AI natural Artillery, without script.

[bravo 6 0]

I've been looking and forward to see this feature working naturally but it doesn't work as it should. Does it?

Is there a normal way to use it <span style='color:red'>BUT without scripts</span>?

Was already mentioned with scripts here.

My idea and doubt:

Put an empty D30, add a AI squad but two soldiers of it moveasgunner / cargo(if needed) with some significante distance from the rest of the AI squad.

All AI soldiers are linked (grouped) to the AI leader.

Normally the AI Leader give orders to all AI soldiers, so why can't the D30 AI gunner fire to the target (us players)?

That way the artillery would be more natural and would make more sense, knowing that the D30 if far from the main AI group belonging to the same AI group. AI Leader would/could give coordinates to the D30 AI gunner and there we would have a natural and realistic artyillery, <span style='color:red'>without scripts</span> also with natural ingame sounds.

i tryed this and it didn't work, why not? Make sense, no?

Please explain me why the D30 AI gunner don't fire to the enemy knowing that the he belongs to the AI squad. Even without direct visual contact, the AI gunner could receive coordinates from the leader to fire the shells to the target hiting around it.

Please, is it possible?

[frederf 0]

Time to live for shells of that type is pretty low, like 25 seconds so high arcs or distant fires is out.

I don't think the AI knows how to elevate their barrel to engage long distance (AK-47s or anything)... maybe.

Besides D30 is a high velocity anti-tank gun not an indirect fire artillery piece.

[b1sh0p 0]

It would need a little scripting. First of all, the first thing the commander of the AI squad is going to do the moment the mission starts is tell the 2 D30 crew members to disembark. So you'd have to get around that hurdle.

[bravo 6 0]

I have the feeling that if the AI artillery gunner sees the target it will fire but is the AI artillery gunner don't see the target it will not fire untill he sees and lock it again.

edit:

It would need a little scripting. First of all, the first thing the commander of the AI squad is going to do the moment the mission starts is tell the 2 D30 crew members to disembark. So you'd have to get around that hurdle.

As i mentioned, PLZ no scripts.

i tryed it already, and the leader don't order gunner to disembark. actually leader tells to target me or my ai.

They will stay monted, and they will only fire to me or my team AI if the AI gunner sees the target.

[Scrub 0]

Hey Bravo, I'd just wait for the CoC UA.. That is if they are still going to attempt it. They were as of earlier this year. Dinger? Anyone?

[bravo 6 0]

i know what you mean Scrub, but why not working without scrips and working more naturally?

that would be a test if AI is improved or not.

[Scrub 0]

Sure would be. If there is a way for AI Arty to be implemented, it's either a big secret, or it's an archaic method that totally escapes me. (not saying anything there, MANY things escape me )

[4 IN 1 0]

again, "how hard can it be" question, but as there is no game in this world that have a correctly modeled trajectory model(dunno about crysis but thats DX10 we are talking about), i would think that the maths behind them and the amount of scripts need to be used is out of everyone imagination, it should be easier to do if the engine have a very well made physics model which calculate just about every single factor that is on a planet, but it would be like creating a hold planet itself, so if you ask me, i think the answer is "very very hard", still, i am no Pro and i might be wrong

[UNN 0]

General speaking the current projectile trajectories in OFP and Arma, do not lend themselves to high elevation\long range shots. This could be a restriction that allows Arma to have so many units on a map at any one time. Time to live for shells is no longer a problem, but it runs deeper than that.

Even if they introduced a new simulation type (or whatever) to accurately plot trajectories for certain weapons, you still have other issues, like lead-time. Try getting the AI to hit a fast moving aircraft with AA guns. Now imagine the same problem over thousands of meters with slow moving targets.

I'm sure I read something in an old pre-Arma interview that promised Artillery and for players only? I think BI would have to consider it a high enough priority to take the time and effort to even implement a basic player controlled system. How many people (like me) prefer the idea of real shells flying over their heads (even if we may never see or hear them) following something similar to the correct trajectories? Probably not that many, compared to those who would be happy just seeing the explosions.

Personally, I don't see why you have a problem with scripted versions, if it does not lag the game. If it's created using scripts or in game, compiled code, then what’s the difference? From a players point of view, none.

[450R 1]

Personally, I don't see why you have a problem with scripted versions, if it does not lag the game. If it's created using scripts or in game, compiled code, then what’s the difference? From a players point of view, none.

I'd rather have CoC's UA than anything BI could spread glue on and slap together and call artillery. But it does make me wonder what BI has been doing with their time ... it was promised from the earliest of interviews along with a few other things that never showed up.

