I said "CEASE FIRE"!!!

[InFireBaptize 0]

Luhgnut;1430247']Oh he will. But by then we're screwed. And I would want them to keep shooting cause they already goofed.

i have ran into a situation specially when i'm the tank commander where AI refuse to hold fire!

[-RIP- Luhgnut 10]

i have ran into a situation specially when i'm the tank commander where AI refuse to hold fire!

Heh, how about telling your gunner to attack a tank, and he says "Roger" and jumps out and runs at it. I think that's fixed though. Was funny cause I told the guy to attack, and I'm looking through commander scope and see my guy running at the enemy.

[santafee 10]

Eh thx for that video-proof man!!Didnt have the time and my fraps setup is kinda crappy actually...

This shows exactly what i mean and on a area like that, u clearly see that nobody ever has been spotted.So,yes it is a bug.Were not here to blame BIS for bugs just for fun,it is,like i sayed, gamebreaking.U just cannot create missions where u Have to be undetected for a long time and it takes away alot off options scenario wise.It annoyed me the most as i planned to call in an airstrike 200 meter from an village,where my lovely nr.3 started engaging the BMP and the BMP...just killed us all with some shots.Il take that in the suggestions Thread for Patch 1.04 and hope BIS is taking a look on it...!

[-RIP- Luhgnut 10]

Eh thx for that video-proof man!!Didnt have the time and my fraps setup is kinda crappy actually...

This shows exactly what i mean and on a area like that, u clearly see that nobody ever has been spotted.So,yes it is a bug.Were not here to blame BIS for bugs just for fun,it is,like i sayed, gamebreaking.U just cannot create missions where u Have to be undetected for a long time and it takes away alot off options scenario wise.It annoyed me the most as i planned to call in an airstrike 200 meter from an village,where my lovely nr.3 started engaging the BMP and the BMP...just killed us all with some shots.Il take that in the suggestions Thread for Patch 1.04 and hope BIS is taking a look on it...!

I post bugs and feedback so forth on the BIS Dev-Heaven and will post this.

I think what's happening, is that the squad mate is coming out of stealth on DETECTION as opposed to IDENTIFICATION. I concur that once Identified, the OPFOR AI will immediately kick into gear and start firing, to which the squaddy SHOULD come out of stealth and return fire. But as it stands now, they are detected and coming out. It's like backwards. I love ARMA2 and BIS is a great developer, no doubt about it. To which they DESERVE the opportunity to make a great game already, stellar and put into the Hall of Fame. This is one step.

Edited September 4, 2009 by [RIP] Luhgnut

[nomdeplume 0]

knowsAbout.utes.zip (4KB)

Basically the same setup as in Luhgnut's video, but with a hint showing the knowsAbout level for everyone involved, updated twice per second. The first line (g1u2:g2) shows how much #2 in your squad knows about each of the enemies. The second line (gr2:u1) shows how much each enemy squad member knows about #1 in your squad (i.e. the player). The third line (gr2:u2) shows how much they know about your #2.

Might help to shed some light into what circumstances trigger the breaking of 'hold fire' orders.

It seems like my guy is more likely to start shooting if I send him by himself than if he's moving forward in formation with me. However, the enemy does seem to detect us at a much longer range than my #2 sees them, and I didn't adjust the skills beyond their defaults so my man may just be a bit dim.

[Trapper 0]

Good idea.

I think the members of a human controlled squad are that dim or over enlighted because of their missing ai group leader. In the end he's the one scanning vague reports of one of his men and transmitting his evaluation and detections to any other group members to coordinate any action. Instead of a human leader he'll be using the reveal command to rise knowsabout nonstop.

A human leader instead has to reveal by pressing a key every time. When he does, based on his graphic visuals and not on some abstract ai view, he'll be better than a skilled ai leader because of his farther view distance. When he doesn't reveal for his squad, the ai squad becomes as ineffective as if an ai leader would be far away and out of sight of his squad and it's surroundings while they are relying on him.

[NeMeSiS 11]

It seems like my guy is more likely to start shooting if I send him by himself than if he's moving forward in formation with me. However, the enemy does seem to detect us at a much longer range than my #2 sees them, and I didn't adjust the skills beyond their defaults so my man may just be a bit dim.

Your squad is moving, theirs is standing still, you are easier to spot. ;)

[-RIP- Luhgnut 10]

Yesterday when I was putting that vid together, I was trying different things, and one point my guy crawled right up into the enemies face. I mentioned it before in another post but, I'm trying to do it again, and it won't do it. It took forever, but he didn't come off "do not fire" and didn't stand up and run for cover when told to stealth... He just crawled and crawled and crawled.

I would look at him and then look at the Opfor to figure out how close he was and he got within 10 meters. Then suddenly the Opfor guys just totally wigged out and shot him up. Think of it. .... A big marine on an empty runway, crawling around, and they didn't see him. I kept thinking... any second they will see him...... but he would stop where I told him to go to. So I gave him another, and he kept going. This went on for maybe 5 min, so it's too long and boring to video. Weird. Other times, as soon as he moves, they would spot him.

