Anti AI cheat mode

[vilas 477]

ofpforum - than why they shoot me ?

second soldier was skills at minimum

it was wood in north sahrani

i was east sniper

soldiers were : soldier and AT soldier

mission was : clean road of at soldiersh, that sla bmp convoi can cross road safe

i shot one at soldier from 250 meters

and rest is in my posts above

[whisper 0]

KnowsAbout article in the Biki (and the discussion going with it) has a bit of information on how the AI knowledge is handled in OFP. Information has not been updated for ArmA, though, but the system should be more or less the same. Unless BI comes with a completely different thing

@ vilas : I've seen 2 different behaviors in missions, myself. One is the one you stated, but ut's rather rare.

More often than not, I shoot at one, and the other one either drops to the ground and tries to catch me, but he's slow, or he simply continues.

In the 1st "sniping" mission in campaign (the one were you fire on a convoy from a water tower), all the AI could do when I engaged them was run around aimlessly for most of them. 4 or 5 perhaps tried to close the distance. None of them fired accuratly enough to scare me. All ended dead.

I didn't put my AI difficulty slider all the way to the right, just 1 clic away from the right.

I don't know what triggers these differences in behavior, though.

[Dwarden 1125]

maybe all links to AI awareness bugs

like You said crawling person gets detected easier than slow walking

i also wonder if AI detects unit slower if You are in shadows casted by object/tree/bush ...

yet i agree that there should be some "chaotic reaction" code to prevent instant 180 degree turns & return fire ...

and AI should run more often for cover first then start search for attackers ...

[fasad 1]

I think all these problem are caused by the AI knowing exactly where you are too quickly. A larger "grey zone" of knowing roughly which direction you are in, but not exactly enough to fire upon you would be a great improvement. I understand that creating believable AI in a realtime game environment is an extremely hard task, and thorough line of sight calculations are likely quite resource intensive!

[SmallBlackSheep 0]

Apart from the AI knowing too well where you are, I've the feeling there's another problem: It seems the AI (or its weapons) shoots more accurately. On a wide open field (~500 m) I nearly need a whole magazine to hit the AI two times to kill it. That's with the M4 with ACOG, and I can clearly see the tracers hitting the ground a few pixels around the AI. This is okay I think, but the AI on the other hand only needs three or four shots, and that's with an AK with iron sights.

Or maybe it's just me aiming badly.

[fasad 1]

AI armed with AK74/M4 will only fire upon a target at a distance < 400m.

I created a scenario with the player being either a SLA AK74 rifleman or a Blufor M4 aimpoint rifleman, standing 395m apart facing each other. The player had to be revealed to the AI for it to know of the players existance. It took the AI 5~10 shots at about 3 shots per seconds to hit me with either rifle. After about 10 shots they stop shooting.

I have to agree that the AI is way too accurate at such a high rate of fire at such long distances. If the rate of fire was reduced to say 1 shot per second, i think it would be reasonable that they have a 10~20% chance of hitting a stationary, standing target. I can hit in these conditions with 2~3 shots.

A moving target at this range seems not to pose much more of a challenge to the AI, which is a bit unrealistic. I found it to be at least twice as hard to hit a running target at ~400m, needing 3~8 shots.

[Sugsilla 0]

My two cents. I think that AI has been problem in games from weary beginning of the first games. AI need to cheat to work. It would be too consuming to make realistically behave simulation of the behaviour for AI soldier. But trick is to make it that player can’t notice when that cheating happens. But a personally I get feeling that Arma brings nice step forward at graphics but at AI takes perhaps baby’s first steps.

Don’t get me wrong. I don’t want to be that rambo who kills division of mens using only pistol, but I get that old little annoyed feeling that AI is doing that ill behaviour again. Part of that feeling is sometimes those amazingly fast reaction times, at time to time, and sometimes those weird spotting trough smoke, darkness, foliage, or even walls, but perhaps its more widely they behaviour under fire. Perhaps I should explain it that they aren’t affected by suppressing fire, and that goes for both ways. When I shoot them with MG they try to run around and I get that Matrix feeling that they are dodging bullets, instead that they try to find the cover and save they lives. And same seems to be that AI never uses suppressing fire at players. And strangely I don’t get feeling that it does matter do I run or crawl from AI:s point of view.

