Ai needs fixin!

[walker 0]

Hi all

The main problems with the M4A1 are that unless it is using subsonic munition it will be louder than this.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K6giOcB2v4M

The main advantage of a suppressor are. Flash reduction and in the case of supersonic rounds that it is harder to locate where the shot came from but you would still know it had been fired.

If it is using subsonic munition with suppressor it is still emitting in excess of 110 decibels. The main problem is that the reduction pressure means it maybe that it no longer has enough power to auto cock the bolt and requires something called Neilson device to work properly.

Here is video of C9 firing suppressed subsonic as you can see it still real loud.

http://www.canadiantactical.ca/Video/SuppressedC9.mpg

You will also find that the sound of the bolt working is real loud and the suppressor has no effect on that.

This is an M4 Subsonic see what I mean

Kind Regards walker

[Heatseeker 0]

The supressor, silencer or even the lights are irrelevant factors. Artificial light sources (light poles) dont increase a.i's ability to see in a dark environment.

A supressor or silencer is only for show (against a.i. that is), the supressed/silenced effect is 100% coded in the SD amunition.

This means you can use 5.56stanagSD on a M16 and it will have the same effect on a.i. a suppressed sopmod does.

The same is true for the M9 and MP5A5 (loaded with SD ammo).

This is a design flaw wich results from BIS decision of making interchangeable (<<spl) amunition .

Vanilla a.i. is ok.. but with DAC the a.i. is f a n t a s t i c .

[charliereddog 9]

Walker, I'm impressed by your cogent arguments. I'd love to see the upgraded AI you've programmed from the results of all your research. oh that's right, you haven't done it have you???

You've admitted the AI is flawed in some respects, yet you haven't fixed it either even with all the knowledge you're expecting Ethne to acquire?

Also, the point about ArmA is the openness of the terrain and the replayablility available. Forcing the player to complete a mission one way seems a little strange for such a good game.

All this doesn't negate the fact that ethne's thread title is a little one sided and a little late in the day considering all the other threads regarding AI behaviour and it's failings.

And to those who were saying that he couldn't complain and compare to another game but agree there is a failing in the AI. What are you comparing it to? For it to have a failing means it doesn't ahve what something else does, be that your favourite twitcher FPS or your own standards/ expectations.

We're all on the same page here. It's just some of us are more arsey than others.

[bangtail 0]

I have to agree with you Charlie. Only being able to complete a mission one way in a game that is touted as completely non linear and open ended is a little contradictory to say the least.

I too would like to see Walker's utopian vision of AI realised but as you so rightly stated neither he (with all his AI knowledge), BIS nor anyone else have managed to create the AI we are all looking for.

Having said that, for such a grand undertaking, the AI aren't terrible. There are just certain situations where things could be improved.

Regards

E

[froggyluv 2136]

Good lord would you guys stop playing tit-for-tat  

DAC2, Durgs Vegetation,True Range and many other mods have already shown some nice improvements in AI. As far as levels being too linear, your talking about ONE mission out of hundreds if not thousands and the vast majority I've played are completely non-linear.

[bangtail 0]

Good lord would you guys stop playing tit-for-tat  

DAC2, Durgs Vegetation,True Range and many other mods have already shown some nice improvements in AI. As far as levels being too linear, your talking about ONE mission out of hundreds if not thousands and the vast majority I've played are completely non-linear.

Yes, and all the missions I have designed are entirely non-linear without any mods whatsoever. That wasn't the point. I made an observation/criticism about how the AI react in certain situations and how they seem to know where you are on a dark, stormy night when I am well concealled, using a weapon (M9SD) that is virtually silent (I originally used the M4 QDS, but I changed to the M9SD).

That is what I was quite specifically referring to.

E

[Second 0]

I have to agree with you Charlie. Only being able to complete a mission one way in a game that is touted as completely non linear and open ended is a little contradictory to say the least.

So? maybe situation was like it, one serious weakness in defence of that base. It's way too linear to always have option complete mission in several good ways. I find it seriously stupid and dump... n00b-likeish.

You can gun your way in, can't you?

You can TRY sneak your way into from several places like from gates, can't you?

Well those are bad options, but you can choose to try those options if you like. No one isn't forcing you to go that way, or takes away your guns until you have reached your waypoint... Am i right?

Think this for a moment: Was there flaw in mission design or in AI

Cause i can tweak behaviour of AI very-very much, expacely in these "sneak into base"-missions. I think your not very experienced or advanced mission designer if you can't figure out what you can do to AI.

