COD like combat in Arma 2

[liljb15 0]

Let me just say right now that I'm not a troll, I love arma and I play it almost every chance I get and I've played every BIS game from the first ofp to Arma.

But I loathe the fact that every AI guy is a sharpshooter, they never hide behind a walls or cover, and they never lay down suppressive fire. I mean sometimes I see soldiers getting shot at and they go prone in the middle of a road (who in there right mind does that). How come soldiers never shoot where they think they saw the enemy to suppress them. Where is that intense combat.

All I'm saying is that I hope they don't make the ai so bad when it comes to infantry.

[max power 21]

Let me just say right now that I'm not a troll, I love arma and I play it almost every chance I get and I've played every BIS game from the first ofp to Arma.

But I loathe the fact that every AI guy is a sharpshooter, they never hide behind a walls or cover, and they never lay down suppressive fire. I mean sometimes I see soldiers getting shot at and they go prone in the middle of a road (who in there right mind does that). How come soldiers never shoot where they think they saw the enemy to suppress them. Where is that intense combat.

All I'm saying is that I hope they don't make the ai so bad when it comes to infantry.

Call Of Duty isn't a combat simulator?

I'm sort of confused as to all these threads that ask why the AI are sharp shooters. They aren't. They don't hit every time. In fact, I hit more often than they do. If you are exposing yourself to effective fire all of the time, though, you're doing something wrong. You can't play this game like you would play COD.

[Beagle 684]

AND it's in the options to make them really bad shooters.

PS: whenever the A.I. shoots at you or other A.I. and misses... just consider it supressive fire *g*

[liljb15 0]

I know call of duty isn't a simulator. Hell I'll be the first to say it isn't but can you guys honestly tell me it isn't kind of annoying seeing your AI guys go prone in the middle of a street in the open, or seeing the fact that they NEVER take cover when getting shot at, or the NEVER lay down suppressive fire.

[Beagle 684]

They go prone when shot at..and supressive fire is overestmated...as log as they are shooting back it's all O.K.

It's a facht that ArmA A.I. ist optimised for the open gound, not for urban or CQB...but hey...most regular soldiers RL are not "optimised" for that too.

[Commander-598 0]

AI is a complex thing and CoD is heavily scripted, not to mention their AI isn't as good of a shot as it should be. OFP/ArmA's AI is in my oppinion better than CoD's as it doesn't rely on scripts to tell it what to do, however as far as the AI's concerned there isn't any cover in the middle of a street or nearby so the only option left for it is to hit the dirt and it's a still a good idea for you to do it too.

Also note, under the right conditions, you will see them take cover, it's just usually behind a tree or bush than around the corner of a building. When told to go down "this hill" a squad will stick that line of trees over "there"...without having to have a pre-placed marker to tell it that it's a good idea.

I should also point out that there may not actually been any cover anywhere on the street anyway and finding cover would require backtracking for a hundred yards but only making it fifteen because they got shot in the back trying to find a perfectly blown apart wall to cover half of their body so it would look good to the player.

That last part was only half of a rant...

[Beagle 684]

Yes, A.I. does a few amazing thing by itself. If you let them...like calling repair or fuel or medics if there are some assigned as support...

You can shoot with MANPADS at a chopper...pilot will try an emergency landing...if sucessfull he will call medics for the wounded...and after this repair and refuel team...he will call his team back aboard, lift off and continue flight plan...wow...!

That's truely artifical intelligence.

[Col. Faulkner 0]

Call of Duty is a simulator. It simulates participating in

an action-packed war movie, and does that very well.

ArmA is a simulator too. It simulates being in combat with

suicidally fearless "soldiers" none of whom have the slightest

idea about real fieldcraft - on a battlefield that, with some

rare exceptions, is as practically featureless as the local

municipal golf-course.

So, both are "sims" - for a given contextual definition of "sim".

[Beagle 684]

Call of Duty is a simulator. It simulates participating in

an action-packed war movie, and does that very well.

ArmA is a simulator too. It simulates being in combat with

suicidally fearless "soldiers" none of whom have the slightest

idea about real fieldcraft - on a battlefield that, with some

rare exceptions, is as practically featureless as the local

municipal golf-course.

