Movement precision

[Balschoiw 0]

I´m currently pulling my hair out on some mission-specific details that simply do not work because of the sluggy movement precision Arma offers.

If you want to have soldier moving to an exact position you´ll most of the times end up with the soldier standing somewhere (not really near) next to the position you gave him via waypoint as the big movement precision value that is implemented by default hinders the unit to go to the exact position of the waypoint.

This makes cutscenes with exact and necessary waypoint placement for units almost impossible as they will only move near the given waypoint and then stop.

If this was implemented for pathfinding reasons or whatever PLEASE give us a waypoint option "Spot" that forces to unit to move to the exact given location. It´s really very frustrating to do complex cutscenes and micromanagement of troops within a cramped urban area if they do not go to the given locations but only near the location given.

I guess I am not the only editor who is fed of having to use scripts to get units to where they actually should get to by waypoint.

OFP was very precise in this aspect, but Arma fails completely to make use of the given waypoint coordinates.

I´m afraid that BIS response ( as on other critical matters ) will be that they will try to fix it for Arma 2, but to be honest, that would be another slap.

[bravo 6 0]

Do you mean "Movement precision" for Ai's only or does your idea envolve human Movement precision aswell?

To be honest i can't also wait to have this problem fixed. Its a pain for all.

[opteryx 1562]

I dunno, just felt like posting this.

Quote[/b] ]

Marek:

AI from original the Arma was based on Flashpoint AI, and it was supposed to be used for fights in open areas. It wasn’t working too smooth then, with precision in meters. For Arma 2 we are making AI which will work in precision in centimeters, which communicates more, and gesticulate. AI Which takes cover behind the corners, leans from the corners, uses sidesteps, back steps and stuff like that. I think all of this makes for a completely new experience from player vs AI battles. We are working on the system of suppressive fire too.

[max power 21]

I´m currently pulling my hair out on some mission-specific details that simply do not work because of the sluggy movement precision Arma offers.

If you want to have soldier moving to an exact position you´ll most of the times end up with the soldier standing somewhere (not really near) next to the position you gave him via waypoint as the big movement precision value that is implemented by default hinders the unit to go to the exact position of the waypoint.

This makes cutscenes with exact and necessary waypoint placement for units almost impossible as they will only move near the given waypoint and then stop.

If this was implemented for pathfinding reasons or whatever PLEASE give us a waypoint option "Spot" that forces to unit to move to the exact given location. It´s really very frustrating to do complex cutscenes and micromanagement of troops within a cramped urban area if they do not go to the given locations but only near the location given.

I guess I am not the only editor who is fed of having to use scripts to get units to where they actually should get to by waypoint.

OFP was very precise in this aspect, but Arma fails completely to make use of the given waypoint coordinates.

I´m afraid that BIS response ( as on other critical matters ) will be that they will try to fix it for Arma 2, but to be honest, that would be another slap.

The movement precision is not buggy, it's just got a very low resolution. If this is a show stopper for you, time to sell your game.

However, I don't think that what you are describing is the movement precision but rather just the nature of the waypoint radii. Maybe there is another way to get the units to where they are going via some other command or scripting method.

This post has more drama than a highschool play wrap party. Seriously, get over yourself.

[MehMan 0]

I think it's been discussed already, but if the AI is near a road it'll prefer to follow the road and walk IN THE MIDDLE OF THE ROAD rather than follow the waypoint line. Lovely isn't it? That's why you can't have actual urban enviroments where the civvies move around because they'd use the middle of the road.

[celery 8]

The movement precision is not buggy, it's just got a very low resolution. If this is a show stopper for you, time to sell your game.

However, I don't think that what you are describing is the movement precision but rather just the nature of the waypoint radii. Maybe there is another way to get the units to where they are going via some other command or scripting method.

This post has more drama than a highschool play wrap party. Seriously, get over yourself.

I can find more drama in your post than Balschoiw's. It's time for you to get over with being personally offended every time someone finds a new (or old) flaw in Armed Assault. The original post has some sense to it and the bug can really make advanced cutscenes a pain for a mission maker.

[max power 21]

The movement precision is not buggy, it's just got a very low resolution.  If this is a show stopper for you, time to sell your game.