I rather like to see that perhaps AI should work that way that they MG starts to fire suppressing fire at players, and meanwhile rest of them is trying to take a cover and try to organise it for more accurate fire later and perhaps send a few soldier to flank the player at the same time when rest of them prevent player to move better cover. Another thing is that when you shoot a sniper rifle at AI player that is too far to shoot back, they won’t try to find proper cover to save they souls and perhaps then should call help from other units at they side to handle nasty sniper. I think that there is tons of videos in net where they call even some artillery or aircraft support to handle some insurgent. And perhaps I can continue this list more and more, so after all I just hope that they tweak some AI behaviour that it will stand more side by side with graphics.

Ps. I’m not sure is this kind of same thing with different words but have someone ever thought why player is allways out of ammo? And when they meet any corpse from AI player you can salvage almost full ammunition they have carried? Why they didn’t use those ammunitions to stay a live like player do?

[NeMeSiS 11]

Ps. I’m not sure is this kind of same thing with different words but have someone ever thought why player is allways out of ammo? And when they meet any corpse from AI player you can salvage almost full ammunition they have carried? Why they didn’t use those ammunitions to stay a live like player do?

Have you ever noticed the players killcount is exponentially higher then that of the AI's?

EDIT: Which is also something i dont like, 1-2 kills per mission would be fine IMO, i still feel like rambo sometimes.

AI's should retreat much sooner IMO and it shouldnt only depend on their rank and how many groupmembers they lost but also on the friendly/enemy ratio in the area and maybe some other variables.

AI's using cover effectively in firefights would be awesome but its not a realistic expectation.

I would be happy if the AI would decide a bit faster on what they are going to do, just a few minutes ago i saw 1 AI with 2 enemy AI's in 5m front of him. He shot one immideatly, then started aiming at the second one but halfway he turns the other way around and wants to run away, only to get shot in the back.

Ofcourse this doesnt happen constantly but it does kinda distract from the immersion.

[amrax 0]

Quote[/b] ]And how much bullets do you need? More then 10? The AI shoots more or less as good as players do, which makes perfect sense IMO.

NO WAY dude, they hit chest shots at 200m easily!

Quote[/b] ]They can look trough bushes on some occasions but thats a problem with the bushes, not with the AI.

No, that is AI.

Quote[/b] ]Nope, AI only shares information in their own group unless the GUARD/SENTRY waypoint is used.

No, that is not how it works!

Quote[/b] ]This is okay I think, but the AI on the other hand only needs three or four shots, and that's with an AK with iron sights.

Yep, that is our problem too.

Quote[/b] ]AI's using cover effectively in firefights would be awesome but its not a realistic expectation.

Why not, simply code tactics into their already "godlike" skills.

There isn't much to the AI, they simply know where you are and aimbot shoot you. Not exactly what I call "AI", they have no intelligence whatsoever!

And they walk purely by waypoints set for them, they never randomly go somewhere in order to countermeasure your assault for example. Zombie like they are with aimbot...

[NeMeSiS 11]

And they walk purely by waypoints set for them, they never randomly go somewhere in order to countermeasure your assault for example. Zombie like they are with aimbot...

Yeah right, never heard of a guard waypoint before?

Or the S&D waypoint? Have you even TRIED?

Quote[/b] ]NO WAY dude, they hit chest shots at 200m easily!

So do i. (and read my previous post about the values in the name.armaprofile for proper accuracy of the AI)

Quote[/b] ]No, that is AI.

No its a missing LOD in the bush.

Quote[/b] ]No, that is not how it works!

Yes it is.

Quote[/b] ]Why not, simply code tactics into their already "godlike" skills.

If its so simple then why dont you do it?

Quote[/b] ]There isn't much to the AI, they simply know where you are and aimbot shoot you.

Shame you never tried to read the .FSM's (which in itself only contain a part of the AI AFAIK) or did any proper testing regarding fleeing, proper use of waypoints, behaviours, etc etc.