So, both are "sims" - for a given contextual definition of "sim".

Well, I consider both just games...!

A Sim is something like Microsoft Flight Simulator, Steel Beast, Silent Hunter or Falcon 4.0.

[liljb15 0]

Yes, A.I. does a few amazing thing by itself. If you let them...like calling repair or fuel or medics if there are some assigned as support...

You can shoot with MANPADS at a chopper...pilot will try an emergency landing...if sucessfull he will call medics for the wounded...and after this repair and refuel team...he will call his team back aboard, lift off and continue flight plan...wow...!

That's truely artifical intelligence.

Yes I have no doubt that the AI is smart when it comes to things like; calling for support, driving, path finding, flying. The AI is amazing except for when they're in combat then they just act like those annoying droids from star wars.

[Commander-598 0]

Call of Duty is a simulator. It simulates participating in

an action-packed war movie, and does that very well.

ArmA is a simulator too. It simulates being in combat with

suicidally fearless "soldiers" none of whom have the slightest

idea about real fieldcraft - on a battlefield that, with some

rare exceptions, is as practically featureless as the local

municipal golf-course.

So, both are "sims" - for a given contextual definition of "sim".

I beg your pardon. They do attempt to flank you, however the environment may hinder this quite a bit. I remember sniping a squad on Malden, and I watched the remnants of that squad sneak up a mountain from over 1km away and stealthily come up to my previous position.

They also occasionally run away. I was just playing around with a BMP and a Stryker. Knocked the Stryker out, crew bailed killed one. Somehow flipped the BMP in the process of trying to run the other crewman down. After bailing my three man team out, I could not find any trace of the little SOB. Even in OFP they would eventually come back, but I could not find him...

They aren't as dumb and suicidal as you think they are, you just give them impossible situations that kill them before they can form a proper response.

Also, I'll have you know that there is no mountain range in the middle of my local golf course.

[liljb15 0]

I beg your pardon. They do attempt to flank you, however the environment may hinder this quite a bit. I remember sniping a squad on Malden, and I watched the remnants of that squad sneak up a mountain from over 1km away and stealthily come up to my previous position.

They also occasionally run away. I was just playing around with a BMP and a Stryker. Knocked the Stryker out, crew bailed killed one. Somehow flipped the BMP in the process of trying to run the other crewman down. After bailing my three man team out, I could not find any trace of the little SOB. Even in OFP they would eventually come back, but I could not find him...

They aren't as dumb and suicidal as you think they are, you just give them impossible situations that kill them before they can form a proper response.

Also, I'll have you know that there is no mountain range in the middle of my local golf course.

Come on commander you seriously can't tell me that when it comes to combat the AI is flawless in this game. I mean you can't even compare them to games like F.E.A.R, S.T.A.L.K.E.R, Call of duty, or even Brothers in arms.

Yes I know none of these games are simulators but in all these games the AI realisticly ran from cover to cover, they could get pinned down and in some of these games they covered each other. They didn't fire only when they saw the enemy they fired at where they last saw the enemy, they supressed the enemy and flanked the enemy. The only times they ever stood out in the open is if they had absolutely no choice.

Unlike the arma AI in arma they don't run from cover to cover, the enemy has never flanked me unless it was scripted, they would crouch in the open, they never covered each other, and each time I tried to suppress the enemy they would calmly look at me and put a bullet right between my eyes. There is no way in hell you can tell me that this is realistic AI.

[max power 21]

Call of Duty is a simulator. It simulates participating in

an action-packed war movie, and does that very well.

ArmA is a simulator too. It simulates being in combat with

suicidally fearless "soldiers" none of whom have the slightest

idea about real fieldcraft - on a battlefield that, with some

rare exceptions, is as practically featureless as the local

municipal golf-course.

So, both are "sims" - for a given contextual definition of "sim".

It's a strange concept- a simulation for an experience that doesn't exist. The simulation becomes the only vestige of the experience it attempts to simulate.

