Anti AI cheat mode

[Infam0us 10]

infamous read prevoius posts than you had read

I see

[Second 0]

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.

The difficulty is "realistic" and i kill 10 of them with ease. "wait them to come for you and kill them one-by-one" is good way to deal with them, in almost every situation. But that is offtopic.

ArmA/OFP:

Then someone else has planed their waypoints wrong (missiondesigner). They just choose routes how to get to that waypoint, what they do quite good = using cover from observation. If there is any cover to use, that is. Ofcourse not always it works, but then again: that is what lack of info results. They also change their original route in right conditions (but never ingnore waypoints).

Here's few i've noticed:

Platoon of T-72s has circled to my back... performing big flanking move, when waypoint tells them to move by road and not mountain. They choose to "climb" across mountain.

-infantry squad pulling back to nearby woods when facing enemy.

-Squad which should defend (stay in one place), starts to pullback when seeing platoon of tanks.

-Squad, when spotting enemy airplane, starts to move inside woods to get cover from observation.

They don't know about you, if they can't hear or see you, other group doesn't give them info or if reveal (script command) isn't used. It's that simple, if you want that it's called radar, then i'm fine.

EDIT: If it isn't mission that you designed, then things might look like stupid. Because you don't see things like missiondesigner sees. One Grunt sees only minor piece of battlefield. Maybe they acted strange, because there was some other bigger threat (that they know about) than you (which they possibly don't know)... Oh that can't happen in Farcry as player is usually alone.

But one thing yet remains to be said: In urban warfare AI sucks quite a bit. Farcry's AI is better in use of cover. Expacely in build-in areas (ArmA sucks, Farcry rocks). In wilderness they act much better, but not in level of Farcry. Farcry just messes things by being too agressive and moving (which, by my experience, can't be fine tuned)

[amrax 0]

Quote[/b] ]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

Yes, but those objects aren't filtered well, to them its like there is barely any object (objects blocking yours and their view don't matter to them but they do to YOU). To them it is a matrix, for us its a virtual reality. - We could go into the depth of both of them if you like but I think that would get too complex for you! -

And their awareness jumps from 0 to the "magic" number on the first smallest clue.

For example, if I were to shoot you (not kill you) you wouldn't know my EXACT position, you'd know approximately where I were if you were paying well attention and had a high awareness.

You sure as hell won't drop to floor and shoot me with your first 5 rounds wihtin 10secs... Anyhow if you're shot your down on the floor in need of a medic, you won't do much at all (relay info to your commander perhaps). Unless you have super endurances of course .

I hope you understand what I mean here and not skip it and focus on something that has nothing to do with this example.

Quote[/b] ]paint it....

Thx for making me an artist .

Quote[/b] ]Platoon of T-72s has circled to my back... performing big flanking move, when waypoint tells them to move by road and not mountain. They choose to "climb" across mountain.

-infantry squad pulling back to nearby woods when facing enemy.

-Squad which should defend (stay in one place), starts to pullback when seeing platoon of tanks.

-Squad, when spotting enemy airplane, starts to move inside woods to get cover from observation.

Those are vehicles, obviously they would respond diffirent with vehicles than with enemy soldiers. DUH

Quote[/b] ]if you want that it's called radar, then i'm fine.

Not exactly, but whatever - call it what you like.

Quote[/b] ]But one thing yet remains to be said: In urban warfare AI sucks quite a bit. In there Farcry is better in some aspects (in use of cover).

Thank you.

Quote[/b] ]EDIT: If it isn't mission that you designed, then things might look like stupid. Because you don't see things like missiondesigner sees. One Grunt sees only minor piece of battlefield. Maybe they acted strange, because there was some other bigger threat (that they know about) than you (which they possibly don't know)... Oh that can't happen in Farcry as player is usually alone.

"If I design a mission it would look stupid..." that is a good one!

Did I ever say I "designed" a mission or are you making stuff up now? Yep you were!

And what difficulty did you play it? Easy+ right?

[sickboy 13]

We could go into the depth of both of them if you like but I think that would get too complex for you!

Conversation Ended there for me...

[whisper 0]

Quote[/b] ]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

Yes, but those objects aren't filtered well, to them its like there is barely any object (objects blocking yours and their view don't matter to them but they do to YOU). To them it is a matrix, for us its a virtual reality. - We could go into the depth of both of them if you like but I think that would get too complex for you! -

And their awareness jumps from 0 to the "magic" number on the first smallest clue.

For example, if I were to shoot you (not kill you) you wouldn't know my EXACT position, you'd know approximately where I were if you were paying well attention and had a high awareness.

You sure as hell won't drop to floor and shoot me with your first 5 rounds wihtin 10secs... Anyhow if you're shot your down on the floor in need of a medic, you won't do much at all (relay info to your commander perhaps). Unless you have super endurances of course .

