Arma AI bugs (not 1.14 exclusive)

[Architeuthis 9]

Let me start off by stating that I’ve enjoyed playing Armed Assault from its release to this very day. Nevertheless the game is not without flaws. Most of these have thankfully been addressed with the numerous patches that BIS has released. There are however a couple of issues that I feel should be addressed. While they are not gameplay breakers per se, they do drastically diminish my enjoyment of the game. These are the following:

Formation order

The first issue that needs some attention is formation order. When a squad is ordered to patrol in a column formation the highest ranking member of said squad will lead it with progressively lower ranked units behind it. The problem with this formation is that the squad leader also acts as the point man, or better said, the marked man. His fate is almost always certain in the case of an ambush. While I certainly do not claim to be an expert on modern day infantry tactics, I find it highly unlikely that a squad leader will literally head the patrol himself. Shouldn’t he be placed further down the (staggered) column?

Figure 1a

Arma column infantry formation places the squad leader up front.

Figure 1b

Clearly a much safer and more sensible placement of the squad leader within a column formation.

I am not really sure if the above is applicable in vehicle/convoy scenarios or how difficult it would be to implement the (possible) differences.

Formation discipline

The second issue I want to address is also related to Arma’s AI. While I am not really sure whether or not the following is a feature or a genuine bug, I do believe that its existence is of great annoyance to myself (and hopefully others). For the purpose of clarity I shall address the issue as a bug.

The bug is most prevalent in single player situations where the player is not in direct command of his squad. What happens is that an AI member of the squad often breaks formation and charges headfirst into the fray (and often certain death). As this bug is not present when the player is in command of the squad, we can infer that the order must be given by the AI squad leader.

Figure 2a

We clearly see the squad lined up in a ‘line formation’.

Figure 2b

During engagement one of the squad members breaks formation and charges forward.

It should be noted that this bug is present with all formations.

It’s especially annoying when a squad is supposed to be in a covered and easily defendable position. The sheer stupidity of watching one of your men leaving cover to ‘do a rambo’ is easily one the most frustrating sights to behold. While I cannot say this with absolute certainty, I do believe that this kind of suicidal behaviour was not present in the earlier Arma builds.

So my question to BIS is as follows; is this AI behaviour intentional or is it merely a bug that (possibly) slipped in with one of the later patches? Are there any plans on changing the AI’s behaviour concerning this issue?

Unnecessary disembarking

BIS’ decision to include a cargo seat for the co-pilot is one I very much applaud. It’s a much more realistic sight to see two crewmembers piloting a helicopter. Even if one is just for show. However game mechanics somehow force the co-pilot to disembark when the pilot is engaged in a fight. This situation is true on the condition that the co-pilot has been added to the helicopter itself.

Figure 4

The co-pilot has been attached to the helicopter with use of the f2 button. His rank is either equal or inferior to that of the pilot. If the co-pilots rank is superior to that of the pilot, the issue does not occur.

This is especially annoying with the ah-6 littlebird, which upon engagement with hostile forces will land in close proximity with that enemy and force out the co-pilot. This is an extremely annoying occurrence which should be fixed.

The situation also applies with Mateck’s m1a1 (HA) addon. Although BIS is obviously not responsible in this case, we can see the same mechanics that plague helicopters are also prevalent with the case of ground vehicles. What happens is that the loader (in terms of game mechanics nothing more than a cargo seat) sometimes ejects in the middle of combat. Not because the vehicle has received a critical amount of damage, but because the commander ordered him to do so. However, as stated earlier, BIS is not accountable for 3rd party addons.

Disclaimer:

The above have been tested and are all present in an unmodified version of Arma 1.14

As these issues are not exclusive to any specific patch I decided to open a separate thread.

[Second 0]

Lack of pointman is bit of a problem. But in ArmA leaders aren't as important in reality they would be. If sergeant is killed then corpral takes command in few seconds at worst... at best in split second. I can't think of big drawbacks to squad performace from leader getting killed. All-AI squads to my understandment are even more immune. No time is wasted on communications like in squad which involves player.

Higher rank getting killed is more dismoralizing than lower rank, but then again most squads can keep up fighting even when half squad has been wiped out.

Then again it's leader who has binoculars. Guy getting best spotting value (as well as usually being most trained guy in formation) is valuable in front.