[Gisen 0]

Come on commander you seriously can't tell me that when it comes to combat the AI is flawless in this game. I mean you can't even compare them to games like F.E.A.R, S.T.A.L.K.E.R, Call of duty, or even Brothers in arms.

Yes I know none of these games are simulators but in all these games the AI realisticly ran from cover to cover, they could get pinned down and in some of these games they covered each other. They didn't fire only when they saw the enemy they fired at where they last saw the enemy, they supressed the enemy and flanked the enemy. The only times they ever stood out in the open is if they had absolutely no choice.

Unlike the arma AI in arma they don't run from cover to cover, the enemy has never flanked me unless it was scripted, they would crouch in the open, they never covered each other, and each time I tried to suppress the enemy they would calmly look at me and put a bullet right between my eyes. There is no way in hell you can tell me that this is realistic AI.

1) He didn't say the AI was flawless, stop making strawmen arguements.

2) All of those games have extremely narrow corridors of movement in which the enemy movement can be EXTREMELY heavily scripted i.e. a human actually sat and decided what they should do, where they should jump over a wall etc. Where it is not heavily scripted it's still a hell of a lot easier to program AI to react in a more visually impressive way in a little narrow corridor map.

3) The AI in Arma do run from cover to cover. They aren't very good at it, but they do do it. The AI in Arma WILL flank you without ANY scripting, please don't talk nonsense about things you know nothing about.

It's not realistic AI, it's definitely not perfect AI, but it is a fuckton more impressive than the AI in any other game so far.

[liljb15 0]

1) He didn't say the AI was flawless, stop making strawmen arguements.

2) All of those games have extremely narrow corridors of movement in which the enemy movement can be EXTREMELY heavily scripted i.e. a human actually sat and decided what they should do, where they should jump over a wall etc. Where it is not heavily scripted it's still a hell of a lot easier to program AI to react in a more visually impressive way in a little narrow corridor map.

3) The AI in Arma do run from cover to cover. They aren't very good at it, but they do do it. The AI in Arma WILL flank you without ANY scripting, please don't talk nonsense about things you know nothing about.

It's not realistic AI, it's definitely not perfect AI, but it is a fuckton more impressive than the AI in any other game so far.

1) I know he didn't say the AI was flawless that's just the choice of words I used

2)Even though Call of duty and fear do have narrow corridors. Brothers in arms and Stalker are known for their wide open maps and gameplay,please don't talk nonsense about things you don't know about.

3) I stand by what I said and I know what I'm talking about. I've had this game since it has launched in the U.S. and I have played it almost everyday since then. and also like I said the AI in arma has never flanked me unless I use that UPS script (great script by the way). And you tell me the last time the AI from arma crouched behind a wall or a tree.

The AI is impressive in everything EXCEPT combat. There are a whole lot of other games that have a "fuckton" of more impressive AI (at least when it comes to combat).

[Guest]

the title of this thread is apples and oranges

or cat and dog.

My cat wont bark so its not as cool as a dog. Or My car is much faster than my horse.

Like everyone mentioning.... COD is scripted and is a run and gun arcade game. You can take 99 percent damage and recover 3 seconds later. Great value for life...I put COD in the same category as missle command.... hit the button a bunch then get killed. Its fun, dont get me wrong.... Most bigger games now a days are made to the demographic that plays them. Our demographic being more based on realistic vs pacman type shooters is a smaller demographic.

Name one game that has a better replay value in terms of tools to create your own missions and have a computer deal without heavily scripted scenes?

Anyone suggesting that the combat should be the same in ARMA2 as it is in COD is obviously way to young to have the experience to understand how games have been made in the past and what ofp-arma-vbs1-vbs2 means next to the rest of whats out there. Im not bashing young players...im just saying that it wouldnt be good to mix sugar with gasoline or milk with beer.

Ill definitely play cod4, only SP as MP in COD has always been a joke...and the latest videos of MP combat look fun for about 15 seconds.....OIIEEeeee run in circles. mabey 1 vs 1 pans out to be fun or mabey 2 x 2.