[Ilaafi 0]

But artillery is quite useless. Typical lethal radius of 122mm D-30 standard HE is around 100 meters to standing target. In this game, I shot an round at enemy hitting 5 meters from him and he just kept running. As being artillery reserve officer and knowing D-30 quite well, this was really appalling...

And crew of D-30 is 6, not 2..

[bravo 6 0]

Personally, I don't see why you have a problem with scripted versions, if it does not lag the game. If it's created using scripts or in game, compiled code, then what’s the difference? From a players point of view, none.

I'd rather have CoC's UA than anything BI could spread glue on and slap together and call artillery. But it does make me wonder what BI has been doing with their time ... it was promised from the earliest of interviews along with a few other things that never showed up.

ill try to answer both.

@UNN: using existing script artillery (im already using in my missions) looks very fake in MP. The sound of the shells can't be heared over our head in MP (dunno why).

The shells always hit the same place with some radius (ofcourse) using triggers (boring). AI have NO Control Aiming the target.

Imagine if the target moves from that trigger or change strategy, AIs are not able to change direction of those "trigger" shells. Another one, Image if you program triggers on the presence player, after a while a chopper or plane pass trough them in very hight speed activating all these triggers, you will have the heavyest artillery mission in history..

I think the effect of the shells flying over our head is a very realistic feeling to the player that can not be acheaved with these artillery scripts but with some normal AI artillery. Though it has its problems i already mentioned in the last post.

From a players point of view, you say "none" i would say "all"

@450R:I agree with you on the "BIS promise".

You say you rader have CoC's.. but if i remember well that CoC's were good for players, human players i mean and not AI's. The Main Idea is that AI's use Artillery naturally aswell without transmiting fake feelings to the players with usage of these scripts mentioned before.

Note: I have artillery working in my missions but not the way i want to. The way it is, i say AI have no self life and no personality.

[NeMeSiS 11]

It wouldnt be that hard to make the AI choose their own targets to call artillary on, i guess the hardest thing to do it deciding when the AI needs to call the artillary. When they first spotted the enemy? When they are hit? When their group number is too low?

That AND we should also take into account that their could be friendlies near the place the AI would call the artillary on, which may look hilarious at first but its not really good for the gameplay.

And then there are probably still other things that im forgetting.

Ive no idea why you dont like scripts, but its a million times easier to write a script like this (or incorporate it into a .FSM) then making the AI not aiming directly at their targets but somehow aiming above them so they take into account how far the bombs drop and the fact that they need to shoot over mountains/objects/whatever.

Making the AI choose their own targets creates new problems but IMO its still easier then your solution.

EDIT: And from what im reading it looks like you are using a script that is quite simple, you shouldnt think that that is the only scriptable way to do it, there are probably 1000 different ways to script it.

[450R 1]

You say you rader have CoC's.. but if i remember well that CoC's were good for players, human players i mean and not AI's.

It's been done. General Barron created a script for the mission Marine Expeditionary Force by Kendo that allowed the AI to use UA ... and they do put it to good use.

I know it's not exactly the natural solution you were speaking of, but to the end-user (player) it's as good as it can possibly get.

[UNN 0]

@ofpforum

Quote[/b] ]It wouldnt be that hard to make the AI choose their own targets to call artillary on, i guess the hardest thing to do it deciding when the AI needs to call the artillary. When they first spotted the enemy? When they are hit? When their group number is too low?

That AND we should also take into account that their could be friendlies near the place the AI would call the artillary on, which may look hilarious at first but its not really good for the gameplay.

All of that has already been done and more. Not for UA, as it wasn't released at the time. But it does highlight some of problems BI might face if they did include Artillery. If they introduced Player controlled Arty then it would not be long before we start demanding an AI that uses it properly.

Quote[/b] ]And then there are probably still other things that im forgetting.

Yeah, there is a lot more you could add to the list to get the AI to behave more life like and make the kind of decisions you would yourself.

@bravo 6

Quote[/b] ]Imagine if the target moves from that trigger or change strategy, AIs are not able to change direction of those "trigger" shells. Another one, Image if you program triggers on the presence player, after a while a chopper or plane pass trough them in very hight speed activating all these triggers, you will have the heavyest artillery mission in history

Using target reference points in the form of triggers is one way of doing it, but like you said, despite being CPU friendly it is a bit limited. The problem of filtering out certain types of vehicle is easy enough to fix. But none of that is script related, the only arguments with scripts verses compiled code are; Compiled code runs quicker and has access to all that lovely internal information, hidden from the scripting commands.

