One tweak that will change alot

[kronzky 5]

@KeyCat: I have tried your mission, but I cannot reproduce the behaviour you described.

The AI will update its knowledge about you (indicated by the flagpole) if you fire again soon after you were initially spotted. That part is probably a bit "super-natural", but not by a huge margin. After all, the AI is now alerted to your presence, and will keep their eyes (and ears) open for you.

But if you wait a while (or move away quite a bit) the AI's knowledge will NOT be updated. No matter how often you fire after that, they will still not know where your new position is (even at the highest AI settings).

So, while the AI definitely has some defects, I don't really see the problem in the situation described.

I don't even see the issue of them not spotting you, just by sound, as a big problem. After all, it's not like they ignore any incoming fire until it's too late. They are aware that something is amiss when bullets hit the ground close by. They then start searching the area for the shooter.

If you have perfect cover they will not be able to locate you, even if you fired right next to them (In your test mission I put up a wall piece on the mountain, and fired from behind. The AI went into alert mode, but never spotted me.)

[KeyCat 131]

But if you wait a while (or move away quite a bit) the AI's knowledge will NOT be updated. No matter how often you fire after that, they will still not know where your new position is (even at the highest AI settings).

How long did you wait? Of course if you wait long enough the AI will loose all knowledge about you and go back to safe mode.

Did a qucik test now and waited ~3 minutes between shots and my exact position was still updated (without LOS). You surely fire at higher rate than that in a firefight.

Note that I'm not objecting to that the enemy AI detects you are around and looking for you in your general direction, thats fine! It's that they pinpoint your exact location (X,Y,Z) within decimeters and it gets updated for each shot you fire (within reasonable time) even if you are outside LOS.

Maybe there are (for us) unknown and valid reasons for things working this way and BIS already knows all about it. But if not then adding randomness routines to the AI's perceived position would be a huge improvement IMO.

Who knows, maybe we get a comment from the devs?

/KC

[kronzky 5]

Quote[/b] ]How long did you wait? Of course if you wait long enough the AI will loose all knowledge about you and go back to safe mode.

I waited about 30 seconds, during which the knowledge level didn't go down (I added a loop that constantly shows me the knowledge level). It went up to about .1 once the AI spotted me, and stayed there during the whole period.

Once I was spotted I walked backwards for 30 seconds, moving behind the mountain (the flagpole followed me for a few steps, but once my head was out of sight it stayed put).

After these 30 seconds I fired a few more shots, but there was no update of the pole position.

I get the same results if I move back for 20 seconds, and then wait for another 10 before firing again.

If, OTOH, I only move back 10 seconds, and then wait there for another 20 seconds, then I will be located when I fire again.

Which means that, the more you fire from one position (even if you move around slightly) the more exactly the AI will be able to locate you.

I can live with that...

SuperAI is on, Enemy Skill is on 1.0

[KeyCat 131]

Strange since thats not exactly what I experience? Whats your skillEnemy and precisionEnemy settings in your ArmAprofile?

/KC

[KeyCat 131]

@ Kronzky: In your test maybe you reached the rangelimit and gotten outside the scripts range? Can you change the nearTargets range from 500 to 3000 in enemypos.sqs so we can rule that out and try again?

/KC

[kronzky 5]

skillEnemy & precisionEnemy are both set to 1.0 in my profile.

I've changed the range for nearTargets to 2,000, but that didn't change anything (if I move back for 20 seconds after being detected, the distance is only about 310 meters).

Is the initial knowledge level 0.1 when you are detected? I could imagine that the localization skills are higher if the knowledge level is higher too. But in my case it never really goes above .1

But it definitely seems to make a big difference how big the distance from the initial position is when you fire again. If I walk backwards for only 10 seconds, or walk back for 10 and then left for 10, I will still be tracked. If I walk backwards or sideways for 20 seconds though the next shots aren't registered.

If you want to pursue this any further, perhaps you should put some markers into the mission, so it'll be easier to reproduce the exact steps you're taking. But right now my results are actually quite satisfactory, realism- and game-wise...

[Second 0]

Well why do you test that kind flagpole marker things which might not show real results and ways AI works Those might be fancy ways but i prefer to see how AI actually performs, what info it thinks to be useful and what not.

Why not use team switch to enemy side and watch how enemy reacts and what it does for real. What it thinks to be essential and what not.

They chase that engage square. Not the flagpole or markers

[the_bengine 0]

+1

BIS, please take note and somewhat tone down the AIs capability

to 'eartrack' player 99% exact. 70% (?) should be ok for an

*much* better and way less (sometimes) frustrating experience.