However, I don't think that what you are describing is the movement precision but rather just the nature of the waypoint radii.  Maybe there is another way to get the units to where they are going via some other command or scripting method.

This post has more drama than a highschool play wrap party.  Seriously, get over yourself.

I can find more drama in your post than Balschoiw's. It's time for you to get over with being personally offended every time someone finds a new (or old) flaw in Armed Assault. The original post has some sense to it and the bug can really make advanced cutscenes a pain for a mission maker.

Well if it isn't the BIS forums psychologist at large. Don't quit your day job.

He's saying that it's a showstopper and I think he's coming to the wrong conclusion about the nature of the problem... Show stopper tends to mean that he can't progress any farther with the game- that it's unplayable. If that isn't what he means, he shouldn't use that language. I think that that's not really what he means, and what he means is that he's frustrated with this problem. He should just say that. To overstate and use constant hyperbole is just creating drama. Troubleshooting posts are much easier to read if the person on the other end isn't screaming and raving.

[Heatseeker 0]

Shouldnt this be under mission editing?

If its for a cutscene find a workaround, change the location or think of another way?

Try to change a.i. behaviour or combat mode.. use getpos on a empty H, etc.

Just remember the most important thing:

If you pulll your hair off you will regret it later .

[celery 8]

The movement precision is not buggy, it's just got a very low resolution. If this is a show stopper for you, time to sell your game.

However, I don't think that what you are describing is the movement precision but rather just the nature of the waypoint radii. Maybe there is another way to get the units to where they are going via some other command or scripting method.

This post has more drama than a highschool play wrap party. Seriously, get over yourself.

I can find more drama in your post than Balschoiw's. It's time for you to get over with being personally offended every time someone finds a new (or old) flaw in Armed Assault. The original post has some sense to it and the bug can really make advanced cutscenes a pain for a mission maker.

Well if it isn't the BIS forums psychologist at large. Don't quit your day job.

He's saying that it's a showstopper and I think he's coming to the wrong conclusion about the nature of the problem... Show stopper tends to mean that he can't progress any farther with the game- that it's unplayable. If that isn't what he means, he shouldn't use that language. I think that that's not really what he means, and what he means is that he's frustrated with this problem. He should just say that. To overstate and use constant hyperbole is just creating drama. Troubleshooting posts are much easier to read if the person on the other end isn't screaming and raving.

I am flattered that you call me a psychologist, clearly indicating that I am on to something.

If he's making a cutscene but it's not possible because the waypoints are inaccurate or random, is it not fair to call it a show stopper? Afterall, it stops you from making a good cutscene show.

I'm sure being the Devil's advocate is exciting but it creates a bad atmosphere on this forum. If you read the original post again you will see that there is no screaming or raving, only informing about the bug, its severity and giving an idea to solve the problem. Talk about overstating (and hypocrisy).

[frederf 0]

Quote[/b] ]Show stopper tends to mean that he can't progress any farther with the game- that it's unplayable.

The 'game' in this case being his attempt to make a cut scene. And because of ArmA's quirks therefore he cannot progress farther with the 'game.' It is 'unplayable.'

It is a showstopper, QED. Thank you for the use of your definition there.

----------

The original post lacked positive wording like "This thing is annoying and preventing me from doing what I want to do. Has anyone found a way to be more precise?" rather than the frustrated spew that he did write.

On the gasp helpful side of things, I'd like to vaguely recall that there is a way to adjust how "precise" waypoints are. I'm pretty sure when in an AH-1 flying to a mission waypoint, the tolerances are different than if you were walking there.

In a nutshell:

Flying tolerance: 100m

Walking tolerance: 10m

Custom tolerance: ???m

Does anyone know how to adjust the "fudge" range on waypoints? Setting it to a very low number would possibly help the OP's predicament.

[NeMeSiS 11]

On the gasp helpful side of things, I'd like to vaguely recall that there is a way to adjust how "precise" waypoints are. I'm pretty sure when in an AH-1 flying to a mission waypoint, the tolerances are different than if you were walking there.

In a nutshell:

Flying tolerance: 100m

Walking tolerance: 10m

Custom tolerance: ???m

Its the 'precision=' value in the config, ive checked it and for the man class it seems to be 1 meter(Unless its redefined somewhere i didnt look), same as in OFP.

