Enemy Accuracy way to good.

[KeyCat 131]

What about the AI knowing when one of their group members dies from several hundred meters away?

I tested this in ArmA, using a silenced weapon with subsonic ammunition. Upon killing a group member, the squad leader of that group turned and faced my direction. I think the auto-detection of a downed squad member is quite unrealistic, and can ruin some stealth missions.

Walker, I think An-225 asked this as a question not as a statement (but I could be wrong tho)...

However, this is another one of my personal "pet peeves" in ArmA and I hope to see it fixed/improved in ArmA II. It's described and documented in this thread and actually in ArmA the enemy AI doesn't need to be grouped togheter for "unrealistic" things to happen. As An-225 mention this makes stealth missions (like killing sentry's to get inside a camp or similar) close to impossible to make.

Anyone having ArmA II and tested this thing out yet?

One thing worth mentioning is that it's sometimes quite easy to pick "AI things" apart if you only concentrate on one specific limitation/issue/flaw, we have to try to remember looking at the bigger picture as well before commenting/judging how things are done. Also this is just the dawn of the ArmA II era and I'm sure we will see improvements in many different areas, we just have to give BIS some time, and it's summer after all :)

Just my 0.20 SEK

/KC

Edited June 11, 2009 by KeyCat

[maddogx 13]

Seeing the delay put before leader asks for his troop, I really don't see that as a problem. what is the issue with this behavior?

The problem is, as long as that squad member is alive he is automatically considered to be okay. As soon as he is dead, no matter how far away he is, there is an automatic inquiry about his status, as if the squad leader had a "gut feeling" that he was dead. And the delay is no more than a few seconds, maybe 30 tops. I experienced this just yesterday in an MP game:

I went to a town with 3 AI in my squad. I sent #3 and #4 to flank around the sides while I moved in with #2. Unfortunately, #2 and I got gunned down pretty quickly by an enemy tank because I wasn't paying attention. After respawning back at base, I was just grabbing new equipment, when I (automatically) asked #3 to report status. After a few seconds I announced that #3 is down because he didn't respond. Weird, I thought. After that I asked #4 (myself this time, not automatic) and he responded with his position...

Get my point? Dead subordinates are automatically called out, no matter where they are.

[Sonar 0]

I was not meaning maximum range the bullet travels, but max effective range.

To the MOA thing, its not target shooting its an assault rifle you arnt going to be taking 1000yard shots let alone worry about 1/2 inch :P

im am but mearly responding to the comment about a) Ak's are accurate to 3-5MOA and b) 4MOA is 4" which it is not.

MER of a AK47 was 200yds AKM 350m (yes a differnet scale) 20-60% increase in MER is +18oMetres there fore a MER of????? thats right 530m. How is that possible in a proji thats 5.45 out of a necked down 762x36 cartridge.....I doubt it very much esp when a 7.62x51 either from a M14 or a L1A1 has a mer of 300m and a battle range of 600.

[whisper 0]

The problem is, as long as that squad member is alive he is automatically considered to be okay. As soon as he is dead, no matter how far away he is, there is an automatic inquiry about his status, as if the squad leader had a "gut feeling" that he was dead. And the delay is no more than a few seconds, maybe 30 tops. I experienced this just yesterday in an MP game:

Yes. Consider that the regular check is always made, you just hear about the one that matters.

In a full AI group, that simply means that AI leaders perform regular checks of members every 30 s.

It is not about what you hear happen, it is about what is simulated. This system simulates a regular check by squad leader about the state of his squad members. The fact you don't hear the successfull checks doesn't mean it's wrong

If you consider this a bug, it's a cosmetic one at best. The fast spotting is a bigger one imho

[Yoma 0]

@bis: would it be possible to step in and just give feedback if the AI cheats or not?

Of course it does, it's AI after all ...

But i personally don't think it cheats too much.

[bloodbomb 12]

If I cant crawl around and snipe/be stealthy I won't be buying this game.