I hope you understand what I mean here and not skip it and focus on something that has nothing to do with this example.

These objects do count for them

Every object's P3D has a special LoD defining what is "view blocking" for the AI. Usually, it is a rough copy of the 3D visual representation of the object (of course, less precise than the best visual LoD to avoid too much CPU stress).

Everything behind this LoD is hidden to AI. No matter what.

That does not mean, though, that they don't know you are behind. Obviously, if you hid behind the object while they were watching you, they KNOW you are behind.

The thing is, as long as they do not have Line of Sight to you (ie, as long as a "view blocking" LoD of an object sits between them and you), their "knowsAbout" factor for you slowly decreases. Once this "knowsAbout" goes under the "magic number", AI considers you as "not there anymore" (at this point, a AI leader will issue a "clear" radio command, for example).

As long as the knowsAbout decreases, the AI guestimate your position, using the last information it has for you (position, speed, mainly).

It is very visible when a AI leader orders you to target an ennemy unit on which it has no LoS anymore. You'll see the target square moving, and often moving over an area absolutely empty, there's no ennemy there. It's just your leader estimating that the target "should be there"

Now, where the "magic AI" comes from, is because of 2 things :

- AI share their knowsAbout, often. Mostly within a group. Which means that an AI that should not be aware perfectly of you position (because you are hidden for it) in fact has a good knowsAbout for you, because another unit sees you. This is simulating AI groups talking amongst themselves and relaying information.

- an AI hit by someone will have its knowsAbout about the shooter magically raised to 1 (ie above the magic number), whatever the line of sight conditions. Of course, after this initial magic raising of the knowsAbout, the normal rules apply, and if the shooter stays hidden, the knowsAbout will slowly decrease.

Add the 1st and 2nd point, and you'll see that sometimes, as soon as you shoot someone, the whole ennemies will know exactly where you are, and if able to, will shoot at you.

You need to take advantage of the decreasing knowsAbout, by staying hidden as much as you can, even more importantly, back out into cover after any shot. And more importantly if you can, you should take advantage of their estimation system. They usually consider you'll continue running in straight line after going into cover. Taking a few turns while you escape usually totally lose them, as they follow the target square given by their leader, which always thinks you're going in straight line.

I think at least, the knowsAbout given on shot should not be a fixed "1", but a value depending on at least the distance from shooter to target. The farther away, the harder it is for the target to spot the shooter. At some point, it shouldn't be able to spot the shooter.

[fasad 1]

A problem in ArmA atm is the knowledge does not drop, it stays contant for the 2 minute timeout.

[amrax 0]

Quote[/b] ]an AI hit by someone will have its knowsAbout about the shooter magically raised to 1 (ie above the magic number), whatever the line of sight conditions.

For example yes but that isn't realistic or the kind of knowsabout the AI SHOULD have.

If I were to shoot at you, you wouldn't know right away where my EXACT location is, drop down and kill me with your first 5 rounds, would you?

Of course usually you would shoot to kill, but put that fact aside.

Quote[/b] ]Every object's P3D has a special LoD defining what is "view blocking" for the AI. [...] less precise than the best visual LoD to avoid too much CPU stress).

Yes but the AI can see and shoot you nonetheless, try in a forest area where there is enough cover for you, they will still shoot you without you even seeing them or knowing where THEY are.

That is what I mean, to them it is a matrix not a virtual simulation.

What you say just doesn't work with this AI of ArmA. Other games yes, like Far Cry or such...

Quote[/b] ]you should take advantage of their estimation system

They know the exact spot where you are, there is not much you can do against that. Counter measures like cover and changing position don't really help because by than you'd be dead.

Quote[/b] ]The farther away, the harder it is for the target to spot the shooter. At some point, it shouldn't be able to spot the shooter.

Exactly but for now that isn't the case which most people find normal here!

[NeMeSiS 11]

And ofpforum you dodged the Far Cry question...

Yup sorry.

Quote[/b] ]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!

Well, depends on how you compare them. If we would make a list of what both AI's can and cant then the AI of ArmA would definately win.

However this doesnt immideatelty make the AI better, partly because the ArmA AI has the decision capability of a woman (aim, no wait lets move, no im going to aim here, lets lie down, lets aim again, or shall i run there?...) and the AI doesnt show what they are doing. In FC its clear to sea that they are advancing or taking cover, in ArmA it always looks like the AI is completely lost, also because they cant walk sideways or lean, whch means leads to the woman thing. ('I want to shoot that guy but there is a car in front of me, lets walk next to it, now let me lay down, aim, shoot), while in FC they just step sideways in 1-2 seconds and shoot at you. (Also, in FC you can walk and shoot properly, you cant in ArmA and the AI's almost never do this)

This doesnt make the FC smarter but it does make them more capable of killing other people, and it makes them LOOK alot smarter for sure.