Plus the whole system in COD with weapons and unlocking them is slighlty motivating feature to play more MP. But look at how a company would ruin the fun of the game by allowing kids play in an uneven community. I bet thats alot of fun playing mp the first time and playing against someone with more health, more armor, more ammo, more stable gun, better sights, more damage vs you set to default.

These games are so different as i mentioned earlier.... That I cant understand how people would want the same combat as in COD.

If I had to make the choice.... play COD4 the rest of my life or play OFP... Id choose better game over better graphics.

COD4 you will be stuck doing the same thing forever. OFP you can make into any era with mods-addons and supplied tools from the devs.

...not sure if there is a big COD modding scene or not...

[Guest Ti0n3r]

I agree with the thread starter. We need AI that acts more like a human and less like outdated AI from 2001...

Bash bash

[BraTTy 0]

In Arma there isn't much cover. You could script the whole island so that if you recieve fire from so-and-so direction AI would take cover over this object or that object.

Pretty simple really, just alot of work cause the island is so big.

I believe it was in BIS plans as I recall hearing similiar hype before Arma was released.Just another wanted time consuming feature.

Somebody could section off some of the island and spend a few nights doing it

Those that are making new islands would have to script it too so we could have another heavily scripted game like the rest and everyone would be happy

I watch my stepson play COD3 on his PS2 and there are obvious cover spots and only certain walkways etc...

Surely a feature planned for Arma2

Whats the sp mission in Arma they keep coming over the bridge.I lay on the hill and keep shooting them , you would think after they see a few bodies they would flank, they do a little (and eventually get me) cause there is always one hiding.

Another mission a group standing between buildings, I try to take them out as soon as I can, but they flank (they actually flank without heavy scripting) some go around one side, some prone, some around the other. They are pretty smart just not perfect yet.I am glad they aren't cause I still can't take them out.

That other mission you need to take out like 5 soldiers that will take out your vehicles entering the city. A few lay in the road like idiots, but its bait. Some went around the buildings.Hard to get em.

Sorry I am not well at remember the mission names , I just play them.But its just that.Its all up to the mission makers and they didn't spend as much time making Arma missions as they did OFP. And COD missions are replayed till they covered every aspect. Its just that , good mission making

(makes me wanna make some missions to prove you wrong that the AI is definately workable)

depending on your imagination and how you implement it

BIS has been working on AI longer than those other games and its just unfinished on the aspect that they haven't scripted all the cover spots, the island is large and not distinct pathways

[Second 0]

3) I stand by what I said and I know what I'm talking about. I've had this game since it has launched in the U.S. and I have played it almost everyday since then. and also like I said the AI in arma has never flanked me unless I use that UPS script (great script by the way). And you tell me the last time the AI from arma crouched behind a wall or a tree.

The AI is impressive in everything EXCEPT combat. There are a whole lot of other games that have a "fuckton" of more impressive AI (at least when it comes to combat).

Then you don't know nothing about ArmA's AI.

1.I've studied and scripted ArmA's AI.

2. I've had ArmA longer than you.

And i say Beagle has a point.

-They do flank, this should be first thing one see when playing against AI.

They tend to flank too much and in too low numbers and without cooperation, as they do indivudual soldier flankings and not team or halfsquad based flankings. This is something worth of critizing.

-They do take cover on reqular basis. It's programmed in to their .FSM (which enables their bounding overwatch drill). Efficiency how they do this... Could be criticized.

How they use cover as advantange (how they shoot and take cover when in cover) and not just use cover as camolage is other thing. This also can be critizied.

EDIT: Oh! when comparing these two (flanking and take cover) to GRAW (which i have). AI in taking cover in CQB is bad in ArmA. Wildreness then... Hard to tell, GRAW doesn't have much "wild terrain".

Do they flank in GRAW? I don't know does "teamleaders" (does GRAW have teamleader AI's?) have anything like this in his tool back.

[sgt gul 0]

Almost everytime i play, the AI is keeping me surprised. They even do surpress you, they run away. One time i was taking a corner, i saw a squad at the road. so i opened fire, they immediatly started running for trees or they hit the dirt and crawled away. Its true that the AI in arma isnt that great, but it sure gives a feeling that it isnt stupid and uses tactics. Better then the scripted shit in COD or any other FPS. So i sugges that you stop crying and play on.