I think community, when arguing about AI, should make clear to itself what are problems correctable with proper mission design. Which aspects are cubersome but possible with some drawbacks to fix or tweak with proper mission design. And which AI aspects are un-fixable in mission design.

Flexibility to tweak of AI is huge aspect in ArmA. That is what ArmA does best, i think.

[bangtail 0]

If you're going to try and insult me, I wont even bother entertaining what you have to say. I have been designing missions since OFP was released.

Am I the best? Not a snowball's chance in hell but I do know my way around the editor and some intermediate scripting.

Gun your way in? Go give that a try and let me know how that works out for you  

Calling people noobs etc without actually addressing the original complaint doesnt make you look very clever.

E

[funnyguy1 0]

I pasted the wrong link in my previous post (it's updatet now). Sorry.

I'm neither the autor of any of the vids, nor do I know how had the AI been set up. The fact is: they were wiped out, without even noticing what hit them. There are methods of making them smarter, and I'm aware of that, as I make missions for my own use, but in that particular case, and in many similar ones, whole AI team gets wasted either by you, or the enemy AI.

I just wanted to remind the fact that AI isn't that uber hard as some may think. And there are certain ways of dealing with them.

[bangtail 0]

Very good point Funnyguy.

They arent that hard to beat, for instance I could sit outside that base on a hill with an M21 and kill all of them with no risk to myself.

Here is the problem, that is far from realistic. Using an unsuppressed weapon would easily expose the muzzle flash, not to mention the noise.

What should happen in that particular case is that an AI sniper or AI armour for that matter returns fire. Instead they either lie down or run around in a panic, while the armour just sits there. Meanwhile when I put a subsonic, silenced round in the back of a guards head at close range, the whole base erupts! Its definitely the lack of consistency that I find a little annoying

When the AI is too "good", it is more akin to "cheating" than them being smart.

I have seen the AI do some very impressive things in ArmA and OFP and Ill give credit where credit is due.

[Second 0]

If you're going to try and insult me, I wont even bother entertaining what you have to say. I have been designing missions since OFP was released.

Am I the best? Not a snowball's chance in hell but I do know my way around the editor and some intermediate scripting.

Gun your way in? Go give that a try and let me know how that works out for you

Calling people noobs etc without actually addressing the original complaint doesnt make you look very clever.

E

First: did i call you n00b... No i did not. I called n00bish the thing that there has to be always multiple ways (with equal "difficulty") to complete given objective. Should there be several un-guarded holes in wall, or should HQ give you a tank?

About gunning my way in to that base. As i said you or i have option to do so. I did say it would be bad/hard idea. But still it's possible, i've done that alot.

So you have designed mission from beginning of OFP... Does it tell that your advanced? Because most of what your saying are poiting to BAD mission design! Well in your point of view, i can't find it to be bad mission desiging for example in that sabotage mission. I don't see most of what your saying to indicate to actual problems in AI.

Mission design is expected to back-up AI, like briefing is to back-up player! In other words: You can make mission with bad guides to AI and claim that AI sucks. Did this make it any clearer? Walker was earlier pointing at the same thing.

Example: I can make mission where troops don't react anyway when tank drives over wall into base, blows few vehicles and drives away. Let's say that it simulates conditions where troops have had their shipment of Vodka after exhausting 2 weeks combatphase without sleep.

I can make two officers come out from barracks when player fires tanks cannon. If they don't see or hear the tank in one minute they go back to bed. If they do hear or see the tank they raise alarm and everyone is awake. This simulates the fact that troops might have had also bean-soup which makes them to fart loudly (bit like tanks cannon when it fires) so officers has to be certain that it was not a fart.

I can make so that when player sets his foot inside base whole base goes nuts. This simulates that base has received their new sensor-set to help with guarding.

You see? There are several ways how base could react in several different situations to something. It's better that there are ways to tweak it. One stock AI can't fullfill all of that.

Now. The issue remains: What can be done by scripting, triggers when designing missions etc and what not. And what can be done by "general" scripts (addons) which overhauls AI and what not. Forexample SLX mod for OFP.

[bangtail 0]

Sorry, I misunderstood your post. After I re-read it I realised that the n00b comment was not directed at me

As I said, I have been making missions since OFP, I very clearly stated that I do not consider myself the best. I do understand what I consider good AI as opposed to bad AI however. This doesn't have much to do with designing missions.

The mission in question, Sabotage, is one that was designed by BIS. I don't understand what you mean when you say "I don't see the problems". What matters to me is that I see them and so do others who I play with. If it isnt the AI, then what exactly is it?