So IMO the only thing that really should be changed is the way they move and plan their paths, but this is a core thing and definately not easy to change(Hell, i didnt even expect this when the game came out), everything else* is actually very good. (except for the knowsabout bug and the fact that they still ignore geometry lods under certain conditions).

*bounding overwatch, different behaviours, squad tactics, etc

EDIT: I prefer the ArmA AI btw, the FC definately isnt bad but something just felt wrong IMO, im not sure what it was, they all did their things to 'smooth' i guess, and ofcourse they liked to charge me like rambo..

[Second 0]

Those are vehicles, obviously they would respond diffirent with vehicles than with enemy soldiers. DUH

Quote[/b] ]if you want that it's called radar, then i'm fine.

Not exactly, but whatever - call it what you like.

And what difficulty did you play it? Easy+ right?

Not all of those are vehicles (like that pulling back to woods when enemy is spotted), there was/are/will be infatry facing infantry situations also.

Well, whatever was the name of that radar-thingie (hearing, eyes etc...), suits me just fine.

Difficulties? ArmA: skilllevel 0.6 and veteran. Farcry: realistic. Farcrys AI has only one pattern how it tries to take out player, so AI is easy to win when using brains. They have this strange desire to run to my line of fire... So they die. If they would hide more and shoot smarter (not just spray) they would do good job. But right now i serously think that ArmA's AI is better: It doesn't have just one general tactic (this is the part where missiondesigner comes in). There are stupidities (ofpforum listed few), but they are deadly smart sometimes (like that T-72s flanking).

Quote[/b] ]"If I design a mission it would look stupid..." that is a good one!

Did I ever say I "designed" a mission or are you making stuff up now? Yep you were!

Maybe my bad english made the trick for me or you are arrocant little kid (you understanded it complitely wrong)... Have fun, i have strong feeling that you wouldn't belive me (or anyother) no matter what.

With that being said: i rest my case.

[Maddmatt 1]

A problem in ArmA atm is the knowledge does not drop, it stays contant for the 2 minute timeout.

That's just the "knowsabout" value. It just means that the AI is aware of your presence (or thinks it is). It doesn't mean that the AI knows exactly where you are.

I don't think the AI in ArmA is too good. I kill them more often than they kill me. They don't seem any better at seeing things than me either. Except when it is pitch black at night and they don't have NVGs - that is one problem that should be fixed.

[amrax 0]

Quote[/b] ]partly because the ArmA AI has the decision capability of a woman (aim, no wait lets move, no im going to aim here, lets lie down, lets aim again, or shall i run there?...)

('I want to shoot that guy but there is a car in front of me, lets walk next to it, now let me lay down, aim, shoot)

AHHH , I'm actually starting to like you. :P

I'm happy you got my point though.

We should play a mission together and I'll show you.

You did brought up another point, their decision making is diffirent AND they use diffirent tactics, although I like the Far Cry more I understand the ArmA can do more because there is more stuff in the game, like planes, tanks etc etc.

Quote[/b] ]so AI is easy to win when using brains

YOu should be happy it has no conscious, imaging that . Than we would be in serious trouble... lol

NO no, its not I don't believe you, its just that I know how AI works and can prove it to you. You are however not willing to see it, which is fine if you choose to - freedom of choice.

By-the-way, I thought of another reason why some of you don't get shot so easily; because of your silent weapon choices. The AI responds diffirently to them I noticed.

Which they should but you get the point.

[NeMeSiS 11]

Quote[/b] ]partly because the ArmA AI has the decision capability of a woman (aim, no wait lets move, no im going to aim here, lets lie down, lets aim again, or shall i run there?...)

('I want to shoot that guy but there is a car in front of me, lets walk next to it, now let me lay down, aim, shoot)

AHHH , I'm actually starting to like you. :P

I'm happy you got my point though.

Well it has nothing to do with the AI 'cheating'. Im not even surprised its like this as changing this would probably require to trow the whole AI movement and pathfinding system away and completely rewrite it. As ArmA started as a small sideproject im actually pleasantly suprised by the ArmA AI, i expected the same AI as in OFP.

If its still like this in Game2 then i see real reasons to complain, but thats still years away, and the ArmA AI can still handle themselves OK. (some easy to make changes in the .FMS like AI's forced to stand when they are near buildings are advised though, as well as the lowered accuracy)

[xy20032004 0]

OFP/ARMA has the best AI before I played STALKER. Although these are two different games, at the point of AI, stalker reached a higher level than arma.