[celery 8]

At least in "scripted" games the AI behaves close to what you'd expect from a soldier. ArmA AI behaves like what you'd expect from the first generation of dumb-o-matics with guns and primitive combat algorithms. Their mechanical moves and blank stare freak me out.

I just want to add against some of the favorite arguments that I'm not the least bit impressed with the "unscripted" mechanics and I don't care how few games have such a crap AI as ArmA or OFP. No other game gives me the impression of fighting against pieces of simple code and waypoints.

[NeMeSiS 11]

Anyone complaining about the AI not taking cover/shooting too good/not being suppressed/firefights being over too quickly: Try seconds suppression scripts (Link)

While the 'taking cover' itself isnt perfect, IMO its quite good as it doesnt end up in '1 dude behind a tree, now lets just wait until he pops up and shoot him in the face' like in GRAW/../...

Combine this with slightly lowered accuracy and accept slower paced gameplay and you have an instant winner. (IMO )

[Dallas 9]

I think those that complane about AI sharpshooters are doing exactly what they accuse the AI of doing. Failing to utilize cover. liljb15 you must dischard your COD habits when playing ArmA. There's not any automatic healing from just pausing your advancement and you don't advance your enemy headon, while they spawn in triggered swarms taking cover at their prearranged positions. You cannot stand much more than a shoot or two and you will need to get yourself in cover when you're engaged by more than one enemy.

You have to play ArmA, like OFP. This COD style where you intentionally take a couple on MG rounds in the cheat, just to locate the hidden MG nest, doesn't apply to ArmA. If you used your sights you'd observe how AIs often kneel or go prone before they engage whatever they just spotted. This should give your a good second or two to find cover and it should certainly give you a hit about using similar aiming stances too.

If you don't take cover from starters, you wont survive long enough in a firefight, to observe how good the AIs really are.

This is ArmAAAA!!!! (not COD)

[celery 8]

Dallas, what are you talking about? The thread starter only commented on the very poor AI and you draw conclusions about his game style. He hasn't said anything about him playing the game like Call of Duty.

Besides, it's hard to take cover behind anything else than a building (which are rare in the countryside, ArmA isn't an urban combat simulator afterall) because the sharpshooting AI can spot and shoot you through anything that doesn't stop a bullet.

[Ezekiel 0]

Well I've only played COD 1 and 3 on the Wii but from what I can see, EVERYthing they do is scripted. Its a case of spawn here (just out of sight) move to there and take cover behind this wall, and proceed to pop up and down firing shots (moving up and down the cover occassionally.

Admittedly if you put ArmA AI in the same CQB situation as the AI in COD you wouldn't be able to get them to act the same even with uber heavy scripting, cos they refuse to recognise cover they can crouch behind and shoot (ruins missions where you want them to use a row of sandbags as cover I've discovered, they just go prone and hide).

On the subject of S.T.A.L.K.E.R., I've actually played that game quite a lot and the AI isn't THAT impressive (although it is fun to play against). The trees are mostly set up with the bushy parts high up, which IMO would be something BIS should try out. Means they can use the trunks as (semi) hard cover intelligently, without getting confused by all the bushiness. But the AI in Stalker really isn't that smart, their idea of engaging you is to run to cover, follow the edge of it until they emerge and then charge out into the open firing at you madly until they run out of ammo, and then running back to cover whilst reloading (hilarious to watch when they have a double barrel shotgun with only 2 rounds loaded, 9 times out of 10 you end up shooting them in the back as they run for cover). They can't go prone, which reduces complication, they can't use grenades, can't heal, can't recognise dynamically created cover, and they're mindlessly suicidal. Like I said, they're fun to play against but hardly realistic.

I've never been in combat but I imagine the first priority is staying alive. If there's a squad coming at you down a road and you start shooting at them, the first thing they're going to think is 'my god we're being attacked', they don't know its just one person it could be a whole platoon with armoured support, so cover should take priority over being the first one to fire his rifle.