You could lower this but <1 can get quite buggy IIRC(units endlessly trying to reach their waypoint).

<s>I dont know if different behaviours have any effect on this but it may be worth to check it out.</s>

EDIT: Probably not.

[max power 21]

I am flattered that you call me a psychologist, clearly indicating that I am on to something.

If he's making a cutscene but it's not possible because the waypoints are inaccurate or random, is it not fair to call it a show stopper? Afterall, it stops you from making a good cutscene show.

I'm sure being the Devil's advocate is exciting but it creates a bad atmosphere on this forum. If you read the original post again you will see that there is no screaming or raving, only informing about the bug, its severity and giving an idea to solve the problem. Talk about overstating (and hypocrisy).

Uh, no, I was implying that you think you're on to something.  Ergo, don't quit your day job.  

Just as in our previous conversations, Celery, there is a minimum level that I will stoop to in order to explain something.  If you lack the understanding to decode what I'm saying from simple english to ideas in your head, I cannot help you.

Follow closely.  This is the last thing I will say on the subject:

If he is trying to do something that is not part of the core program and it is behaving as it was designed, then he's trying to make hollywood movies in photoshop.  It may be possible, but it will be combersome, difficult, effort intensive, and will require some outside-the-box solutions.  He has every right to voice his opinion but playing it like it's some kind of personal affront by BIS to him.  It's unnecessarily dramatic.

Clearly, the final line in his post- the one that you're going to take home with you if your remember nothing else- is about how BIS is personally affronting him. This is a strange perception, and a statement based solely on emotional appeal. It's dramatic rhetoric.

[Balschoiw 0]

I am seriously wondering if any of those who feel so offended by my post actually ever tried the things I mentioned in my post.

It´s not only about cutscenes, it´s about patrol routes offroad, defined movement of enemies in cities offroad, almost everywhere.

The fact that all infantry units prefer roadways (the middle of the road) to move through open terrain is just plain stupid. You give them waypoints in the open field to have a covered approach and they decide that it´s the ultimate wisdom to disregard the waypoints and just go in the middle of the roadf, although there is no waypoint at the road for them.

As it is now, the waypoints seem to be only "suggestions" for AI units that they happily disregard.

If you ever set up a custom perimeter in open terrain and tried to have units patrol the perimeter with waypoints you will find out very soon that they either get stuck at some point, wildly shaking their heads, or run through the perimeter objects to waypoints they have never been given.

The AI infantry troops disregard waypoints. For them it just seems to be a non-binding advice.

Quote[/b] ]The movement precision is not buggy, it's just got a very low resolution.

Oh cool. Sure it´s a bug if I place a waypoint at an exact spot and I want the unit to go there, but the unit stops 10 m´s away and breaks it there. You can call it low resolution or whatever, but in my book a waypoint should be reached, not only reached 1 out of 10 times. It worked in OFP, so don´t give me any whacko explanations.

Quote[/b] ]If this is a show stopper for you, time to sell your game.

Pfft. Sorry for pointing out a deficit.

Quote[/b] ]Maybe there is another way to get the units to where they are going via some other command or scripting method.

Do you know how much time I spend(t) implementing workarounds for functions that are supposed to be working out of the box with Arma ? Ever tried to have a convoi crossing a bridge ? Ever tried to send a unit to an EXACT location ? If you are into Arma editing you know what I´m talking about. It´s this extra-work we have to do for simple stuff as the BIS implementation is simply flawed.

Simple as that.

All I´m asking for is that those things get fixed as they are apparently broken the way they are implemented today.

It´s funny if you spend time on defining routes offroad and find out that they all run for the next road to do the "whackadellic" approach.

Quote[/b] ]Show stopper tends to mean that he can't progress any farther with the game- that it's unplayable.

People ask for content, that´s what kept OFP alive. Addons alone do not change much. There have to be missions. I´ve always made missions for OFP and I guess over the years there have been a bunch of decent missions released by me, but editing with Arma often sends you straight into a wall as the most simple things just do not work. Simple as sending a unit to a waypoint. It just doesn´t work at times. Most of the times if the waypoint is not on some street...