Since I re-read your post I see it's not scripts you dislike, only the lack of suitable ones at this point in time, for your purpose. I really think it's down to priorities, you could always add it to the BI Bug Tracker wish list and see how many votes you get. But if there are other, more pressing features and fixes for BI to make, that satisfy the majority of players then we will have to rely\hope on script solutions made by fanatics

[Heatseeker 0]

The 2 artillery pieces in Arma are currently no more than eye candy targets, they remind me of the OPF scud launcher. If they could be made usefull they would add alot to Arma's gameplay, large scale adversarial modes, cooperative, would be good fun for everyone.

Finding the enemy base and adjusting arty on it. Finding and taking down enemy arty bases.. even supporting arty bases with ammo trucks, many possibilities there.

The arty pieces currently use tank heat shells, these will never work since once you fire them they get lost in space..

But rockets/missiles would work. If you fire a RPG or M136 straight up into the air you will hear it detonate on the ground shortly after.

It would require a modified missile/rocket class amunition and an interface that would allow relative acuracy.

The tough part would be making the a.i. use it...

What are your thoughts and ideas? .

[dslyecxi 23]

My idea? Wait for the Chain of Command team to bring Unified Artillery over to ArmA.

http://dslyecxi.com/shackposts/ofp_cocua11.html

[max power 21]

Are the rockets hitting the ground or detonating in mid air?

[jasono 0]

If you want to find out what happens with the tank shells, you could try using my bullet cam script

http://www.ofpec.com/index.p....g198486

It will follow the shell once u fire, and when it detonates the camera will end.

Does the saying "What goes up, must come down" not apply to ArmA

[Heatseeker 0]

Well, i would like to see BIS finishing what they started... i was under the impression that missiles only detonated on impact but that would be so obvious that someone would have thought about it way back in the day, they problably detonate in flight after a while and i dont know if this can be changed ?

The coc artillery was great, in the way that it worked but did it really work or was it "simulated"?

We know that the engine features ballistics, it can be seen in many types of small amunitions like a round fired from a sniper rifle (dropping over distance).

It should be possible to create a specific artillery round but i bet that unlike many other things BIS just didnt have the time.

I will check out your script JasonO, thanks .

[dslyecxi 23]

The coc artillery was great, in the way that it worked but did it really work or was it "simulated"?

Yes, it really did work.

[swtx 42]

You can grab Mr. Murry's excellent artillery script right here and wait for the COC team to port thier awsome Unified Artillery to Arma  

[kestrel7e7 0]

Realistic artillery would be absolutely mind blowing in a well scripted single player campaign in ArmA scale maps!

...

Here's to waiting for BIS game 2.

[4 IN 1 0]

Realistic artillery would be absolutely mind blowing in a well scripted single player campaign in ArmA scale maps!

...

Here's to waiting for BIS game 2.  

like i said in another topic, a correctly modeled trajectory model is very hard to creat, no one have done that b4 and maths behind them and the amount of scripts need to be used is out of everyone imagination, COC did that with that simulated very close to the real thing, but its still not ulter realistic as engine limit the usage of a real trajectory, it should be easier to do if the engine have a very well made physics model which calculate just about every single factor that is on a planet so that the AI could use it correctly, but it would be like creating a hold planet itself, no other games done that b4, and there is a long way to see if there will finally be something close to the real thing, so far, only COC managed to do so(playable wise, cause there are other scripts out there which simulate it but very lagged out)

oh and plz get that "we want game 22222" out of your head, really if BI couldnt fix ArmA, Game 2 is a noshow

[INNOCENT&CLUELESS 0]

Exactly

As long as mass, inertia etc are not properly simulated (I mean closer to the reality as currently, I can not judge if BI`s way is state of the art), we will suffer strange effects for projectile flight paths and those flying tanks.

Game2 is a dream that needs a significant rise of manpower inside BI and much better skills in project management to become true.

I would be satisfied if BI makes ArmA as stable as OFP 1.96 until fall this year (I guess they are close to that).

Game 2 should be just a totally reworked physic engine.

ArmA smells for me like 90% OFP in that area.

From game experience point of view, not from the changes they really did to the engine.

I guess with a new engine a lot of current problems would be solved (bouncing tanks; sky-high flying soldiers when hit by shell, strange flight behavior of copters, unreal collision reaction in general, travellingwith/firing from moving objects without using cargo position...)