What's confusing is that sometimes, they can't see 10 meters, and other times, they can see a man in a town 1000meters away. Wish I knew the logic in the code to why.

[fabrizio_t 58]

Luhgnut;1430850']

What's confusing is that sometimes' date=' they can't see 10 meters, and other times, they can see a man in a town 1000meters away. Wish I knew the logic in the code to why.[/quote']

Right.

You can read some considerations about this problem here:

http://dev-heaven.net/issues/show/2209

[50.cal 10]

Luhgnut;1430267']Heh' date=' how about telling your gunner to attack a tank, and he says "Roger" and jumps out and runs at it. I think that's fixed though. Was funny cause I told the guy to attack, and I'm looking through commander scope and see my guy running at the enemy.[/quote']

LOOOL

It works with the "Move To" command as well.

Take an armoured vehicle or whatever. Put a driver a gunner and a commander in it if you can. Then order some other units to board the vehicle do a move to command via the map.

Except the commander gunner and driver all the other dumb AI will disembark for a little jogging...obviously they end up as cannonmeat.

So many bugs...I don't even know where to start.

At this stage this game is a joke :D

It's even more funny to see all these pretended army heroes/experts etc telling "this is the real thing guys that's how it is on the field".

Let me tell you something. I've done the army because it was mandatory in my country. I'm not a professional nor do I like it but this game is nowhere near to be a simulator or anything. Just a very bugged sandbox game attempting to simulate ballistic.

Now I'm still having fun with it. But it always gets me frustrated because of the 10'000 bugs including this one I encounter when I play.

Luhgnut;1430850'] Wish I knew the logic in the code to why.

So do I. But we are not the dev and we're not supposed to understand how bad they codded things to make it work...don't you think?

Edited September 8, 2009 by 50.cal

[-RIP- Luhgnut 10]

Right.

You can read some considerations about this problem here:

http://dev-heaven.net/issues/show/2209

Looks like this has been an issue for quite a bit.

It's just so - inconsistent that you don't know if what you're doing actually has an impact or if some random number generator is running in background.

[bascule42 10]

lol...that really would be a pissa if we found out there was a d20 system running the game :butbut:

[Crni-Vuk 10]

it doesn't matter, if you give an order it should be obeyed.

Even if it would mean to get killed cause you did not returned fire in a emergency situation?

Which I am not sure if it would be realistic.

At least in a Tank like the Leopard 2 the guner has the authority to engange a target that would be a "immediate" threat to the vehicle regardless of the order from the commander. You haev to avoid to receive a hit at all costs and when you know that any second the enemy will tourn its turret toward you to shoot you you dont hesitate even a second to shoot him before he would shoot you. The commander is obviously always the bigest authority, but here also comes in the individual responsibility of every usual soldier toward his squad and own life. Soldiers are not robots, they are human beeings and even in a training situation you are teached to react before thinking when in firefights or engagements as thinking will cost time while you might be injured or in the worst case simply dead. And even the strictest order regarding a "cease fire" can be bypassed when either your life or those of your squad is in "direct" and "immediate" danger. Though what that is now, is a bit left to everyone personaly.

What though I think is the issue is that the AI has not a clear "definiton" sometimes about what a immediate threat is to them. A target 10m infront of you that will raise its rifle any second toward you and shoot is of course a danger that you will shoot regardless of orders. But to engange targets far away that have not spoted you yet and just will alarm the whole enemy force will definetly be a issue.

[NoRailgunner 0]

In addition to my previous post I would say:

If AI is set on stealth they should obey Hold fire by player/teamleader - regardless how close the enemy unit is.

If AI is set on danger and aware they should only fire at highest+closest threats - without players/teamleaders ok.

Imho AI should try to report and warn about highest threats and possible attacks before they start shooting without teamleaders permission.

[InFireBaptize 0]

Even if it would mean to get killed cause you did not returned fire in a emergency situation?

Which I am not sure if it would be realistic.

At least in a Tank like the Leopard 2 the guner has the authority to engange a target that would be a "immediate" threat to the vehicle regardless of the order from the commander. You haev to avoid to receive a hit at all costs and when you know that any second the enemy will tourn its turret toward you to shoot you you dont hesitate even a second to shoot him before he would shoot you. The commander is obviously always the bigest authority, but here also comes in the individual responsibility of every usual soldier toward his squad and own life. Soldiers are not robots, they are human beeings and even in a training situation you are teached to react before thinking when in firefights or engagements as thinking will cost time while you might be injured or in the worst case simply dead. And even the strictest order regarding a "cease fire" can be bypassed when either your life or those of your squad is in "direct" and "immediate" danger. Though what that is now, is a bit left to everyone personaly.

What though I think is the issue is that the AI has not a clear "definiton" sometimes about what a immediate threat is to them. A target 10m infront of you that will raise its rifle any second toward you and shoot is of course a danger that you will shoot regardless of orders. But to engange targets far away that have not spoted you yet and just will alarm the whole enemy force will definetly be a issue.

please read post#8 up.