I guess I already spent more time finding workarounds for Arma issues than actually editing the missions. So yes, for me as a mission-creator it´s a showstopper. If you think that you can do missions in Arma with the same fluidity as with OFP, you´re wrong. You will watch vehicles driving through solid bridges, AI units who are supposed to approach in cover and choose to run in the middle of the road, setpossed units who are unable to shoot from balconies, etc, etc.

You implement some really stupid, simple thing only to find out that you have to implement another workaround just to make it work.

I know that it is a result of the rushed release, but it´s about time that those things get worked upon and fixed in the end. Leaving Arma just for the sake of Arma 2, where everything will be better, faster, whatever is simply wrong imo as it would mean that we all just stop working on our projects right now, bin Arma and forget about it. Is that the solution ? Is that the thing BIS should be after ?

Quote[/b] ]If he is trying to do something that is not part of the core program and it is behaving as it was designed, then he's trying to make hollywood movies in photoshop.

I didn´t know there was magic attached to simple waypoints.

Strange...it worked like a charm with OFP but with Arma it´s broken. Must be magic.

Quote[/b] ]Clearly, the final line in his post- the one that you're going to take home with you if your remember nothing else- is about how BIS is personally affronting him.

Bullshit. I simply ask for a solution and I guess I´m not the only editor who´d like to see a solution for basic things that are supposed to work out of the box.

You can claim whatever you want to, but I´ve always been very loyal with BIS, but lately I feel a bit dissapointed that BIS always mentiones Arma 2 when it comes to fixes or tweaks for Arma 1. I do not own Arma 2 , but I do own Arma 1 and I want to work with it. Not more, not less.

[fasad 1]

On the gasp helpful side of things, I'd like to vaguely recall that there is a way to adjust how "precise" waypoints are. I'm pretty sure when in an AH-1 flying to a mission waypoint, the tolerances are different than if you were walking there.

In a nutshell:

Flying tolerance: 100m

Walking tolerance: 10m

Custom tolerance: ???m

Its the 'precision=' value in the config, ive checked it and for the man class it seems to be 1 meter(Unless its redefined somewhere i didnt look), same as in OFP.

You could lower this but <1 can get quite buggy IIRC(units endlessly trying to reach their waypoint).

<s>I dont know if different behaviours have any effect on this but it may be worth to check it out.</s>

EDIT: Probably not.

While testing for the mission editor article, I found AI man units completed a move to waypoint when within 1m or so, vehicles were 5 or 10, aircraft 50 or 100m. For players, each of these was multiplied by about 5 or 10 (cant remember the exact numbers).

Of course these were best case scenarios, in open fields, and I suspect the AI may say "close enough" a little further away in complex urban terrain or under high cpu load.

[NeMeSiS 11]

Of course these were best case scenarios, in open fields, and I suspect the AI may say "close enough" a little further away in complex urban terrain or under high cpu load.

Very true

It may be worth to just force the unit around with play/switchmove if its a cutscene anyway.

EDIT: Some more precision values stuff.

[Balschoiw 0]

Quote[/b] ] Of course these were best case scenarios, in open fields, and I suspect the AI may say "close enough" a little further away in complex urban terrain or under high cpu load.

Or with/at custom placed empty objects like sandbags, wrecks, tents, etc.

Make a try. Place an empty open tent east somewhere. Place a unit inside the tent and give him a waypoint outside of the tent.

Enjoy.

He will not be able to leave the tent at all, unless he crawls.

If there should be some other objects around the tent by accident he will get totally confused and just keep standing although there should be enough room to move if he followed the given waypoints.

For me it´s very hard to reproduce why things happen in Arma. In this case it seems to be a combination of a few issues:

1. east tent open´s entrance is too low to allow soldiers to pass through

2. objects placed out side the tent seem to be interfering with route calculations. It seems like they appear as bigger obstacles to the AI than they really are.

3. The waypoints aren´t followed precisely.

I don´t know at wich part the AI gets lost, but it certainly does all the time.

Another easy to reproduce test that shows the flaws is this:

1. Place a unit somewhere in open terrain

2. Create a few WP´s , careless, move

3. Cycle the waypoints to see that the unit always does the same

4. Place a roadcone at each Waypoint

You will see that the unit gets to WP, tries to avoid the cone by 3 meters at least and moves on in funny curves to next waypoint where it will avoid the cone again by at least 3 meters.