Seriously, if you have no knowledge whatsoever you can post what you observe but you cant state it as a fact.

[redpride 0]

The AI needs a lot more improvement work..

On top of it all I find AI unbalanced between west and east. For instance, in the editor, I would set up a fight between 10 west rifleman, 1 M1A1 on side A and 10 east rifle men, 1 T72 on side B with all setup corresponding to equal rank and skill between the two. West would win 10/10 games! The M1A1 would destroy the T72 before the T72 would get in even 1 shoot at the M1 each and every time!

In OFP you get more or less one side winning over the other indicating the AI skill settings being used equally onto both sides.

[S.O.S 0]

... The AI gets its info from "us" uploading our player (position) to the game /server\ upon which the game tells the AI exactly where we are ...

Thats just not true.

[rom_un 0]

In the editor, put an AI at 5 meters in front of you. The AI must face 90° than you, you see his profile.

The AI react only when he turn the head to your side. That prove they didn't see at 360°.

When you are in his back, AI react to the first move, not before.

You can try many experience like put you and an enemy each side of a wall.

I didn't feel to have the same game than certain other author from this topic.

Am i alone ?

Not happy with AI decisions ? Scripts it !! Have you test the Group Link II Script ArmA and others ?

[dmarkwick 261]

In the editor, put an AI at 5 meters in front of you. The AI must face 90° than you, you see his profile.

The AI react only when he turn the head to your side. That prove they didn't see at 360°.

When you are in his back, AI react to the first move, not before.

You can try many experience like put you and an enemy each side of a wall.

I didn't feel to have the same game than certain other author from this topic.

Am i alone ?

Not happy with AI decisions ? Scripts it !! Have you test the Group Link II Script ArmA and others ?

Nope, you're not alone

The only time I've seen "magic AI" is when I've used the UPS script (Urban Patrol Script) which I am pretty certain uses getpos.

Other than that, it's sight & hearing that gets you found. The AI communicate between each other to be sure, but then so do we.

[amrax 0]

Quote[/b] ]Yeah right, never heard of a guard waypoint before?

After you engage them, not before. You missed the whole point!

Quote[/b] ]No its a missing LOD in the bush.

No, its not. read the link of wishper and you might understand if you have any intelligence.

Quote[/b] ]Shame you never tried to read the .FSM's (which in itself only contain a part of the AI AFAIK) or did any proper testing regarding fleeing, proper use of waypoints, behaviours, etc etc.

No its not, that is BS.

You just don't know how AI works.

I did test it and after a while they start to run to points way off, but they always use the exact same route.

You just don't know AI .

Quote[/b] ]You can try many experience like put you and an enemy each side of a wall.

Read a few posts on page 2 and you find it.

Quote[/b] ]In the editor, put an AI at 5 meters in front of you. The AI must face 90° than you, you see his profile.

The AI react only when he turn the head to your side. That prove they didn't see at 360°.

When you are in his back, AI react to the first move, not before.

As many have giving examples as I did, we can tell when AI looks at us. They simply were looking at a complete other direction, turned and fired a kill round.

The point is that they DIDN"T see us!

EDIT:

Quote[/b] ]And thank you to tell me that i'm a liar.

LOL .

Quote[/b] ]If its so simple then why dont you do it?

I centainly will.

[rom_un 0]

Quote[/b] ]As many have giving examples and I did, we can tell when AI looks at us

I've didn't read any example where you DON'T move. If you want to make a test, try separately VIEW and SOUND.

And thank you to tell me that i'm a liar.

[NeMeSiS 11]

As many have giving examples as I did, we can tell when AI looks at us. They simply were looking at a complete other direction, turned and fired a kill round.

The point is that they DIDN"T see us!

Quote[/b] ]No, its not. read the link of wishper and you might understand if you have any intelligence.

I know what he posted, RES bushes had the same problem.

Quote[/b] ]After you engage them, not before. You missed the whole point!

Indeed i did, and im sorry but on one hand you dont want the AI to know where you are and other the other hand you want them to attack you without having any waypoints whatsoever? Imagine making a mission and having no control on what the AI is going to do..

