant see the difference between attacking or fleeing

(Altough this is moddable i think)

And it would be awesome if they knew how to take cover behind objects..

Oh well, just daydreaming...

[sniper pilot 36]

When speaking about the gameplay. Many of people on this forum say that other games may have a good AI because they have small levels and can be scripted. That's true. But for many end-users who aren't going to make missions for the games it doesn't matter how the good AI is achived, if it is by predefined paths or also predefined but at the other lever - hardcoded. Did you play Brother in Arms Earned in Blood? It's AI was quite good when it comes to tactics. And let's get back to OFP. Did you notice that many mission in it take place at terrains that aren't much bigger than those from GhostRecon or BiA? So it is natural that the AI in OFP is compared to the other games. And for the end-user OFP loses in that contest because for many players it doesn't matter that could operate at bigger levels when it can't operate in squad based levels. Another thing. ArmA as OFP won't be (AFAIK) really simulator of big numbers of troops because of CPU useage and lack of Chain of command between the different groups. So we won't see company scaled battles. We'll se at best platoon scaled ones (I hope I'm wrong but I try not to expect too much from ArmA). And if we are to see platoon scaled ones we are justified to expect that AI on that level could be compared to other games which take place on small levels filled with up to 40 enemies.

Just some of my thoughts.

yeah and now with that streaming feature...

[Yarrow 0]

Ahh.. come on! A better AI then OFP is very much possible. it is a matter of adding some sensor technics to register what is happening where. then the pc just has to calculate what the enemy is to do next, based on the events that actually make an impact on the enemy forces.

so in stead of trying to make the AI "think" by them selves, and have things working 50%. I think my option might give a higher propobility of working.

And what bothers me the most is that prone-run-prone-run-prone-run some more-get killed stuff the enemy AI does. Isnt it possible to implant some simple tactics to the enemy AI by using vectors or wathever. like making them flank, cover eachother and move more tactically. Offcourse you as a shooter may not be seen by the enemy becouse they cant see you. (they dont have enough information)

And that comes back to that sensor thing i was talking about. if there is a implanted function that describes the amount of covar a specific area gives, the enemys propobility to see you is then calculated based on factors like the ai skill, sound, weather and distance for example. and the more time they spend scouting the area, the more chance there is for them to find you.

and if the enemy somehow cant get your exact position, they may know your approximate position, and therefore put down some coverfire, even if they are some distance away from you. (but approximetly in the right direction). And here impement a psychological factor aswell. (This might make an impact on the player cuz he might think the shoting acually is aimed twards him, even though it is not)

Depending of what information the ai has about their surroundings, their moral is calculated. This will decide how they might retreat if that is what they deside to do. they might retreat tactically or like animals.

simple things like this must be possible to implant. This will at least make things more entertaining and realistic instead of that run-prone-run stuff. all we need is that sensor thingy..

[Uziyahu--IDF 0]

Someone said that A.I. wasn't so practical on a console.

That's funny, because the A.I. in OFP:Elite is an improvement over that of OFP:R, yet they got it to run on a box with much lower specs than most machines running OFP:R.

Ask NAXASTA on the OFP:E board about some of the amazing things he has seen OFP:E A.I. do.

Lots of OFP's A.I. requires that the mission designer place units and waypoints intelligently, with an eye to the enemy side's defense/offense. Design your mission stupidly, and the A.I. will behave more stupidly. (e.g., program a squad without rocket launchers to engage 1 enemy shilka; program a UH-60 to fly into a zone infested with shilkas and strelas.)

[bravo 6 0]

Quote[/b] ]"Up to this point I haven’t lost a man yet, but that’s about to change as we move from a simple flank assault to some building-to-building fighting. The squad becomes hard-to-control and it will be harder to issue specific orders, especially when working with the AI."

link -> Page 5

The bold letter:

I wish this impoves in the final version.

Make it better for the game to be more interesting when using Ais.

edit: any suggestions how?

[sluggCDN 0]

Quote[/b] ]

-Together with the use of new animations, make the ai movement alot more fluent. No offense to BIS, but even though ofp ai is programmed to the death, they still are one of the most retarded ones around, because they are so robotic. They have to stop to turn, they have to stop to hit the deck, they have to stop to reload and so on. The original ghost recon ai code is probably the 1/10th of the ofp's ai code, and yet, the AI in ghost recon looks amazingly authentic, i especially loved the way they duck down and crouch-run to the nearest piece of cover if they get shot at. They hide and wait for you to assault,  and if everything goes quite for about a minute, they come out to investigate. Basicly, the ai need to not just be authentic, but need to look authentic too.

I totally agree with ryankaplan GR series games always had the edge on OFP when it comes to the visceral aspect of close range battle. Ghost Recon developers seem to aways know which small details of gameplay would make the game come alive as real as it possibly within the limits of the engine. GR doesn't have a large scale like OFP but when u are engaging an enemy squad u surely feel like u are in the middle of a battle. There are 3 things that help GR top OFP in the battle department:

1. human like animations of characters which includes a very extensive library of idle behaviour animations. ai just doesn't stand around like maniquens

2. punchy nicely acted out real life voice-over - u could hear when they panic in GR. They scream, shout order, curse etc.

3. very human realistic behaviour under fire. thoroughly realized fire-movement

ultimately in a game a player is interacting with virtual characters - everythign else is a backdrop to it. The more ai characters behaviour resembles human behaviour the more real the game experience will be. What do human solders do when bullets start whizzing? - drop to the ground or disperse looking for cover, then return fire; that is exactly what GR ai does. Anywho I'm very impressed with the latest GR:AW game especially with ai behaviour and animation. If only OFP would be like that....

