AI too easy after 1.03

[Seaweed 10]

I think the AI are actually a little too easy in the latest build. I used to fear being exposed at all, similar to an MP game but now I can shoot at a group of 5 AI 150 meters out and know I have a good chance of survival - a little too good.

I agree with this post.

In 1.02, I had to change position EVERY time after firing an AT weapon from about 600m, because a barrage of lead would drop on my last location every time, but now I can can do the same with impunity.

I had to crank up the AI from 0.4 to 0.9 to get a similar effect, and it still seems not as good as before.

What results, is that the AI can be killed off at leisure at a distance, but with the skill at 0.9 dealing with them up close truly is "murder".

I would prefer to have the AI smarter at longer ranges with lower skill settings, just like it seemed in 1.02.

[sabre4809 0]

You should be on 1.0

1.2 was not great. They could pinpoint you after 1 shot fired and be fireing on you within 5 seconds at 500+ meters. Yes you can hear the shot that far off and get an approximate position but with an error of atleast 50-100 meters. And then you have to spot the guy in the grass. Now at 200 if I fire on them they still, hear me, locate me, fire on me10 sec. But at 400+ they hear me locate me "on that hill" and move in my general direction sometimes firing on the hill but no where near me.

[NeMeSiS 11]

I have to see i agree. I am dissapointed that BI gave in to people who think that they should be able to easily kill dozens of AI.

[CanadianSyrup 0]

Dead people Can't report other positions to ALIVE people. That is the reason why the AI was able to target your position and fire within 5 seconds of you killing an enemy. I don't know about you but I'm Applauding BIS for fixing that bug. But I can agree on the AI seemly being a little too easy, Because There hearing has been reduced but there are many times still where the AI has X-ray Vision. The patch has its pros and cons for some which tend to even out for me.

[fabrizio_t 58]

In v 1.03 all "sensitivity" config values for infantry where HALVED (why cutting these and not "sensitivityEar"? I thought the problem was with units hearing capabilities ...).

That's a huge change that drastically reduces AI awareness and it's probably one of the top causes for the "dumber" AI .

[Daniel 0]

Crap, this explains a lot. We were quite happy with the 1.02 AI, all we had to do was lower their precision. That way firefights still had shit loads of fire, but we could run with covering fire without being picked off every time.

Please change it so that the AI will always fight for their "lives", and leave us to decide how accurate they are.

[rasdenfasden 12]

It's too unaware for my tastes too. At 1.0 I still feel like a one man army.

[NeMeSiS 11]

In v 1.03 all "sensitivity" config values for infantry where HALVED (why cutting these and not "sensitivityEar"? I thought the problem was with units hearing capabilities ...).

That's a huge change that drastically reduces AI awareness and it's probably one of the top causes for the "dumber" AI .

What should have been changed is the 'audible' (I think that is what its called, been a while) value of all units in the game. The AI could hear you walk too well cause it made too much 'sound', but their ability to hear gunshots was pretty much perfect.

Im afraid it will have to be modded back up. Either that or BI changes it in the next patch and provides proper explanation for some AI actions and starts calling people who whine retarded.

[crow 10]

I'm really unsure of how the AIskill and AIprecision parameters factor into the AI's coding, but it seems that AIskill has a lot lower effect now, whereas AIprecision is still just as deadly as ever if set at 1.0.

Here are a few scenarios regarding infantry combat that I imagine would be fairly accurate and the AI should try to mimic:

Reaction to Rifle/AT fire <200m: Infantry spot and engage targets within 10-20 seconds. Vehicles take a bit more time because they may not see the direction of fire, but will have it radioed rapidly.

Reaction to rifle fire 200-400m: Infantry advance towards the area and tanks follow shortly after. Depending on how exposed the enemy is, they will engage at various ranges as they close and spot the enemy. Tanks take awhile to engage or may move forward until they are closer to the shooter before firing.

Reaction to AT fire 200-400m: Infantry suppress the area where the enemy came from while vehicles take a moment to react, but typically can engage right away as soon as their guns take aim. Tanks might see the direction of fire and suppress the area immediately.

Reaction to Rife/AT fire >400m: Infantry move in the general direction of fire, but wait until they get in range to fire (depending on how exposed the enemy is). Tanks take awhile (30+ seconds) to engage targets and either suppress the area or move forward to a point where they can see the enemy and engage.

This is based on an enemy that has nothing more than their Mk.I eyeballs and ears. If they have scout-snipers or binoculars then obviously spotting enemies will be a little easier and troops could suppress from a further distance.

Currently I find that the infantry act fairly close to what I've described above, but the vehicles simply do not engage and continue on their patrol or sit idle. I'm guessing that the infantry are not radioing enemy locations to the vehicles properly...