If I can't pick off a few sentries with a suppressed rifle (or even up close with an MP5-SD) I'm not going to buy this game.

If AI has supernatural perception/ESP/Remote viewing capabilities then I won't be buying this game.

Sounds harsh, but thats the truth.

Can we please have some of these issues addressed by BIS staff/dev's? All it would take would be a couple of statements to dispel these accusations and I would be back to happily wanting to buy this game, otherwise you could well lose a few sales guys, just saying...

[max power 21]

"4 moa means 4 inches dispersion every 100 yards"

It does not! Well not really.MOA means Minute of Arc (or Angle) it equates to 1.047" at 100yds and 10.47 at 1000yds so at 400yds it would equal 4.188" So 4MOA would be 4.188 at 100yds and 16.752" at 400yds at 1000yds it's 41.88".

Are you on drugs? You disagree with me to agree with me? And you explain the same thing I explained only more complicated so as to obfuscate the point? LOL.

"MOA doesn't equal 1 inch per 100 yards, it means approximately 1 inch per 100 yards".

Where is your head at?

When are you going to be shooting 1000 yards and niggling over 1/2 inch dispersion FFS? Do you feel this strengthens your argument in some way, or weakens my point about the AK?

If I cant crawl around and snipe/be stealthy I won't be buying this game.

If I can't pick off a few sentries with a suppressed rifle (or even up close with an MP5-SD) I'm not going to buy this game.

If AI has supernatural perception/ESP/Remote viewing capabilities then I won't be buying this game.

Sounds harsh, but thats the truth.

Can we please have some of these issues addressed by BIS staff/dev's? All it would take would be a couple of statements to dispel these accusations and I would be back to happily wanting to buy this game, otherwise you could well lose a few sales guys, just saying...

Someone hasn't been reading the thread before they comment :p

You can do all of these things, but you have to be smart about it. This game doesn't reward stupidity, so sniping from 100 yards.. oh, sorry, 160 yards is a good way to receive a number of non serious but badly bleeding wounds.

Edited June 12, 2009 by Max Power

[Hell_Toupee 0]

MER of a AK47 was 200yds AKM 350m (yes a differnet scale) 20-60% increase in MER is +18oMetres there fore a MER of????? thats right 530m. How is that possible in a proji thats 5.45 out of a necked down 762x36 cartridge.....I doubt it very much esp when a 7.62x51 either from a M14 or a L1A1 has a mer of 300m and a battle range of 600.

if you could put that in english would be great

[max power 21]

if you could put that in english would be great

MER is maximum effective range. His premise about a necked down 7.62mm soviet round is totally out to lunch, though. He's trying to say that since the AKM was innacurate, and since the AKM fired 7.62mm soviet, that the AK74 must also be innaccurate since the 5.45 mm round shares the same casing as the 7.62. Very odd logic. Maximum effective range is the range at which a trained operator to use a weapon system to hit targets 50% of the time, beyond which the likelihood becomes lower. A weapon system is comprised of the weapon, ammunition, mounts, sights, bling bling, and other paraphernalia, not only the cartridge casing.

Further, I would really doubt that the maximum effective range of an m14 is 300m since the m16 has a maximum effective range of 600m. Maybe the m14 just really sucked, but I think that that would preclude its later refurbishment and adoptation as a designated marksman's rifle. M14 having a maximum effective range of 200m is just false. FAS claims it to be 460m.

[Sonar 0]

Are you on drugs? You disagree with me to agree with me? And you explain the same thing I explained only more complicated so as to obfuscate the point? LOL.

"MOA doesn't equal 1 inch per 100 yards, it means approximately 1 inch per 100 yards".

Where is your head at?

When are you going to be shooting 1000 yards and niggling over 1/2 inch dispersion FFS? Do you feel this strengthens your argument in some way, or weakens my point about the AK?