[VISTREL 0]

Levels are awesome in GRAW. That first jump, and view distance is huge.

[Uziyahu--IDF 0]

GR:AW on the PC is quite impressive, but GR1 was crap compared to OFP. Perfectly constant running speed and breathing while running? Can you say "Replicant"?

Yes, GR1 got the CQB better than OFP(except for the very real clumsiness of moving with a weapon and gear), but let's not hear any baloney from you about engaging squads in GR1. That simply did not happen. You engaged individuals in GR1. Never squads. Not until GR1 was patched past Desert Siege and into Island Thunder did you begin to face off against small fire teams.

GR1 was mostly facing the highly-unlikely single soldier patrolling through the forest on his own.

It was Rogue Spear dropped in a forest, and that was when it was at its worst. GR1 was always better in an urban environment, which was to be expected, given that it was essentially the Rainbow Six/Rogue Spear engine updated.

Yes, the graphics, animation and A.I. weren't bad, but when you're a single enemy soldier with only yourself to worry about it's pretty easy to get that little right. It's not like the other enemy soldiers in GR1 actually HEARD and REACTED TO their buddies' shouts and warnings. GR1 enemy A.I. soldiers were player-seeking missiles on feet. They homed in on you nomatter what. It wasn't because they were listening to their buddies.

Quote[/b] ]Levels are awesome in GRAW. That first jump, and view distance is huge.

And the framerates rarely hit 30 on my 3 Ghz, 1 Gig RAM, GF 6600 GT, SB Audigy 2 system at very much less-than-ideal game graphics settings.

[Ukraineboy 0]

And the framerates rarely hit 30 on my 3 Ghz, 1 Gig RAM, GF 6600 GT, SB Audigy 2 system at very much less-than-ideal game graphics settings.

Your Graphics card aint that good so I wouldnt complain about the game.

[andersson 285]

When you wait for more news about Arma you can always be entertained by Ukraineboy´s negative attitude. I will miss him if (when..?) he is banned from this forum.

Sorry, couldnt resist. Usually I do not post pointless replies but I had to give Ukraineboy some credit.

[NeMeSiS 11]

Sorry, couldnt resist. Usually I do not post pointless replies but I had to give Ukraineboy some credit.

Myeah, he gives everythings a bit special flavour, hes entertaining, that probably the reason whe he hasnt been massivlely flamed yet

Anyway, In some of the latest AARs it said that the wedge formation was the only one BIS put it, would that mean that BIS still needs to add the others, or are they changing the way the squad sticks togother (ah bit more natural way?)?

[Ukraineboy 0]

Sorry, couldnt resist. Usually I do not post pointless replies but I had to give Ukraineboy some credit.

Myeah, he gives everythings a bit special flavour, hes entertaining, that probably the reason whe he hasnt been massivlely flamed yet

Anyway, In some of the latest AARs it said that the wedge formation was the only one BIS put it, would that mean that BIS still needs to add the others, or are they changing the way the squad sticks togother (ah bit more natural way?)?

I hope they add in a new formation for Urban combat...the staggered column just isnt good enough. I'd also like just a...non formation for militia's etc. I mean just a big group all in a big circle or whatever. I hate seeing militias in line formations etc.

[lecholas 2]

Good idea with untrained soldiers' formations Ukraineboy. Or maybe good solution would be better support for custom formations? Or even...( I had a dream ) Imagine that you can open a dialog in which you can set your formation just by dragging icons representing your squadmate to set their relative position to leader. This way you could dynamicly adopt your squad's formation to the particular situation... (I'm awake now)... nah... BIS won't make it

[andersson 285]

True!! When you think about it there is a need for a "militia/civilan formation". Random positions in a group.

In sweden its called "formation skithög" (formation shitpile, formation pile of shit or something in that manner....)

[DEAD_RABBIT 0]

You know what would be a good addition to ArmA (but impossible to add at this near-final stage perhaps).

The Euphoria engine.

Website

Video tutorials

It enables you to create dynamic animations by using behavior scripts and altering the settings and sequences of the behaviors to get a realistic animation. These animations can be created blending original animations, using props and restraints.

You could use this to make the AI act more sentient about themselves. By programming a ton of possible ingame situations using Euphoria and adding a variety of variables to the code, it enables you to apply them in almost any form of each ingame situation.

Example, you spot an AI in an urban area and open fire (assume your accuracy is shit). The AI detects a bullet impact nearby him or that he is being fired at, and that triggers the ingame situation. He ducks/looks around and fires back while searching for cover. You can program these sequences and the Euphoria engine calculates how the animation is going to look like. It doesn't make the AI smarter in any way, but it does allow the AI to look more advanced. Because it behaves/moves more dynamic to its environment.

You could even program the AI in such a way that the Euphoria engine kicks in when the player camera is nearby. So the AI starts the "act" a lot more realistic, based on the props that are in its surroundings. Or even based on the skill level of the AI.

It of course wouldn't improve the AI's ability to predict enemy movements and use tactics in any useful way. But the addition of the Euphoria engine alone, would make my brain tingle with excitement. To see the AI act according to their environment, and move in accordance with their own preferences.... in my honest opinion, it should be there or something like it. Just like how OFP revolutionized how large a 3D game level can be, the same feat, BIS should do with ArmA.

[lecholas 2]

Right. I'm tired of good ol' OFP animation system that forces soldiers to put a RPG on their back before dieing if they are hit when they've already started the animation. Transitions of animations really should be done better. And there should be animations for looking around, taking cover, panicking etc. As it was stated this wouldn't make AI smarter but it would make it pretend they're smarter