This is a simple demonstration that shows how much trouble you get if you create a custom campside or custom perimeter and try to have AI units move within the camp or along the perimeter. Basically it will get lost while avoiding all the objects.

In one example I had an AI move straight into a custom built camp. Plenty of space, no problem I thought. The unit ended up circling the camp from the outside and never made it to the given WP in a straight line. As I said, there´s plenty of space, but the AI seems so busy to avoid objects with a wide pattern that it´s impossible to get him, where he´s supposed to go to.

This is why I asked for the implementation of a waypoint type that sends a unit straight from point A to point B.

If this kind of waypoint command also disregards the roadway LOD it would also enable us to have units patrol on solid rooftops which is not possible by now unless the building has buildingPos for the rooftop as the AI will always try to get to the ground first as it´s missing a roadway LOD on higher surfaces.

Bad idea ?

[Jex =TE= 0]

Trying to get the damn AI to walk between a fence and a rock (on the 2 small islands up in the NW of the map) when there is 20 feet between them is impossible for them. I had to change my mission because of these friggin morons. Very frustrating and it doesn't help to read asinine comments to perfectly honest questions.

[kestrel7e7 0]

Very frustrating and it doesn't help to read asinine comments to perfectly honest questions.

This forum has some notorious trolls who never fail to jump to ArmA's defence despite their ignorance of the topic. I can completely appreciate the frustration of ArmA editors who want to improve ArmA's longevity while being faced with buggy and broken functions and the impending ArmA2 that will ultimately render their work obsolete. Yet they struggle on for the good of the community, the last thing they need is to be held in contempt just because they draw attention to some of ArmA's shortcomings.

[TRexian 0]

I'm an ArmA noob (although I enjoyed OFP for awhile) so I'm not sure when to be offended or not, so I'll try to be naively helpful and bask in the glory that is my noobness.

I have seen at least 2 scripts for helicopter precision flying (Mando and one in the Geloxo tools). I am going to play with these for a mission I'm working on. But, it occurs to me that those might be "fitted" to work with ground units, too?

Particularly in the context of a cut-scene, where "normal" AI considerations are less important than hitting the marks.

[Balschoiw 0]

Quote[/b] ] But, it occurs to me that those might be "fitted" to work with ground units, too?

Not really as Mando´s script irons out finetuning distance issues with a setVelocity directive that can´t really be applied to ground units as it would look wrong if people are just moved around like chess figures

Apart from that, I´m not really looking for another scripted workaround that has to be embedded for any unit in question. Most of the times for a big part of the units on a map. This simply wouldn´t work.

That´s why I asked BIS for an implementation of a new waypoint type that would disregard objects and simply send a unit from point A to point B without the object-avoidance coding and leaves it up to the mission-editor to find and place a suitable route for AI in cramped (or better say terrain with objects) areas.

If there are problems with automatic route-planning there has to be an option to override it and place the WP´s manually, binding for the AI, no matter if there is a bush nearby, or a custom placed object.

[joke]

Something like that is already in Arma. You can see it when units magically run through objects, wrecks, walls when they think you don´t see them

[/joke]

[Jex =TE= 0]

[joke]

Something like that is already in Arma. You can see it when units magically run through objects, wrecks, walls when they think you don´t see them

[/joke]

Or even funnier when one AI runs through a building and shoots your mate in the back, runs back into the building with you shooting after him but you just hit the wall and he then runs back through the building and shoots you - as you draw your last breath you hear the AI creasing up on the other side of the building...

[mr reality 0]

I reported something similar in the bug tracker here. Basically they said its by design, so we wont be seeing any improvements. Call me melodramatic, buts it's this very thing that's stopped me making missions. If the squad wont go where i want it to why should i spend more time trying to find a suitable location that might work.

[ACF 0]

Another easy to reproduce test that shows the flaws is this:

1. Place a unit somewhere in open terrain

2. Create a few WP´s , careless, move

3. Cycle the waypoints to see that the unit always does the same

4. Place a roadcone at each Waypoint

You will see that the unit gets to WP, tries to avoid the cone by 3 meters at least and moves on in funny curves to next waypoint where it will avoid the cone again by at least 3 meters.