About breaking formation. Sometimes it is good, sometimes not. Was introduced in OFP... I pretty much didn't like it. However atleast in 1.08 this happened only with in stealth-behaviour... So BIS has done OFP with ArmA as well. This became "problem" in later patches of OFP, in earlier patches they remained in their formation... Sometimes good, but not nearly always.

[Beagle 684]

I'm not very experienced in infantry drills apart from the basic training, but I've never seen a group leader leading a group (squad) from the middle, exept line and wedge formations.

The disembarking of passangers from APCs and Trucks in most situation is very useful and is based on the same AI routines as disembarking Copilots.

[Architeuthis 9]

Lack of pointman is bit of a problem. But in ArmA leaders aren't as important in reality they would be. If sergeant is killed then corpral takes command in few seconds at worst... at best in split second. I can't think of big drawbacks to squad performace from leader getting killed. All-AI squads to my understandment are even more immune. No time is wasted on communications like in squad which involves player.

Higher rank getting killed is more dismoralizing than lower rank, but then again most squads can keep up fighting even when half squad has been wiped out.

Then again it's leader who has binoculars. Guy getting best spotting value (as well as usually being most trained guy in formation) is valuable in front.

It’s not so much a matter of performance loss (or better said; combat ability), it’s the fact that the squad leader always dies when patrolling on foot. Perhaps NCO’s lead a squad of infantry from the very front, but this would hardly be the task of an officer. It’s extremely annoying to see my lieutenant getting blasted every time when I play a patrol scenario.

Other than that, it would be great if BIS could somehow model in the loss of a leader (and the breakdown of the chain of command). Something tells me that is reserved for Arma2 or one of the TC mods (ACE, SLX, etc.) for Arma though.

Quote[/b] ]About breaking formation. Sometimes it is good, sometimes not. Was introduced in OFP... I pretty much didn't like it. However atleast in 1.08 this happened only with in stealth-behaviour... So BIS has done OFP with ArmA as well. This became "problem" in later patches of OFP, in earlier patches they remained in their formation... Sometimes good, but not nearly always.

Breaking formation is absolutely horrid in both defend and attack scenario’s. In a situation where the squad has been ordered to hold a certain position (say a ridge), it makes absolutely no sense to leave that position defended by machineguns and other support weapons to charge into an open field. There is no logic in that action whatsoever. Sure in attack scenario’s it might be less annoying, but I would like the squad to advance with caution and care. Not with suicidal tendencies. I can see absolutely nothing good about this bug/feature.

I'm not very experienced in infantry drills apart from the basic training, but I've never seen a group leader leading a group (squad) from the middle, exept line and wedge formations.

The illustration might be a bit misleading, but the point is he shouldn’t be directly up front, which is probably the most vulnerable position.

Quote[/b] ]The disembarking of passangers from APCs and Trucks in most situation is very useful and is based on the same AI routines as disembarking Copilots.

Passengers, maybe. ‘Essential’ crewmembers, nowhere near useful. Like I stated in my opening post, I don’t directly blame them for this particular issue with regards to ground vehicles. The addon that suffers from this problem is after all 3rd party software. I cannot for the life of me, see the use of ordering out a co-pilot. Granted, as you said, it probably has to do with the way the co-pilot is defined, which is nothing more than a glorified extra cargo seat. This does not change the fact that the current situation is highly irritating and somehow needs to be dealt with. Hopefully this does not lead to the decision to exclude the co-pilot altogether. Although the co-pilot only serves an aesthetic purpose at the moment, I sincerely hope that his role gets expanded.

[walker 0]

Hi all

In Reply to Architeuthis

Using your column formation

How to run formation in Column in ArmA

Pick your scout team. Best is a soldier armed with an M4 and nades or idealy a special forces guy. Snipers are also good.

Break your squad into colour teams.

I will use a standard BIS infantry squad as an example.

Use team Red for scout. [F7] [9] [1]

Use Team Green as your overwatch [F9] [F8] [F5] [9] [2]

Use Team Blue for your maneuver element. [F2] [F3] [F4] [F6] [9] [2]

Set your scout to advance twice. Default Keys [9] [9] [1]; [1] [2] and [9] [9] [1]; [1] [2] He will move 50m in front of you.

Set your Overwatch team to advance once. Default Keys [9] [9] [2]; [1] [2] They will move 50m in front of you.