Edited August 9, 2009 by Crow

[wiper 0]

fully agree with the OP !

I found the 1.02 pretty superior in comparison besides its "corps revealing" bug and a tick too much of a "hearing" sense.

Didn't test alot but my impressions now are they hear almost nothing and do not even notice bold movement when unaware.

[Eagle911 10]

Turn up the AI skill

[.kju 3244]

A server side only addon to tweak the AI values is also an option.

[jw custom 56]

In 1.02 AI was superman style shooting you from all kinda sick positions, at least now you can sneak around without being heard several hundreds meters away because a grass straw broke!

I'm pleased with the AI, it still needs tweaking but in general i'm pleased.

[Alex72 1]

It was nice to be able to sneak up behind an AI now. But i agree it needs tweaking somewhere and somehow to make them a bit better.

Maybe a compromise between 1.02 & 1.03 without seeing through stuff and hearing miles ofcourse. Possible? Dont know. Hopefully BIS get it right soon enough. They got ArmA1 from too super AI to pretty damn good.

Alex

[LeadCommando65 10]

Daniel;1397837']Crap' date=' this explains a lot. We were quite happy with the 1.02 AI, all we had to do was lower their precision. That way firefights still had shit loads of fire, but we could run with covering fire without being picked off every time.

Please change it so that the AI will always fight for their "lives", and leave us to decide how accurate they are.[/quote']

No, "we" were not quite happy.

I don't want to have an AI in my game which makes sneaking absolutely impossible, just because a soldier can hear me crouching slowly in a 300 m radius around him. That's unrealistic and ruins the game!

This makes it just impossible to "hide" from AI in CQB (e.g. if you run around a house to flank them) because they will hear where you are going to.

It may be that lowering other values was not good in this case, cause it makes the AI a little bit blind. But you can still turn on SuperAI.

Edited August 9, 2009 by LeadCommando65

[eymerich 11]

No, "we" were not quite happy.

I don't want to have an AI in my game which makes sneaking absolutely impossible, just because a soldier can hear me crouching slowly in a 300 m radius around him. That's unrealistic and ruins the game!

This makes it just impossible to "hide" from AI in CQB (e.g. if you run around a house to flank them) because they will hear where you are going to.

It may be that lowering other values was not good in this case, cause it makes the AI a little bit blind. But you can still turn on SuperAI.

I completly agree

+1

[LJF 0]

I just had a look then and the AI is still quite good, I tried engaging a squad on UTES (one end to the other) and they put me down, not quickly but pretty well considering it was probably over a kilometer and they didn't have scopes.

[nettrucker 142]

Hi there

Even with AI skill settings to max in my opinion it's a bit to easy now. We need something inbetween 1.02 and 1.03.

kind regards

nettrucker

[Daniel 0]

No, "we" were not quite happy.

I don't want to have an AI in my game which makes sneaking absolutely impossible, just because a soldier can hear me crouching slowly in a 300 m radius around him. That's unrealistic and ruins the game!

This makes it just impossible to "hide" from AI in CQB (e.g. if you run around a house to flank them) because they will hear where you are going to.

It may be that lowering other values was not good in this case, cause it makes the AI a little bit blind. But you can still turn on SuperAI.

"We" was intended to imply the Romeo 2.5 community, not the ArmA 2 community as a whole. We don't spend a lot of time sneaking around (apart from recce) so I guess that wasn't much of an issue for us. So my point that i'd rather have AI that shoots more off the bat, and is as accurate as I want them to be for our community (via the server settings) still stands.

I'm happy that the issues been addressed, but from the 1st page references it seems they blatted the wasp with a bazooka.

[NeMeSiS 11]

Well i just checked and compared the config values:

1.03:

sensitivity = 1.5;

sensitivityEar = 0.5;

1.02:

sensitivity = 3;

sensitivityEar = 5;

[Murklor 10]

Sounds too me like a classical example of patch overcompensating, lol.

The thing is, it made sense that if you killed an AI, the rest caught on. It just didnt make sense that they knew *exactly* where you where, even if you relocated.

They should have just patched it so that the AI instead fired in your general area where they "think" the shots came from, then assault that position to actually spot you. But noooooo... I dont think developers will ever learn, lol.

[fabrizio_t 58]

Well i just checked and compared the config values:

1.03:

sensitivity = 1.5;

sensitivityEar = 0.5;

1.02:

sensitivity = 3;

sensitivityEar = 5;

Nice finding.

I missed the "sensitivityEar" change.

Where did you find it ?

In characters2.pbo ?

[Seaweed 10]

Sensitivity settings are found in the Characters.pbo, in the config.bin.

You can use Kegety's unRap utility to convert the .bin to .cpp and edit it.