"Aware" waypoint issues

[mr reality 0]

This may seem a little strange but i'm having an issue with the "aware" waypoint.

In flashpoint if you set "aware" your squad would jog along nicely until it reached it's destination. In ArmA the squad will often slow down and place there weapons in the shoulder position (much like the OFP "combat" order) which really slows the squad down. This may seem like a trivial problem but if i want to send my AI controlled squad half way over Sahrani it gets a bit frustrating, especially when the area is clear of any OPFOR. If i set the waypoint to "full" speed they will run too fast and not jog. Is this a new feature of the improved AI as i don't like it.....

[ACF 0]

I've had my first serious session in the editor today and I have also found the CombatModes a little perplexing. I ran a reasonably systematic test on the Ramadi airstrip with a BLUFOR infantry group doing a circuit at LIMITED, NORMAL then FULL speedmode in each of the Behaviours. Overhead fire was applied by me as a BLUFOR player to test reaction. The results were pretty consistent across the different CombatModes so I'll ignore those.

In the following, WALK is walking at the low port, ALERT is walking with the weapon up in the shoulder, RTF = reaction/reacted to fire, L/N/F = Limited/Normal/Full speedmode.

CARELESS: L=Walk   N=Walk        F=Walk      WP=Walk   Moves as single group, no RTF.

SAFE:        L=Walk   N=Walk        F=Walk      WP=Walk   Moves as single group. RTF but no movement unless fire continued!

AWARE:     L=Alert   N=Jog         F=Run/Jog   WP=Alert  Moves as single group. RTF then continued.

COMBAT  At all speeds group moves in two teams Alert/Jog and covering Prone/Crouch. Leader gets too far ahead. No RTF.

STEALTH:   L=Crawl  N=Crawl/Alert F=Crawl/Alert/Jog  WP=Prone/Crouch  Moves as single group. Leader gets too far ahead. No RTF.

Interestingly, groups in CARELESS and not NEVER FIRE will react violently to the player's friendly kills.

So, group speed only seems to be controllable in AWARE and STEALH modes. This seems to be a bit of a limitation. Whether or not these Behaviours are defined in the FSM files, any changes ought to be made to the 'engine' level to ensure that they are a standard. I am suggesting that they do need to be changed to give mission designers a few more options. My opening bid is:

CARELESS: L=Walk   N=Jog         F=Run/Jog   WP=Walk/Sling wpn   Moves as single group

SAFE:        L=Walk   N=Jog         F=Run/Jog   WP=Walk/Sling wpn   Moves as single group

AWARE:     L=Walk    N=Walk/Jog    F=Run/Jog   WP=lert/Crouch      Moves as single group

COMBAT:   L=Alert  N=Alert/Jog   F=Run/Jog   WP=Prone/Crouch     2x teams, covering/moving, non-leader team moves first

STEALTH:   L=Crawl  N=Crawl/Alert F=Alert/Jog WP=Prone/Crouch     2x teams, covering/moving, non-leader team moves first

Any other thoughts or opinions?

[Balschoiw 0]

Group speeds often vary because groupmembers who have problems in pathfinding for their designated formation position will try to keep up with leader. That´s why they change their stances. There are just not animations for every speed - behaviour - combatmode combination.

This is why...

BTW your test has a major flaw as you were on their side firing over them or at them. You have to use OPFOR to get real results.

From my perspective you are searching for things that don´t have to be fixed as they are not broken.

And yes, I´m editing in Arma a lot and also have been editing in OFP alot. I don´t see much of a difference there when it comes to combatmodes and speedmodes, except for the vehicles, specifically boats as they are not working 100 percent right now, but this issue will be adressed.

Quote[/b] ]In ArmA the squad will often slow down and place there weapons in the shoulder position (much like the OFP "combat" order) which really slows the squad down.

To me it seems that they are doing this when the path is calculated. As the object density is much higher in Arma than in OFP this results in some "thinklag" and they slow down until the leader hands out a working solution. Just my guessing from editing observations though. Aware also means that the squad is checking the surrounding for enemies and as players would do, they raise their guns.

[ACF 0]

There are just not animations for every speed -  behaviour - combatmode combination.

This is why...

BTW your test has a major flaw as you were on their side firing over them or at them. You have to use OPFOR to get real results.

... that is why the test was carried out on an airstrip with no OPFOR to try and get raw, repeatable results.  The test conditions are stated so the results are what they are. It's also relevant that most missions involve group movements before contact - the patrol round the base etc. - and these are the times people notice 'odd', 'unrealistic' or 'out of context' behaviour. This isn't an 'Arma AI are crap' whinge, it's an observation and, for what it's worth, one for the wishlist rather than the buglist.

We seem to agree on the key point:

Quote[/b] ]I don´t see much of a difference there when it comes to combatmodes and speedmodes

I am aware (from OFP) that there are combinations of anims used for each behaviour and, presumably, speed. I'm just suggesting that the combinations I've seen don't give either of us a lot of flexibility. As I implied in my first post, I personally think that AWARE should be less COMBAT-like: upright with weapons down while moving but crouched/prone and weapons up at halts/WP. What happens once they come under effective fire is not really relevant as then they'll go into COMBAT. The Behaviours aren't broken but, from my perspective, I do think they could be better.

[mr reality 0]

Quote[/b] ]In ArmA the squad will often slow down and place their weapons in the shoulder position (much like the OFP "combat" order) which really slows the squad down.

To me it seems that they are doing this when the path is calculated. As the object density is much higher in Arma than in OFP this results in some "thinklag" and they slow down until the leader hands out a working solution. Just my guessing from editing observations though. Aware also means that the squad is checking the surrounding for enemies and as players would do, they raise their guns.

The only problem with this is that i tested it out on the desert part of south sahrani, you have a good visibility so you wouldn't need to walk with weapon in shoulder. It just looks stupid.

I did notice the pathfinding problems that you mentioned however, but these where caused by small rocks (not the tiny ones) This would really mess up the formation and those lagging didn't sprint to catch up either.It's a shame the AI couldn't just "jump" over the smaller rocks by either running through them or skipping over the top as they only come up to the soldiers ankle.

[Guest]

Unless 1.05 has fixed safe mode, its a real shame right now that using patrols is much less visibly appealing -

As has been stated here, only way to have a patrol 'walk' while on waypoint plan with weapon not raised, is either safe or careless, of course, careless is a bad choice for a patrol, safe allows patrol to go into combat mode still.

Problem with safe, as soon as a patrol in safe mode makes contact with enemy or even catches a whiff of enemy presence nearby, they drop to the ground and never resume their wp plan ,id think re-setting their behaviour would prolly allow them to resume, but thats a potential ton of extra scripting work for a command (safe) that should be working the way it did in ofp...

My only choice has now been Aware for patrols, and, they walk their patrol paths like their hunting down Guba every second of the way...

[mr reality 0]

I don't even think the staggered column formation works in safe mode now either. Every time a placed a squad on safe/ staggered column they just went into column formation.

I would also prefer it if all formations would work with the safe command.

For me the safe command meant that they walked while there weapons were lowered, so i can't understand why that can't be implemented into all the formations.