Have they become self aware? Is it 2:14 a.m. on August the 29th?

To be perfectly honest you aren't making any valid points apart from trying to imply in more than one post that I dont know what Im doing.

Cheers for your insights but I think I am competent enough as a mission designer and a player and I still find the AI in this situation to be omniscient and in my personal experience, it detracts from the overall experience that is Arma!

Good day,

E

[wamingo 1]

Infantry AI is not able to return fire at ranges past ~600m ish which is about ~300m short of the the default visibility.

BIS gave us the ability to increase visibility way beyond the default, but didn't make AI dynamic enough to adapt. This is regretable for certain, but we should probably cut them some slack - giving us such an open and dynamic game is not easy.

It would be very nice if it was a reasonably simple affair to increase their engagement ranges though.

Requesting SetAIViewDistance #

global for all ai in a mission.

discuss

[Second 0]

Ethne:

Quote[/b] ]As I said, I have been making missions since OFP, I very clearly stated that I do not consider myself the best. I do understand what I consider good AI as opposed to bad AI however. This doesn't have much to do with designing missions.

Yes there are aspect which are impossible to make better with scripts or triggers. However, forexample guard duty relies heavily on scripting and triggers. AI guards can do much about nothing. Stock-AI just spots enemy, informs it to the rest of his squad, and tries to shoot it. Waypoints give patrol routes to AI (mission makers responsibility). When conditions of alarm, reaction to alarm are resposibilities of mission maker. AI has no ways to handle this, it relies on mission making

I'm not pro myself. But i've studied ArmA's and OFP's AI quite a bit when trying to mod it.

Quote[/b] ]Have they become self aware? Is it 2:14 a.m. on August the 29th?

But this is what mission maker chooses to do. I can make that same mission to perform so that you blow him up with handgrenade or stachel charge and base remains silent. No alarm, nothing. Zero. Nada.

Quote[/b] ]To be perfectly honest you aren't making any valid points apart from trying to imply in more than one post that I dont know what Im doing.

To your knowledge i opened mission .PBO and looked it thru therally and also tested AI's ability to spot killed buddies (not in same group) in that mission. Results: Ai is fine, you shoot it to head and it dies instantly. You shoot it to chest and it screams, which can be heard to long distance. Pretty logical, hu? Don't let them scream and you can kill whole camp. Shoot one so that he manages to scream before passin away and congrulations you have alerted whole base! Guys holding the base aren't any greens anymore. They are at regular level, which makes them quite sharp for these kinds of things.

How ever there is one minor flaw or feature in one trigger, i don't think it that flaw, but to someone it might be an issue. If someone even briefly sees you before you kill him with clean head shot then whole base is alerted. This however ain't flaw in AI, but it is in trigger as there are no douplechecks conserning does spotter of player live after short moment anymore (simulates time to react before shouting to others etc. Well there are maybe only 0.01% changes that this would happen, so it ain't THAT major problem). After short moment from you have been spotted the whole base is alarmed and troops in base rush to move around base (and yes there are helluva lot of them). quite logical hu?

Still your saying that it's problem with AI? Have you tested it's mechanics before bashing it?

Sorry if i sound to be hard on you. I have not such intetion. But you seem to be quite bullheaded

[NoRailgunner 0]

Night Strike mission needs fixing too. Its very often that I hear at mission start gunshots and when I'm close to the camp tanks are on guard and driving around.

I finished this mission with different tactics. But if tanks are moving it's more like "Die Hard" - one SF hero against all OPFOR. Imho Mission design could be better to show silent actions.

Maybe in ArmA 2 BIS implements some usefull additional options for waypoints in editor?

[Second 0]

Maybe in ArmA 2 BIS implements some usefull additional options for waypoints in editor?

I would welcome that. Mission making would get alot easier, if one could tune AI reactions to hostiles, reaction to casualities, aggresiveness etc directly when planning waypoints. Now tweaking those things requires use of scripting-commands, and because of that they are ignored by many (i don't think BIS itself uses those commands in their missions ). I bet that would make use of commands much more easier to everyone.

It ain't as powerful as scripting, but it's alot more easier.

[Col. Faulkner 0]

Infantry AI is not able to return fire at ranges past ~600m ish which is about ~300m short of the the default visibility.

BIS gave us the ability to increase visibility way beyond the default, but didn't make AI dynamic enough to adapt. This is regretable for certain, but we should probably cut them some slack - giving us such an open and dynamic game is not easy.

It would be very nice if it was a reasonably simple affair to increase their engagement ranges though.