I am mearly quoting you using the incorrect application of MOA, you said and I quote "4 moa means 4 inches dispersion every 100 yards"

Using figures of 3-5 MOA confuses the argument and relating MOA to dispersion confuses the argument. And "niggling" over 1/2 an inch was proving that MOA is not a constant but a variable. If you are going to table an argument table it correctly. I personally would have said "...that a AK will group 3 to 5inches (76mm to 127mm) at 100yds(91.4m)" so the younglings who dont understand ballistics yet would at least know what we are talking about. You seemed to have decided to start an argument with a competion shooter....not the best idea you have had thus far:D.

If you want, I can go right into the exeterior ballistics of a projectile in flight and really confuse things.

But for the sake of a simplfied argument... Soviet era weapons are inaccurate not because of ammo or skill on the part of the user but because of quality control....they didnt have any. And for people interested in the Tank debate this also applied. I have sat inside a RUSSIAN MADE T80, and they are crap. Poor welding, no shock mounts on electronics, exposed wiring and fittings not secured properly. You can have the best armour in the world but if it isnt fitted properly it will fail.

But dont misunderstand this is not to say the AK was a bad rifle, just a poorly manufactured one. The Finnish Valmet M and Rk series and the Israeli Galil ( a hybrid of the M16 and AK) are very well made and therefore very effective . side note: the M76 was calibred in 7.62x 39, 5,56x45NATO and 7.62x51NATO but not in 5.45X39. And all other variants are still 7.62x39mm. I wonder why?

MER of a AK47 was 200yds AKM 350m (yes a differnet scale) 20-60% increase in MER is +180Metres therefore a MER of????? thats right 530m. How is that possible in a proji thats 5.45 out of a necked down 7.62x36 cartridge.....I doubt it very much esp when a 7.62x51 either from a M14 or a L1A1 has a mer of 300m and a battle range of 600.

English translation follows:

MER=Maximum Effective Range

AK 47= a rifle

200yds= a distance

AKM= a rifle

5.45x39mm is the new Russian Calibre they take a 7.62x39mm cartridge and squeeze the neck ( the bit where the bullet or proji goes) down from 7.63mm to 5.46mm, in shooters terms this is called wildcatting. examples are .243Ackly Improved with is a 308Win necked down to receive a .243" bullet. Make a very small bullet travel very fast with heaps of kinetic energy and heaps of speed means very accurate, I have heard of shooters with this round shooting sub 1/2MOA out to 500yds. I have a barrel for my M82 (Parker Hale 1200TX) which is 6mm BR (Bench Rest) its a 7.62x51 cartridge necked to 6mm, with it I have heard I will be able to (but not likely) shoot sub 3/4 MOA at 900 yds.

M14 = 7.62x51NATO rifle used by the USMC until the M16 was forced on them....they didnt want it.

L1A1= Australian and British version of the Fabrique Nationale de Herstal Fusil Automatique Leger (FN-FAL). The Belguim made 7.62x51NATO Battle Feild Rifle. Its not an Assualt rifle, it to big! And its fun when you stick a match under the sear plate....I never did this because its illegal and I was never here!:D

Battle Range= The range that a squad of Infantry can shoot and expect to hit. These are not aimed shots in the sense that you can see your target but a aimed shot at an area where you target is.

My point with the post is that a smaller and lighter proji shouldnt have a MER the same as a Battle range of a heavier calibre. The energy lose at range would make the smaller proji less effective. Its great if it hits the target centre chest, but usless if it dosnt penetrate.

---------- Post added at 04:05 AM ---------- Previous post was at 03:37 AM ----------

Further, I would really doubt that the maximum effective range of an m14 is 300m since the m16 has a maximum effective range of 600m. Maybe the m14 just really sucked, but I think that that would preclude its later refurbishment and adoptation as a designated marksman's rifle. M14 having a maximum effective range of 200m is just false. FAS claims it to be 460m.

I do apologise at this point Im getting my yds and metres mixed up and some of my facts. I unreservedly apologise for this, I should know better.:o The M14 is a brilliant rifle and the USMC didnt really want to change to the M16. The L1A1 also has a MER of 500m.