For things like that we have scripts like DAC and UPS.

Quote[/b] ]No its not, that is BS.

You just don't know how AI works.

I did test it and after a while they start to run to points way off, but they always use the exact same route.

You just don't know AI .

Not sure what you are saying here, but the AI will always plan the fastest route to his destination so it makes perfect sense, still not sure what this has to do with anything...

Quote[/b] ]As many have giving examples as I did, we can tell when AI looks at us. They simply were looking at a complete other direction, turned and fired a kill round.

The point is that they DIDN"T see us!

Seems like you missed some posts on page 2, i explained it there, its their HEARING, not their vision. OR other groupmembers who spotted you (But i assume that they werent there in testing conditions).

Im sorry but you really seem to have no clue whatsoever, observing what you see and then automatically state that as facts?

[2GvSAP_Dart 0]

Whoa, guys, let's not get to the point where you're pulling trousers down and debating which ruler to use to figure out who's better!

Movement is one thing, it's the ability of the AI to not only detect, but fire insanely accurately at long distances at a concealed, prone target.

The worst thing to try to find is an enemy that fires just one round from 300 meters away, and does nothing else. The bullet reaches before the sound...and even then, one only gets a general direction.

If one is in a city, the sound bounces about, making it sound as if it came from a different direction a lot of the time!

All I'm suggesting is that the AI have some dispersion of aim at greater distances. Heck, a three degree shift from center would mean that they would be suppressing fire at 300 meters rather than getting headshots on a prone figure.

As to mods and scripts, I would think that one shouldn't have to modify the sim in order to make it playable. One would think that "Normal" difficulty would be, well, normal.

At any rate, I'm glad I bought the UK import from gogamer.com, as I'm gonna need all the learning curve I can get before the official US release...

[amrax 0]

Quote[/b] ]Not sure what you are saying here, but the AI will always plan the fastest route to his destination so it makes perfect sense, still not sure what this has to do with anything...

No I mean that they run to places which don't make any sense, there is no tactical advantage or such where they run to, so why should they run there?

This indeed would be a partial observation.

Quote[/b] ]Seems like you missed some posts on page 2, i explained it there, its their HEARING, not their vision. OR other groupmembers who spotted you (But i assume that they werent there in testing conditions).

Yes but other people said it was their sight so I had to reply to that too and I was referring to other posts which you just red.

AI doesn't see, hear, feel or senses anything. That would be far far too complex to design for just game makers as I'm sure you would understand.

Quote[/b] ]Im sorry but you really seem to have no clue whatsoever, observing what you see and then automatically state that as facts?

Yes I observe too, but I do know how AI works regardless of an observation. I'm not just stating facts of what I observe... I 60% talk about how AI works regardless of the game, if you know what I mean.

Do you honestly don't get the point I'm making or are you just taking the piss at me?

Unless you refer to something other than me and skip my point.

What I said about the AI getting it's info is not by what I observed, obviously.

Quote[/b] ]Movement is one thing, it's the ability of the AI to not only detect, but fire insanely accurately at long distances at a concealed, prone target.

Exactly.

But regardless of what is said, won't you agree there is something wrong with the AI in ArmA?

Compare the AI to Far Cry for example and hopefully you'll notice. Just a simple example.

I know its a diffirent game and all blah blah!

[NeMeSiS 11]

see, hear, feel or senses anything. That would be far far too complex to design for just game makers as I'm sure you would understand.

Yes, yes they do, it may not be real 'hearing' but its definately simulated. (check the configs)

<s>Im not sure on how it exactly works but i assume that every unit can hear within a certain radius around him (radius would be based on the config setting sensitivityEar =) and every unit sends a 'sound' in a certain radius around him (the audible= setting).

When both units are within both radiuses the knowsabout will probably start going up.</s>

EDIT: Now that i think about it this cant correct. Its probably a radius based on the audible value and how further away you are the lower some value will be, that value is trown in a formula together with the sensitivityEar value and if it reaches a certain minimum the knowsabout will start going up.