I'm trying my hardest not to sound sarcastic so forgive me if I fail, but isn't this demonstrating an acceptable level of collision detection? What real intelligence would attempt to balance or impale itself on a cone?  OK, I admit I'd rather it wasn't an obvious 3m detour but that's the lesser of the two evils IMHO.

Waypoint completion is fuzzy and always has been. The more WPs & object you place in a small area, the more they will conflict. It is a pain in cutscenes, but that's the challenge.

The bottom line is that you cannot rely on an AI actor to hit the same mark time and time again. If placement is that critical, use one AI for the moving scene then cut away to a preplaced, SetFaced double.

I reported something similar in the bug tracker here.

This bug is the same feature we had in OFP. I can remember lots of 'WTF OMG how do I get loons to drive down the road?' type posts to which the answer was always 'put them in SAFE'.

[rundll.exe 12]

I have the strong feeling that pathfinding is related to the FPS, even in single player. (in MP its clear AI gets realllly stupid below 20fps)

What is your average fps while doing those test Bals?

[Balschoiw 0]

Quote[/b] ]I'm trying my hardest not to sound sarcastic so forgive me if I fail, but isn't this demonstrating an acceptable level of collision detection?

I´m not saying that collision detection is a bad thing, neverthe less this is not collision detection but collision avoidance patterns that jump in here.

They do not collide, they avoid objects of any nature with a circular movement.

I´m not saying that is a bad thing, but it makes it impossible to have the most simple things work, like a soldier going from point 1 to point 2. Even if there is no object in the direct pathway the AI will consider objects near the pathway (3-5 m´s) as an obstacle and do their circular avoidance patterns that ruins every pathway defined.

With OFP there has never been such nasty behaviour for footsoldiers. We were able to send them through narrowq passages, along fences, sandbag walls on patrolroutes and didn´t have to worry that they will get lost with objects that are meters away from them. This has been changed for Arma.

Quote[/b] ]The more WPs & object you place in a small area, the more they will conflict. It is a pain in cutscenes, but that's the challenge.

I´m not taliking about small areas. Even if you place a tent in the open place a unit directly infront of the tent and have another unit move up to the placed unit via WP or doMove command the unit will stop far away (about 5 - 7 meters) and simply refuse to get close to the unit at the object.

I wouldn´t mind if the place was literally crowded with objects or such, but it´s one simple object that can and will destroy the path.

Quote[/b] ] If placement is that critical, use one AI for the moving scene then cut away to a preplaced, SetFaced double.

The problem not only affects cutscenes. If it only was that, it would be no biggy as we can do workarounds, but it´s also very much wrecking mission design. The moment you try to guide units through certain areas or have patrols or moving units that are supposed to do certain things at certain locations combined with movement you will definately run into those issues. There is no workaround for this. For the player it will look like bad mission design and furthermore it can wreck a mission if units do not hit triggers as they chose different routes, get lost or simply stan in the open shaking their heads.

Even the original Arma campaign was affected by those issues as some units or vehicles never made it to their destination as they were too busy avoiding objects and got lost.

I´m not asking for the removal of the current system, I´m only opting for a new waypoint Move-Straight that disables the embedded pathfinding routine with collision avoidance and simply sends a unit from one point to another without thinking about the objects that "could" be in the way. It ´s the matter of the editor then to compose a good and working route while the AI simply should move without thinking basically.

People want to have missions that are working, that are "alive" and interactive, where something is going on in the background, where people in city run up to you and alert you, deliver a message and such. That is not possible right now, because most of the times the AI will not be able to fulfill it´s waypoints in an accurate manner and get stuck.

Remember the Arma campaign mission where you are supposed to fight off SLA troops from a hilly ridge with sandbags and camo nettings ? I can´t remember how often I had to run back from the landies to the camo nets to shoot one of the AI who almost always got stuck near the objects and was just shaking his head in agony.

This avoidance also affects vehicles. Ever sent a motorbike patrol through open terrain with bushes ? It´s fun to watch but you´ll never know at wich point the driver will just give up and end his drive.