But your statment about being to lunch is crap. I never said the the they shared the same casing. I said that the 5.45 uses a necked down cartridge. Again you show a profound lack of understanding about ammunition. And dont make assuptioms. The AK AKM and AK74 are innaccurate because of manufacture. My statement was in the vain of... I doubt using a smaller projectile increase the MER by 20-60%.

[max power 21]

I am mearly quoting you using the incorrect application of MOA, you said and I quote "4 moa means 4 inches dispersion every 100 yards"

Using figures of 3-5 MOA confuses the argument and relating MOA to dispersion confuses the argument. And "niggling" over 1/2 an inch was proving that MOA is not a constant but a variable. If you are going to table an argument table it correctly. I personally would have said "...that a AK will group 3 to 5inches (76mm to 127mm) at 100yds(91.4m)" so the younglings who dont understand ballistics yet would at least know what we are talking about. You seemed to have decided to start an argument with a competion shooter....not the best idea you have had thus far:D.

I was explaining basically what MOA meant. Shooter use it because it conveniently works out to approximately 1 inch per 100 yards. The explaination is correct to 5%.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obsessive-compulsive_disorder

If you want, I can go right into the exeterior ballistics of a projectile in flight and really confuse things.

Is this supposed to impress me or something? Do you think that discussing this would confuse me? Do you think I know nothing about it? Are you exploring the limits of exactly how off topic you can get while still sounding like what you are saying makes sense to laymen?

Irrelevent.

But for the sake of a simplfied argument... Soviet era weapons are inaccurate not because of ammo or skill on the part of the user but because of quality control....they didnt have any. And for people interested in the Tank debate this also applied. I have sat inside a RUSSIAN MADE T80, and they are crap. Poor welding, no shock mounts on electronics, exposed wiring and fittings not secured properly. You can have the best armour in the world but if it isnt fitted properly it will fail.

My figures indicate the ak74 being accurate to 2 moa at 300 meters, full stop.

But dont misunderstand this is not to say the AK was a bad rifle, just a poorly manufactured one. The Finnish Valmet M and Rk series and the Israeli Galil ( a hybrid of the M16 and AK) are very well made and therefore very effective . side note: the M76 was calibred in 7.62x 39, 5,56x45NATO and 7.62x51NATO but not in 5.45X39. And all other variants are still 7.62x39mm. I wonder why?

Irrelevent.

My point with the post is that a smaller and lighter proji shouldnt have a MER the same as a Battle range of a heavier calibre. The energy lose at range would make the smaller proji less effective. Its great if it hits the target centre chest, but usless if it dosnt penetrate.

Unfortunately, your ranges are all messed up and that's the error, rather that the effective range figure for the ak74.

I do apologise at this point Im getting my yds and metres mixed up and some of my facts. I unreservedly apologise for this, I should know better.:o The M14 is a brilliant rifle and the USMC didnt really want to change to the M16. The L1A1 also has a MER of 500m.

I wonder how you could have messed up meters and yards so that 500 yards is meters is 200 meters or visa versa. 1 yard = .9 meters. 200 / 500 = 0.4. Not the same ratio. It's not even a factor or multiple of the same ratio.

But your statment about being to lunch is crap. I never said the the they shared the same casing. I said that the 5.45 uses a necked down cartridge. Again you show a profound lack of understanding about ammunition. And dont make assuptioms. The AK AKM and AK74 are innaccurate because of manufacture. My statement was in the vain of... I doubt using a smaller projectile increase the MER by 20-60%.

Again you show a lack of understanding of basic logic. Your statement is still the same and it's still false. Necking down the projectile is not the only relevent factor.

BTW. Necking down a casing is using an existing casing design but necking it down to accept a new bullet size. ie. using the same casing. Perhaps you could brush up on your english skills, figurative language skills, and logic skills before you reply next.

[Hell_Toupee 0]

My point with the post is that a smaller and lighter proji shouldnt have a MER the same as a Battle range of a heavier calibre. The energy lose at range would make the smaller proji less effective. Its great if it hits the target centre chest, but usless if it dosnt penetrate.