+2 When u shoot from well hidden POS at an uaz with MG or Grenade launcher, after the fisrt shot the shooter immidiatly turns his gun at u and after that theres not much to do. (after 1.08 there must some wait time implemented, because they dot fire instantly at u, like in prevuis versions)

+3

It doesn't matter how clever BI have been with the scripting, it feels very unfair. the AI have enough advantages IMO without pinpoint accuracy at 300m. An enemy soldier could creep up behind my left hand side, stand 10m away and fire at me and i'd still be clueless as to his location.Thru my stereo speakers all i'd know is that he was quite close and on my left hand side.

i find the flanking procedure tiring aswell. Doesn't matter how well you choose your sniping position, you know after one shot that you're going to have to completely change location or spend the entire time watching your flanks. And on several occasions (twice last night on Blood Sweat & Tears) found myself being hunted down by a BMP2 which had decided to drop whatever it was doing on the battlefield because the commander overheard a bullet being fired 250m away on a hilltop

I'm no expert, but surely that's not realistic..?

I understand that, should BI address the problem of AI accuracy, the game would become easier - but this could be easily remedied with higher enemy numbers/lower friendlies/more AI options. Besides, the game could do with being a bit easier. I've had to restart so many missions which,statistically, look like they should be a fair fight but in reality have seen all ai controlled friendlies slaughtered within the first few minutes.

Each to their own.

Rant over

[sickboy 13]

OK, below is a link to a simple test mission that demonstrates it all.

Do the following:

1. When the mission begins stay put behind the ridge and fire a magazine with the M24 up in the air - nothing happens (?).

2. Now walk ~15 m forward at SW and crest the ridge. Look down in the village in the scope and you will see one single East soldier.

3. Fire a few shots close by his feet (not at him) and he will soon detect you.

4. When you see the message "You are detected" a flag pole is positioned at the position where the AI "think" you are (i.e your perceived position). So far so good since he probably saw you.

5. No walk back again 50-100 m out of LOS and fire a single shot in the air at NW or whatever. You will see that instantly the flag pole (indicating the AI's perceived position of you) will move to your exact position. Move again a couple of times (out of AI's LOS) and fire and you will see that the enemy AI pinpoints you with 100% accuracy.

Try different things, different weapons, different skilllevels, try behind buildings etc. in village.

http://keycat.no-ip.com/files/ArmA_108_AI_Uber_triangulation.zip

Post your thoughts/comments in this thread and keep it on-topic, pls!

/KC

Very cool keycat, big thanks for the effort, will look into it aswell!

[Second 0]

And on several occasions (twice last night on Blood Sweat & Tears) found myself being hunted down by a BMP2 which had decided to drop whatever it was doing on the battlefield because the commander overheard a bullet being fired 250m away on a hilltop

I'm no expert, but surely that's not realistic..?

That BMP in Blood Sweat & Tears, is part of infantry group. What infantry on foot hears they "tell" to vehicle. Vehicles are quite a deaf on their own.

That is realistic if leader can give even somewhat accurate position via radio to vehicle: "Enemy soldier in 30 meter in left side of rock". Or something like that.

[4 IN 1 0]

i think that would be quite impossible

[Second 0]

i think that would be quite impossible

What is? That what i said about? I would be happy to hear reason, as there's always something to learn more, if you were referring to my text.

Or are you referring to that situation explained in the_bengine's text? That they give accurate position of player which is behind hill? That i'm not denying. Just gave an example, to show that vehicle can be led by grunts.

[Kwato 0]

i find the flanking procedure tiring aswell. Doesn't matter how well you choose your sniping position, you know after one shot that you're going to have to completely change location or spend the entire time watching your flanks.

The flanking is one of the few things that is good with the Ai in this game.

[jdski 0]

Vietnam vets said they could tell when the enemy was near because they could smell them. Being I can't smell anything in this game, there really needs to be a compromise with these AI and they're triangulation ears. I would like to see the AI do stupid thing like us humans do sometimes. Not robot stupid, but human stupid.

Some should just suck at aiming. Some should waiste ammo and spray and pray. Or do some covering fire while the others advance.

Nothing wrong with some being as good as a shot as they are now, but not every one of them.

Let some keep firing where I was, while I sneak up on them and outflak them for a change.

Maybe part of the problem is that the AI get the same info we get on the map showing enemy positions. But they don't need to stop and look at the map and try to determine where the enemy is in the 3d world. They seem to get this info on a constant stream to their AI brains.

[NeMeSiS 11]

Am i the only one getting more and more respect for the AI the longer its being 'studied'?