[-RIP- Luhgnut 10]

In addition to my previous post I would say:

If AI is set on stealth they should obey Hold fire by player/teamleader - regardless how close the enemy unit is.

If AI is set on danger and aware they should only fire at highest+closest threats - without players/teamleaders ok.

Imho AI should try to report and warn about highest threats and possible attacks before they start shooting without teamleaders permission.

My theory (and what I submitted to Bis-Bug hunt guys) is that the squad members are coming off "hold fire" on DETECTION by the enemy as opposed to IDENTIFICATION. If he's seen they should still look at him to distinguish the side the squad member is on, then react. Such an overt action would then trigger the squad member to react in defensive/life and death manner. Right now, as soon as he's detected (either enemy or non) he opens fire..

Personally this subject has been discussed pretty heavy and BIS is aware and working on it. So I think we just wait and see at this point.

[THEBLITZ6794 10]

it doesn't matter, if you give an order it should be obeyed.

No. They should obey their orders to the best ability of a human.

[nettrucker 142]

Hi everybody

I did some further testing. Placed 2 groups on Utes airfield. Skill is set to max. No waypoints have been given, no behaviour set, no other code snippets.

Here the distance is aprox. 300 m. Couldn't find anything wrong. Ordered my team to hold fire and they are obeying even after revealing the enemy group.

Here's a video to check.

Second attempt . . . leaving everything the same changed only the distance of the 2 groups to aprox. 200 m. See the results for yourself.

At this point I'm quite unsure if it is a bug or not. In any case I couldn't find anything strange though.

regards

nettrucker:D

Edited September 9, 2009 by nettrucker
wrong link

[fabrizio_t 58]

Luhgnut;1433491']My theory (and what I submitted to Bis-Bug hunt guys) is that the squad members are coming off "hold fire" on DETECTION by the enemy as opposed to IDENTIFICATION. If he's seen they should still look at him to distinguish the side the squad member is on' date=' then react. Such an overt action would then trigger the squad member to react in defensive/life and death manner. Right now, as soon as he's detected (either enemy or non) he opens fire..

Personally this subject has been discussed pretty heavy and BIS is aware and working on it. So I think we just wait and see at this point.[/quote']

I second your theory, based on my personal and limited experience.

---------- Post added at 10:49 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:43 AM ----------

Hi everybody

I did some further testing. Placed 2 groups on Utes airfield. Skill is set to max. No waypoints have been given, no behaviour set, no other code snippets.

Here the distance is aprox. 300 m. Couldn't find anything wrong. Ordered my team to hold fire and they are obeying even after revealing the enemy group.

Here's a video to check.

Second attempt . . . leaving everything the same changed only the distance of the 2 groups to aprox. 200 m. See the results for yourself.

At this point I'm quite unsure if it is a bug or not. In any case I couldn't find anything strange though.

regards

nettrucker:D

Definitely a bug. How can you properly code any AI driven infiltration / recon mission if units break hold fire command when NOT absolutely needed ?

I've seen many times friendly AI opening fire while ordered to hold, shooting enemy units clearly in CARELESS/SAFE stance (meaning they did not IDENTIFY as a threat those friendly units).

Edited September 9, 2009 by fabrizio_T

[NoRailgunner 0]

nettrucker -thats another issue with AI. ;)

Try this example even without "Hold Fire" and "move" waypoint (default):

if both groups below 200m they will start firing - above 200m they wont do anything. (tested with default veteran settings in editor and 2500m viewdistance)

Isnt it very strange if opponents have a clear view on each other that they dont try to do something?

The issue with "cease fire" is important for many missions where you have to keep silence before attacking the enemy. Like I mentioned - give the AI some more and precise reporting skills and some improved abilities to engage threats. :)

Basically the AI should obey all orders from player (and team/squadleader). Only if they are in real danger they should use their weapons to engage only the highest threat(s).

[fabrizio_t 58]

Basically the AI should obey all orders from player (and team/squadleader). Only if they are in real danger they should use their weapons to engage only the highest threat(s).

That's the entire point. May i suggest just a very slight correction ?

"Only if they are in real danger they should use their weapons to engage first the highest threat(s)."

[maddogx 13]

"Only if they are in real danger they should use their weapons to engage first the highest threat(s)."

"Real danger" is a highly subjective concept, very difficult to define. When teaching the AI how to recognize when this is the case, a lot of things factor into that decision - some based on judgements that an AI cannot easily make.

When the enemy is firing in your general direction, how do you know if they are firing at you or at some other squad close by? If an enemy is moving toward you, when can you be certain that he will see you? If one of your squad mates is killed by a grenade, how do you know it was aimed at him and not just a stray?

There are a lot of parameters to take into account in order to make the AI behave realistically. :)

[50.cal 10]

I think the AI knows exactly when it is detected.

[maddogx 13]

I think the AI knows exactly when it is detected.

Of course it does, but that's essentially cheating. That way they would start firing even if someone were creeping up behind them.

[50.cal 10]

No they could just return fire or advise you've been spotted and ask the permission to engage.