Set Blue team to fall back in formation [9] [9] [2]; [1] [1]

This is a very rough idea.

I personaly think what is needed is the ability to set colour teams with their own formation and distance from leader.

You may like to try CEX to do most maneuvers like this as it is more refined and can do the above.

I personaly would not use column where I expect contact front.

Kind Regards walker

[Architeuthis 9]

Hi all

In Reply to Architeuthis

Using your column formation

How to run formation in Column in ArmA

Pick your scout team. Best is a soldier armed with an M4 and nades or idealy a special forces guy. Snipers are also good.

Break your squad into colour teams.

I will use a standard BIS infantry squad as an example.

Use team Red for scout. [F7] [9] [1]

Use Team Green as your overwatch [F9] [F8] [F5] [9] [2]

Use Team Blue for your maneuver element. [F2] [F3] [F4] [F6] [9] [2]

Set your scout to advance twice. Default Keys [9] [9] [1]; [1] [2] and [9] [9] [1]; [1] [2] He will move 50m in front of you.

Set your Overwatch team to advance once. Default Keys [9] [9] [2]; [1] [2] They will move 50m in front of you.

Set Blue team to fall back in formation [9] [9] [2]; [1] [1]

This is a very rough idea.

I personaly think what is needed is the ability to set colour teams with their own formation and distance from leader.

You may like to try CEX to do most maneuvers like this as it is more refined and can do the above.

I personaly would not use column where I expect contact front.

Kind Regards walker

This is something I usually do too. However this is only of use if the player is in command of the squad. It would be awesome if BIS could implement that as standard AI behaviour. But right now, I’d settle for just changing the formation structure by rank.

[4 IN 1 0]

this have been talked like 1000+ times together with chain of command system for "real" platoon size management, but since BI have drop the idea in Arma2 ages ago and reduce the number of AI under your command into 6( blahhhhhhhhh! )

l think this is very less likely to happen in anytime in the future

[jakerod 254]

this have been talked like 1000+ times together with chain of command system for "real" platoon size management, but since BI have drop the idea in Arma2 ages ago and reduce the number of AI under your command into 6( blahhhhhhhhh! )

l think this is very less likely to happen in anytime in the future

How do you know they dropped it to six? Just because the campaign only feautes you commanding six doesn't mean you can only have six in other missions. There was actually a video of someone commanding multiple groups in ArmA2 a while back and thus it seems you can command more.

[NeMeSiS 11]

this have been talked like 1000+ times together with chain of command system for "real" platoon size management, but since BI have drop the idea in Arma2 ages ago and reduce the number of AI under your command into 6( blahhhhhhhhh! )

l think this is very less likely to happen in anytime in the future

How do you know they dropped it to six? Just because the campaign only feautes you commanding six doesn't mean you can only have six in other missions. There was actually a video of someone commanding multiple groups in ArmA2 a while back and thus it seems you can command more.

He means that because we usually get only 6 units BI probably didn't add a whole chain of command within 1 group, not that the max groupsize is 6.

[MehMan 0]

It's rather unfortunate how BIS went with that decision, seems most people enjoy large scale engagements, based on my observations, or at least battling large numbers of AI. It is unfortunate that BIS doesn't work up an AI that works up to a platoon level. Oh well, I guess there's always tons of scripting.

[NeMeSiS 11]

It's rather unfortunate how BIS went with that decision, seems most people enjoy large scale engagements, based on my observations, or at least battling large numbers of AI. It is unfortunate that BIS doesn't work up an AI that works up to a platoon level. Oh well, I guess there's always tons of scripting.

It's ok if there are alot of other (friendly) untis around, commanding larger squads was too complicated for most people anyway. However if your squad are the only friendly units in a large area then it <s>kinda sucks</s> is incredibly retarded.

[Second 0]

Yes. ArmA bited dust, in my opinion, with "super" sized groups already. Leaders were just command-automats... It was a mess even if AI led the platoon... I mean, i hardly ever had solid understandment what are we doing and what i (as trooper/soldier/dork) was supposed to be doing. Leader also blocked the communications network for even minutes by issuing horrible amounts of orders, getting killed and stuff...

Not to mention mess with 'get in and disembark'-play when group had vehicles... Being in killzone of Battery of 122mm guns, while AI-leader can't deside should platoon stay in it's Strykers or not... ... When looking at sides and seeing that both other platoon leaders are having same "problem"...