Try to play stalker random close combat for a while, espatially indoor fights, you will notice how excellent the AI is. They shoot you at one place and then move to a different place at once. They stand and crouch and take covers in a smart way, making you sweating. ARMA has the same concept, but the AI does not perform so well.

Do hope ARMA can greatly improve the AI to match that of STALKER in order to make the game still to be the best one!

New patches should focus on AI rather than adding new planes. So long as the official 3D tool is avaliable, addons will never be a problem. OFP has proved this. Thanks to the ARMA team for such a good army simulation, let us make it better!

[predator887 0]

well maybe if ArmA had been delayed as long as stalker was then the AI would be better

AI in ArmA is fine for the type of open combat that in the game, like anything theres always room for improvement but i dont see it as a major issue

[Stendac 0]

Yeah, I just watched the review for STALKER on gametrailers.com and they also said they were impressed by the AI. It was one of the game's noticeable strengths despite its flaws in other areas.

I guess it couldn't hurt ArmA to give the AI a swift kick in the ass.

[teioh 0]

well maybe if ArmA had been delayed as long as stalker was then the AI would be better

AI in ArmA is fine for the type of open combat that in the game, like anything theres always room for improvement but i dont see it as a major issue

you don't see a problem with AI that only hits the deck when it's fired on the middle of a city street and sits there or the fact that if one member of the team dies, another will run to that exact spot and die, then another will go there and die, then another...

[max power 21]

New patches should focus on AI rather than adding new planes. So long as the official 3D tool is avaliable, addons will never be a problem. OFP has proved this. Thanks to the ARMA team for such a good army simulation, let us make it better!

*ahem*

*cough cough*

*ahem*

The people who are in charge of coding AI aren't involved in making art assets, and visa versa.

[thr0tt 12]

I have STUTTER I mean STALKER and sorry but the AI isn't that great, ArmA has much better overall feel with the AI.

STALKER is not a good game.

[AWDrift 0]

I think it's a bit late to get something like the A-life system into ArmA. I mean, GSC worked over half a decade to get stalker's A.I. that good and in that time we will probably be playing Game 2.

[USSRsniper 0]

I think it's a bit late to get something like the A-life system into ArmA. I mean, GSC worked over half a decade to get stalker's A.I. that good and in that time we will probably be playing Game 2.

A-life has nothing to do with how AIs take cover and flank you, etc.. A-life is system trying to simulate living, world such as mutated dogs draging dead bodies. But when it comes to regular fighting AI, this shouldn't take a decade to make. because you really dont want A-life in future games by BIS since BISs games not only about realism but about modding. A-life system is very hard to mod.

Thr0tt

AI in ArmA is not good as in STALKER, because Ai in ArmA is very predictable, but not in STALKER. such as you fire your weapon ai is behing the building it will lie down and follow with their gun as you walk behind building and when you in sight you are dead..... And here is STALKER example, you walk by Mutant acts like it didnt see you, when you walk near same place there is no mutant and why? Because he is sneaking behind you!!!! but also you can find this mutant to attack you right away.

[thr0tt 12]

It is down to perspective and as I don't like stalker then my opinion is jaded.

[NeMeSiS 11]

2 AI discussions on the same fucking page?

[troop 0]

I have to agree, that the AI in Stalker is the first AI of *any*

other game (FPS/tactical shooter) that impressed and

'surprized' me *since* OFP original and now ArmAs AI.

Yes, it has flaws as well. But still.

Take F.E.A.R.s AI for example. It earned alot of praise, but

it only had very limited environments to navigate and only 2-3

different 'path' to get you. Stalkers AI is clearly superior to this. imo.

However they did pull this off;..they did *very* well, imho.

Had me jumping not only once.

And I think, we can all agree upon, that ArmAs AI can 'learn'

alot from Stalkers wrt. close quarter combat and actually

*using* cover/move/shoot/move/cover/shoot.

Combine those;..that would be phantastic.

[Dwarden 1125]

MODedit: Merged this thread into previous AI thread ...

[Spokesperson 0]

Bozo Lozo!

The AIs shoot too well. At 2-300 meter they hit you with non-sniper rifles in the first shot when you're _lying_ down. Usually they never miss more than 10 cm. Looks like their hands aren't shaking and that they aim perfectly.

At 2-300m it's practically impossible to hit anything lying down like that. There should be more shots around you. Especially if your opponent is a machinegunner. It would be much more realistic if there were loads of shots flying around and hitting the ground around you. One would have the chance to take cover etc. There's no use of surpressing fire or anything similar.

Have a look at Close Combat: CoI . It's the same thing as OFP, but you control multiple squads and it's 2d.

I also think there should be an option to remove the white bouncing crosshair. It's also too accurate and requires no shooting skill. Doesn't matter if one has got a sniper or ak. With that white thing they are equally good att 200 m.

Mwghamack Out.