[Second 0]

Am i the only one getting more and more respect for the AI the longer its being 'studied'?

No, you are not

BIS: You can make miracles

[Törni 0]

This is funny. Some are complaining about AI performing too well. Elsewhere there are messages about how stupid the AI is.

After half a year I would say it is just peculiar. One time it outperforms you and on the next is stupid and does not even fire. Even in the same mission. Because it is somewhat random it is very hard to say anything definetive about it's performance.

EDIT: But I guess that we can all agree that it does not do things like real soldiers do.

[Ezekiel 0]

This is a really noobish question but how exactly do you go about unpacking and viewing the AI scripts (or is it not possible without the mod tools)? I haven't a clue how it all works but I'd be interested in finding out.

[kronzky 5]

This is a really noobish question but how exactly do you go about unpacking and viewing the AI scripts (or is it not possible without the mod tools)? I haven't a clue how it all works but I'd be interested in finding out.

You get one of the different tools listed on the Wiki, either under PBO Editing or Config Editing, and then start poking away at the game files.

Some of the formats are documented there as well, with others you may just have to use your imagination...

[NeMeSiS 11]

And to get you started: The scripts can be found in the scripts folder in characters.pbo

(But IIRC those arent used in the game and those scripts have some debug stuff in there and what is actually used in the game is in the config.bin in that same pbo, but maybe my memory just hates me..)

[frederf 0]

I am literally glued to this thread. I really want to see where this is going and possibly make the stupid smart AI more of a smart stupid AI.

[Rogueci5 0]

Just my 2 cents worth.

I would much rather a Deadly AI thats dumb than a Very smart AI thats not really as smart as it should be.

At least how it is at the moment you have to always be on your toes, knowing the AI will kill ya, than playing hide and seek with an AI that in the end makes stupid mistakes because of a limitation of the game engine.

As of now you muck up in a fire fight and you get your butt handed to you. I like that

[Delta 5-1 3]

Yeah man same here, glued to this topic, wanna see where it goes...sup Frederf..

Rct. Delta 5-1 [1-8th]

[Ezekiel 0]

Thanks for the pointers guys.

After dicking around for a while I've decided that someone needs to go into the native FSMs for the AI and change it up some.

A few questions -

Is it possible to add entirely new 'states' to a native FSM?

Can an AI distinguish between different types of cover? i.e. if someone were to improve the AI's ability to move to cover when under fire, would they be able to prioritise moving to a nearby building over a nearer bush/tree?

I'm looking at the config.bin file in characters.pbo and it seems to be missing a fair bit of information regarding the behaviours of AI. Is there any way to see a more detailed map of their 'brains' or am I missing something?

I know its all rather OT but I originally got interested when it occured to me that a lot of the AI behaviour seems quite abitrary (for example giving the AI pinpoint ears) when it could be a lot more general and dynamic. When they 'hear' a gunshot for example, instead of instantly knowing you're standing at x,y,z they should get a rough arc/distance. They'll still turn towards that arc and scan for enemies, perhaps changing their behaviour slightly based on the percieved distance (for example a loud gunshot from behind might mean they simply turn and fire rather than throwing themselves to the floor as I've seen some complain).

A commanding AI could even use that perceived 'arc' to plan their tactics - which direction to flank in for example. This might come in very handy for some sort of supressing fire behaviour as well - AI would fire through bushes towards a perceived arc rather than at your exact location (even if they've predicted your location they're still firing at a pin point spot as far as I can tell).

Uh, anyway hope some of that makes sense, it is rather late.

[4 IN 1 0]

i think that would be quite impossible

What is? That what i said about? I would be happy to hear reason, as there's always something to learn more, if you were referring to my text.

Or are you referring to that situation explained in the_bengine's text? That they give accurate position of player which is behind hill? That i'm not denying. Just gave an example, to show that vehicle can be led by grunts.

secound, all to respect plz try not to chase wind, i apologize for not being clear, i mainly referring not about the "situation", but for the "basic" of how the AIs work and how it affect any changes being given that unless BI add some more things to improve how they "see" and "hear" there is little can be done on user side without heavily script use, now that i am not pro on AI and that most things are based on user comment, they all tells me that AI dont have proper LOS that could be used as a steping stone for the tweak(or atless i think)

p.s. on the other hand, since ArmA and VBS2 AI are so modable, that i heard rumors says that mil in the states are working with a university(forget which, and dunno if BIA part of it) to creat a more advance AI system for VBS2, that i think we should beable to script a more decent AI ourselfs, but it would take time and a hell lot of work