Sure it has good bright sides aswell. Making mission easier to make is big factor to me, my capability to focus on making mission more than 1 day is poor. If it's ain't in playtesting state in few hours i will never finish it. With big groups there was no worries of syncronizing waypoints and no so much space for brainfarts in waypoints, no scripting solutions... Which to me are big reliever.

[wamingo 1]

It's rather unfortunate how BIS went with that decision, seems most people enjoy large scale engagements, based on my observations, or at least battling large numbers of AI. It is unfortunate that BIS doesn't work up an AI that works up to a platoon level. Oh well, I guess there's always tons of scripting.

How did you ever get to the conclusion that we won't get large scale combat?

Large scale is what arma is all about. That's not something they'll throw away.

I believe they have said something along the lines that they wanted to make small squads more intuitive and make the campaign more small squad oriented. But I don't see how anyone can really conclude anything from that.

OFP's campaign didn't excell because of its squadsize.

edit: sorry for derailing. interesting subject.

[walker 0]

Hi all

I think we are getting into the reasons that Spinor and CoC created the command engine here.

The CEX interface solves many of the command problems by decoupling the command groups and allowing more refined control of these aspects. This is why CoC was set up in the first place.

Kind Regards walker

[MehMan 0]

How did you ever get to the conclusion that we won't get large scale combat?

Large scale is what arma is all about. That's not something they'll throw away.

I believe they have said something along the lines that they wanted to make small squads more intuitive and make the campaign more small squad oriented. But I don't see how anyone can really conclude anything from that.

OFP's campaign didn't excell because of its squadsize.

edit: sorry for derailing. interesting subject.

I'm not saying they'll throw it away, but it doesn't seem they'll improve it, AI-wise. A chain of command would be essential in that case and they've said that won't happen.

Quote[/b] ]Hi all

I think we are getting into the reasons that Spinor and CoC created the command engine here.

The CEX interface solves many of the command problems by decoupling the command groups and allowing more refined control of these aspects. This is why CoC was set up in the first place.

Kind Regards walker

I thought CoC doesn't work with AI.

[Espectro (DayZ) 0]

One thing I've noticed is, that opposit in OFP, when giving a Move-command to some1 in cargo of a vehicle (a truck for instance) will cause the AI to disembark the vehicle and let him move on foot towards the destination. In OFP, you would simply give the command automatically to the driver of the vehicle.

Can we please have the OFP-way back? It kinda ruins the way "teams" can be assigned, as when in a vehicle, you can no longer use that function.

Also, I don't know if thats only a bug on my screen, but sometimes (often) when alot of people are in a vehicle, I can not see on my bottom GUI which one of my men is the driver - they all have the same damn Icon... That also makes the above problem even worse.

Can we have the OFP-command system back?

[NeoNiels 0]

I noticed that if you set all your ai soldiers to "NONE" instead of "IN FORMATION" they don't exhibit the strange 'always in formation' behavior. Don't know if that helps but with that i get a more open feel so that they don't stick to the formation type unless u call all of them back to formation.

regards, Niels.

[Wolfrug 0]

Some "answers" from the point of view of an editor:

Formation order: I hear you. What walker suggests should ABSOLUTELY be included in ArmA II by the latest: editor commands for special formation orders!! That is to say, you should be able to have commands like "group1 orderAdvance unitName", which would give the "advance!" order once (and then you could just repeat as many times as necessary). Same thing for the "stay back" and "flank left/right" commands (not to mention stuff like "take cover"). Why these commands haven't been included up to now truly eludes me.

Otherwise, the reason for the marching order being what it is is because the leader is the "nexus" around which all the other units move. You can order your AI to move in "Vee" formation when in aware or more to put the squad leader slightly further back.

Formation discipline:

What you're talking about here is the "engage" command. Basically, here's how it works (in my observation): Each AI will in standard Aware/Combat mode move minimally by itself, attempting only to keep its position in the group. Try it yourself: make yourself squad leader, and give yourself one man under your control. Then place yourself for instance behind a hill, with an enemy on the other side. Now go into command mode (default numpad enter, I think) so that you can cheat and look over the hill, and spot the enemy there. Now, with the enemy spotted, select your man and order him to target the soldier (something like "Engage - Target - Man at 12 o'clock or whatever). You will see your guy turn and aim, but not move. Now, order your man to engage (engage - engage or somesuch, can't remember the first part of the command menu), and he will after a moment get up to run into a position where he can actually shoot at the enemy. While doing this, he will most probably try to run along cover (via bushes, trees, rocks, etc). Of course, the likeliest scenario is he'll pop his stupid head over the edge of the hill and get shot.