Requesting SetAIViewDistance #

global for all ai in a mission.

discuss

But only for GPMGs and a very few other specialist weapons

(eg. LSW, SVD, "designated marksman" rifles, etc). Ordinary

riflemen shouldn't be firing over 600m (in reality, 600m is

the outer limit for section fire; 300m or less for individual

fire).

[bangtail 0]

Ethne:

Quote[/b] ]As I said, I have been making missions since OFP, I very clearly stated that I do not consider myself the best. I do understand what I consider good AI as opposed to bad AI however. This doesn't have much to do with designing missions.

Yes there are aspect which are impossible to make better with scripts or triggers. However, forexample guard duty relies heavily on scripting and triggers. AI guards can do much about nothing. Stock-AI just spots enemy, informs it to the rest of his squad, and tries to shoot it. Waypoints give patrol routes to AI (mission makers responsibility). When conditions of alarm, reaction to alarm are resposibilities of mission maker. AI has no ways to handle this, it relies on mission making

I'm not pro myself. But i've studied ArmA's and OFP's AI quite a bit when trying to mod it.

Quote[/b] ]Have they become self aware? Is it 2:14 a.m. on August the 29th?

But this is what mission maker chooses to do. I can make that same mission to perform so that you blow him up with handgrenade or stachel charge and base remains silent. No alarm, nothing. Zero. Nada.

Quote[/b] ]To be perfectly honest you aren't making any valid points apart from trying to imply in more than one post that I dont know what Im doing.

To your knowledge i opened mission .PBO and looked it thru therally and also tested AI's ability to spot killed buddies (not in same group) in that mission. Results: Ai is fine, you shoot it to head and it dies instantly. You shoot it to chest and it screams, which can be heard to long distance. Pretty logical, hu? Don't let them scream and you can kill whole camp. Shoot one so that he manages to scream before passin away and congrulations you have alerted whole base! Guys holding the base aren't any greens anymore. They are at regular level, which makes them quite sharp for these kinds of things.

How ever there is one minor flaw or feature in one trigger, i don't think it that flaw, but to someone it might be an issue. If someone even briefly sees you before you kill him with clean head shot then whole base is alerted. This however ain't flaw in AI, but it is in trigger as there are no douplechecks conserning does spotter of player live after short moment anymore (simulates time to react before shouting to others etc. Well there are maybe only 0.01% changes that this would happen, so it ain't THAT major problem). After short moment from you have been spotted the whole base is alarmed and troops in base rush to move around base (and yes there are helluva lot of them). quite logical hu?

Still your saying that it's problem with AI? Have you tested it's mechanics before bashing it?

Sorry if i sound to be hard on you. I have not such intetion. But you seem to be quite bullheaded  

End of discussion tbh. Get back to me when you take the rose colored glasses off. You are the bullheaded one, illustrated by the fact that it is not up to ME to make the game work properly.

Regards,

E

[walker 0]

Hi all

In reply to ethne

Since I showed that the subject of your original post

Quote[/b] ]Lately I've been getting back into ArmA but one thing that REALLY annoys me is that the AI are really over aware. I was playing the Sabotage mission that comes with the game, armed with the M4 with that ATROCIOUS QDS sight (Come on BIS, thats a CQB sight, a la R6 environments). It is nearly impossible to sneak in as the AI always seem to know where you are.

Despite the fact that the weapon is SILENCED, shoot one guard, the rest panic and always seem to know where you are. This really ruins the immersion IMHO. This is in no way realistic or fun. The stealth aspect of the game is ruined completely by the AI being far too aware

JM2C

E

Edited by ethne on Jan. 11 2008,15:01

was down to your own inability to perform the mission and nothing to do with the AI.

Quote[/b] ]Hi all

In reply to ethne I just retested the mission you mean in both 1.08 and 1.09 I can still do the stealth taking out of the guard in the watchtower and those on patrol who can interfere with the mission without the Alarm going off no problems.

Here is a link to how to take out that pesky tower guard beware SPOILERS IN LINK!

http://www.flashpoint1985.com/cgi-bin....1;top

By the way you are talking about the ability of the AI to hear not its inteligence.

Kind Regards walker

And you even admited the same;

Quote[/b] ]Dont get me wrong, I respect your research etc, but I am talking about my personal experience with the game. Doubtless we all have different mods loaded and whatever else, but even when I tried it vanilla, I was getting the same results.

I'm back to working on my own mission now which presents its own special set of problems

You have conceded that the AI can be very hit and miss and that was originally my point. Its not consistent and it can be very unrealistic. I know BIS will improve on it although Im still not convinced these problems/limitations should not have been addressed in ArmA 1 (or an addon), rather than having to buy a whole new game to experience them.