Quote[/b] ]Yes I observe too, but I do know how AI works regardless of an observation. I'm not just stating facts of what I observe... I 60% talk about how AI works regardless of the game, if you know what I mean.

Do you honestly don't get the point I'm making or are you just taking the piss at me?

Unless you refer to something other than me and skip my point.

What I said about the AI getting it's info is not by what I observed, obviously.

Well you didnt know the above (you stated that there is no hearing at all) and you insisted that the AI was 'all knowing' so...

Quote[/b] ]No I mean that they run to places which don't make any sense, there is no tactical advantage or such where they run to, so why should they run there?

This indeed would be a partial observation.

Not sure what you mean, ive never seen the AI randomly run to some play, if they dont have orders they wont move at all.

They may have a 'engage' order which makes them find a good position to engage the ordered target.

EDIT: And im not sure how they choose their positions to run to, but its usually alot better then staying in formation.

[Second 0]

Quote[/b] ]Not sure what you are saying here, but the AI will always plan the fastest route to his destination so it makes perfect sense, still not sure what this has to do with anything...

No I mean that they run to places which don't make any sense, there is no tactical advantage or such where they run to, so why should they run there?

This indeed would be a partial observation.

Quote[/b] ]Movement is one thing, it's the ability of the AI to not only detect, but fire insanely accurately at long distances at a concealed, prone target.

Exactly.

But regardless of what is said, won't you agree there is something wrong with the AI in ArmA?

Compare the AI to Far Cry for example and hopefully you'll notice. Just a simple example.

I know its a diffirent game and all blah blah!

then you plan their waypoints wrong way. You just don't know how the whole thing works. It takes long time (using and learning) to understand how AI in OFP or ArmA works, It isn't that easy and simple as you think. And Ofpforum knows guite lot more about it than i

What i can say that i'm with Ofpforum.

Farcry's AI... It just runs and shoots from hip. It don't offer challenge. Those rocketfellows were only one, which offered challenge... Snipers were standing (waiting for to be shot), and mercs and rest of the monsters were just moving, shooting and proving to be easy targets. I don't know how much missioneditor can affect to it. In OFP/ArmA missioneditor has big affect to overall efficency of the AI. Few small things (behaviour, combat-mode etc...) can make AI to behave agressive or passive (selfpreserving). To my knowledge Farcry can't offer that kind of felxibility.

And they do have "hearing".

[Infam0us 10]

they were not in ghroup, two soldiers, non in group !

Infam0us - this must be LOD of models error or ear error

what is this error exactly?

And DMarkwick, yes I know they can hear you, but why is it there gun follows exactly where you go even when you creep around?

[vilas 477]

infamous read prevoius posts than you had read

[amrax 0]

Quote[/b] ]EDIT: Now that i think about it this cant correct. Its probably a radius based on the audible value and how further away you are the lower some value will be, that value is trown in a formula together with the sensitivityEar value and if it reaches a certain minimum the knowsabout will start going up.

In that link it said that their awareness raises from 0 to the "magic" number on the first clue no matter how small, that is not good nor realistic.

You had a good example though, but it would get that info uploaded from the game, not the AI hearing himself.

Quote[/b] ]Well you didnt know the above (you stated that there is no hearing at all) and you insisted that the AI was 'all knowing' so...

Damn, you still don't get what I'm trying to explain?!

Quote[/b] ]Farcry's AI... It just runs and shoots from hip. It don't offer challenge. [....] felxibility.

Than you have put it below medium, the difficulty.

Quote[/b] ]hen you plan their waypoints wrong way

I didn't plan their waypoints.

And ofpforum you dodged the Far Cry question...

[sickboy 13]

yes, they get the data uploaded from the game as you call it.

But I dont think that it works as you try to paint it....

The game simulates distances of hearing things, seeing things, ... if soldier is behind a camouflage object, then soldier can't be seen etc. etc. it are all calculations done by the engine.... So yes, the "data gets uploaded from the game" and the AI doesn't "Really" hear you... Stil it simulates the hearing and seeying capabilities of the real thing (altough it might need tweaking, I leave that up for discussion).