MER is max range where bullets can expect to hit target 50% of the time, nothing to do with the effects vs body armor.

A lighter projectile with the same charge will have a greater effective range, due to higher MV and flatter trajectory.

[Sonar 0]

I was explaining basically what MOA meant. Shooter use it because it conveniently works out to approximately 1 inch per 100 yards. The explaination is correct to 5%.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obsessi...lsive_disorder

Wiki is useless

My figures indicate the ak74 being accurate to 2 moa at 300 meters, full stop.

No you didnt!

The ak-74 seems to be able to achieve groupings of 2 MOA

So dont go quoting stuff at me when you dont even quote yourself correctly.

I was explaining basically what MOA meant. Shooter use it because it conveniently works out to approximately 1 inch per 100 yards. The explaination is correct to 5%.

No your wern't

The ak47 isn't that inaccurate. 3 to 5 MOA at 100 meters with a max effective range of 350 meters. 4 moa means 4 inches dispersion every 100 yards, and maximum effective range is the range a trained shooter can expect to get 50% hits on a man sized target.

The m16a2 with milspec ammo can get 1.5-3 MOA at 100 meters with a maximum effective range of 600m.

The ak-74 seems to be able to achieve groupings of 2 MOA. The site I got that figure off of seems to say the shots were fired at 300 meters.

nowhere have you explained what MOA means. You havnt even said where you pulled the 5% from. So again dont quote me until you can quote yourself. Anyone reading this thread knows I explained MOA not you.

Remember this from post #156

It does not! Well not really.MOA means Minute of Arc (or Angle) it equates to 1.047" at 100yds and 10.47 at 1000yds so at 400yds it would equal 4.188" So 4MOA would be 4.188 at 100yds and 16.752" at 400yds at 1000yds it's 41.88".

Some people will mistake MOA for Mils which dosnt work. one MOA is 1/60th of a degree one mil is 1/6400th of a degree. ps the M24 scope is a mildot.Heres a good website to learn how to use them http://www.mildot.com/index.htm

And this bit from #185

I am mearly quoting you using the incorrect application of MOA, you said and I quote "4 moa means 4 inches dispersion every 100 yards"

Using figures of 3-5 MOA confuses the argument and relating MOA to dispersion confuses the argument. And "niggling" over 1/2 an inch was proving that MOA is not a constant but a variable.

Quote:

But dont misunderstand this is not to say the AK was a bad rifle, just a poorly manufactured one. The Finnish Valmet M and Rk series and the Israeli Galil ( a hybrid of the M16 and AK) are very well made and therefore very effective . side note: the M76 was calibred in 7.62x 39, 5,56x45NATO and 7.62x51NATO but not in 5.45X39. And all other variants are still 7.62x39mm. I wonder why?

Irrelevent.

Totally relevent, My initial statement was

AK's are notroiusly innaccurate above 250metres

You claimed in post #153

Allow me to quote myself:

Quote:

The ak47 isn't that inaccurate. 3 to 5 MOA at 100 meters with a max effective range of 350 meters. 4 moa means 4 inches dispersion every 100 yards, and maximum effective range is the range a trained shooter can expect to get 50% hits on a man sized target.

The m16a2 with milspec ammo can get 1.5-3 MOA at 100 meters with a maximum effective range of 600m.

The ak-74 seems to be able to achieve groupings of 2 MOA. The site I got that figure off of seems to say the shots were fired at 300 meters.

The m16a2 has better sights for long range shooting and has less recoil in rapid shooting than the ak47. I am not sure about the ak74.

So I brought up the point of it being poorly manufactured as an argument against it's supposed accuracy and compared it to rifles that are of almost identical design. I have maitained that "CommBloc Weapons are in accurate" and I will maintain this stance. As I have said I have used them, and whilst I cannot prove it to you, my "OPINION" is based on experience not something I read on a uncontrolled website.

[BeerHunter 0]

Does all that techno babble about ballistics , accuracy at various ranges , bullet spread and grouping size really have anything to do with playing ArmedA?