That's a whole other argument that I'll leave for another day

Regards

E

Edited by ethne on Jan. 13 2008,18:58

...after some pressure...

Quote[/b] ]Hi all

No Mods loaded

Just straight vanila ArmA 1.08 and 1.09

Tested 4 times now.Same every time. So no lack of consistency.

Have you tried the method I suggested in the official missions forum?

Kind Regards walker

Quote[/b] ]Posted: Jan. 13 2008,19:25  

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Yes, that specific approach does work. But tbh, it doesnt solve my original complaint. In other situations, that type of approach does not work and a silenced M9 is not going to be heard much over 3 - 5 metres and even at that range, it would be a very low and hard to make out sound.

I'm still going to stand behind my original statement but I will concede that your specific method does work consistently.

Regards

E

I fail to see why you continue to post on the subject.

While there is validity in saying ArmA AI is not perfect in much same way one can say we should all live together in peace. It does not actualy do much.

Several people have explained to you solutions, which you seem for some frankly absurd reason to want to ignore.

You do not seem to understand that the problem you were experiencing was down to you not the AI despite admiting the same.

Kind Regards walker

[Placebo 29]

I would strongly suggest that you two just drop it, then you can continue posting like mature forum members instead of looking like two kids bickering in a school yard

[MehMan 0]

About the silenced weapon thing:

I think the sound might be heard like that in an open field, with little to no sound absorbers around, in an enclosed area and with lots of sound absobers around it might be a lot more muffled.

[Second 0]

End of discussion tbh. Get back to me when you take the rose colored glasses off. You are the bullheaded one, illustrated by the fact that it is not up to ME to make the game work properly.

Regards,

E

Okay we shall end our discussion then, but i have once more something to say.

About colored classes of mine: I'm wearing Vietcong colored classes at the moment, thank you for asking.

Have to admit, even if i don't play ArmA these days but for short moments and i'm disapointed to ArmA, still ArmA's AI in many ways raises my respect. And to me your debating against wrong things here. Major or even minor flaws of AI ain't in this area. Flaws are more combat related, i would say. I even did short list of some combat things and rated them in one of my earlier posts.

Next about "resposibilities" of mission maker to make game work like he wants to be properly:

If it not your job as mission maker to make base's alarm work the way you think, then who's job is to make mission work the way you (mission maker) like it?

Err... Should ArmA make mission for you? You just would type something like this to console: "Give me 'sneak-into-base-blow-stuff-up-get-out-from-the-base' mission with good quality. Me alone against 2 n00b level AIs + 30 average level AIs + 1 elite level AI. Give me silenced guns and NVG" and ArmA would deliver mission like that... hmm... Infact BIS has presented us Mission Wizard which is bit like that. It ain't as powerful or flexible as actual mission editor, but quite limited actually. But i can think that someones do enjoy using it, if not wanting to use harder-to-learn mission editor.

About the silenced weapon thing:

I think the sound might be heard like that in an open field, with little to no sound absorbers around, in an enclosed area and with lots of sound absobers around it might be a lot more muffled.

Infact in that mission AI won't easily hear silenced weapon. I fired MP5 as well as silenced M9 8 meters behind back of regular (skill 0.6) AI which had 'safe' behaviour-mode. I could shoot his mate (not grouped) few meters away behind his back with head shot and he didn't react to it. I also could fire towards sky from that distance and he didn't hear (or register?) the sound. If i killed his mate with body-shot and that mate screamed before dying then he reacted and became aware of me after short moment. Also they hear sound of movement very well. They infact hear footsteps on grass much more easier than sound of silenced weapon fired.

[benreeper 0]

In fact if you were to make a mission like the one described in another game, say or instance COD4, every single aspect of the mission would have to be scripted, including when the AI is supposed to die. So why would anyone have a problem with the minimal scripting required to make a good mission in Arma that also has the benefit of working in multiplayer!.

You have to admit, because of Arma's free form AI, it's pretty easy to make missions for Arma. A lot easier than it is for a game like BF2. I hardly ever see community created mission content for those other games. Once the user finishes the single player game they move onto another game. What other FPS has the legs of OFP/Arma? One of the reasons for its longevity is its sandbox style and game AI.

With good mission design and a little scripting (less than other FPSs) almost every defect of the AI can be overcome. That's all anyone can ask from a developer and their game. Why expect BIS to deliver more (in this area) than other developers; that wouldn't be fair.

--Ben