This is what happens in AI squads: the AI teamleader orders the "engage" which will prompt the AI to "get into a better firing position". Since enemies that are already easily targetable are usually dead by ArmA standards (yay for marksmanship!, this quite often means the AI will get up and run bravely to certain death, trying to get behind that hill/tree/rock/building so he can shoot the enemy. Note he'll also run towards the PERCEIVED location of the enemy, so he might not even be going in the right direction :P

You can try to circumvent this by avoiding the "engage at will" combatmode, and by giving the AI leader a "enableAttack false" init line. You can also mess with the disableAI commands.

The unnecessary disembaring, as mentioned, is due to the way the "co-pilot" is set up. It's cool though when a fully loaded UH-60 on patrol drops off a squad to hunt you down on contact, neh?

Suggestion: since the co-pilot is only there for flavour anyway,simply make him not a part of the chopper's group. That SHOULD stop the needless disembarking.

Regards,

Wolfrug

[Architeuthis 9]

Some "answers" from the point of view of an editor:

Formation order: I hear you. What walker suggests should ABSOLUTELY be included in ArmA II by the latest: editor commands for special formation orders!! That is to say, you should be able to have commands like "group1 orderAdvance unitName", which would give the "advance!" order once (and then you could just repeat as many times as necessary). Same thing for the "stay back" and "flank left/right" commands (not to mention stuff like "take cover"). Why these commands haven't been included up to now truly eludes me.

Otherwise, the reason for the marching order being what it is is because the leader is the "nexus" around which all the other units move. You can order your AI to move in "Vee" formation when in aware or more to put the squad leader slightly further back.

The problem with the ‘V formation’ is its wide shape. Especially in urban patrol scenario’s there is often little room for this formation. But for the moment it’s probably the only formation that offers some form of protection to the squad leader.

Quote[/b] ]Formation discipline:

What you're talking about here is the "engage" command. Basically, here's how it works (in my observation): Each AI will in standard Aware/Combat mode move minimally by itself, attempting only to keep its position in the group. Try it yourself: make yourself squad leader, and give yourself one man under your control. Then place yourself for instance behind a hill, with an enemy on the other side. Now go into command mode (default numpad enter, I think) so that you can cheat and look over the hill, and spot the enemy there. Now, with the enemy spotted, select your man and order him to target the soldier (something like "Engage - Target - Man at 12 o'clock or whatever). You will see your guy turn and aim, but not move. Now, order your man to engage (engage - engage or somesuch, can't remember the first part of the command menu), and he will after a moment get up to run into a position where he can actually shoot at the enemy. While doing this, he will most probably try to run along cover (via bushes, trees, rocks, etc). Of course, the likeliest scenario is he'll pop his stupid head over the edge of the hill and get shot.

This is what happens in AI squads: the AI teamleader orders the "engage" which will prompt the AI to "get into a better firing position". Since enemies that are already easily targetable are usually dead by ArmA standards (yay for marksmanship!, this quite often means the AI will get up and run bravely to certain death, trying to get behind that hill/tree/rock/building so he can shoot the enemy. Note he'll also run towards the PERCEIVED location of the enemy, so he might not even be going in the right direction :P

You can try to circumvent this by avoiding the "engage at will" combatmode, and by giving the AI leader a "enableAttack false" init line. You can also mess with the disableAI commands.

A very logical and plausible explanation. It’s a damn shame we’re forced to use editing commands to somehow circumvent this particular problem with the AI.

Quote[/b] ]The unnecessary disembaring, as mentioned, is due to the way the "co-pilot" is set up. It's cool though when a fully loaded UH-60 on patrol drops off a squad to hunt you down on contact, neh?

Suggestion: since the co-pilot is only there for flavour anyway,simply make him not a part of the chopper's group. That SHOULD stop the needless disembarking.

That’s exactly what I do right now. His function is not much more than a simple prop. But for realisms sake, a complete helicopter crew would be desirable.

[Johan_D 0]

Is there a script what can do this micromanagement for you ? preferrably added to the formation menu?