I think a far more relevant discussion about weapon accuracy in ArmA (especially online) would cover such topics as ping , lag and FPS.

You guys really do need to stop reading Shooters Weekly etc. :D

[Sonar 0]

Never read Shooters Weekly....any good?

[CarlGustaffa 4]

I ordered those. Somehow I think the company I ordered from misread the order. Now I'm getting Hooters Weekly. But hey, I'm not complaining :p

[Sonar 0]

mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm Boobies!

[Steakslim 1]

Okay I'm not going to enter this discussion really, I just want to point out that Sonar, just because it's wikipedia, doesn't always mean it's wrong or useless. Check the link before you dismiss it, and if you want, check the sources listed on the wiki page. While it's not always the most reliable site, it does often contain information that is, for the post part, correct. Dismissing a wiki page is easy, but often unnecessary.

[Sonar 0]

We were not allowed to use it in Uni because it is uncontrolled. A recent court Decision (State v Flores Texas 2008) ruled that Wikipeadia cannot be used because it uncontrolled. And a lot of pm's to me have congradulated my refusial to accept wiki entires as proof. As for the sources listed, again uncontrolled.

[no use for a name 0]

just tonight I've seen the AI "ESP" as I call it. A couple buddies and myself were playing a mission to free a town of infantry. we get on a hilltop overlooking the town, and spot several squads moving around. I get into a position next to a tree on my right side; and opened up with my SAW on the closest squad, taking all 4 of them down within a few seconds. not 5 seconds later, I get shot in the arm and the head. I go into spec and find the guy that got me...he was around 100m laying prone with some bushes, a fence, and the tree I was next too all in line with my body. There is no f-ing way he should have seen me, much less killed me with 100% accuracy.

Oh it gets better...

So one of the other guys throws smoke right under the tree I was next too. He crawls up and around so not to expose himself, and gets on the back-side of the ridge we were on. After crawling for 30-45 seconds and 20+ meters away from my body, the second he poked his head over the top he gets lit up by 3 or 4 guys in the town, including the one that got me (still having bushes blocking his view). I was specing them and saw them track him thru the houses, bushes, and even the damn ground until he peeked over.

I think vegetation does block the AI's view; but only until you shoot. Then they can track/shoot you no matter where you go or what you're hiding behind with 100% accuracy.

[Maddmatt 1]

We were not allowed to use it in Uni because it is uncontrolled...

Even if you can't use Wikipedia as a reference, you can have a look at the references listed by an article.

[Shadow NX 1]

A topic as old as OFP itself i guess.

Im playing it since the OFP days and still i often have a hard time against the AIs shooting abilitys, however using cover well and change position often helps a lot especially in ArmA2.

However i would prefer if you set Ai to lower skill in the menue that they also increase their miss ration when firing at you, maybe it changes something with it but then its very subtile and so it gets quite annoying if again a soldier laying in the grass ( where i cant see sh*t ) at night with no NV googles zapped you from 100 meters distance.

Oh the often miss in A2 however as the AI tends to come in groups and loves to use auto mode they spray you with bullets and one surely hits before you can do much.

I love ArmA2 but that often leads me to unecessary save and load orgies at times.

[Sonar 0]

Even if you can't use Wikipedia as a reference, you can have a look at the references listed by an article.

Um ahhh thats cheating:D

I know we did it, saved a load of work. Mind you we did find some references were wrong, not many though.

[walker 0]

Hi all

@ No Use For A Name

Any chance you can give us a repeatable mission to prove your claims?

Kind Regards walker

[Hell_Toupee 0]

nowhere have you explained what MOA means. You havnt even said where you pulled the 5% from. So again dont quote me until you can quote yourself. Anyone reading this thread knows I explained MOA not you.

Remember this from post #156

And this bit from #185

Seriously WTF man.

He explained essentially what the MOA was, the 5% is simple the difference between his round figure and the .18 you had a fit over, its clear as day.