Hiding in a bush vs AI

[maturin 12]

The AI does know how to use tactics. Squads can flank, hide, take cover and run away.

If BI could make the tall grass blow LOS like bushes and shorten the rest, that would be great. Because really, war is not fought on golf courses.

[CarlGustaffa 4]

Grass is just a statistical factor, but I think AI visibility could be improved even with that.

AI is prone and sees target. Ok, so prone, need to check something else before he fires.

Is the target also prone? If not, just exit and start firing.

What is the distance? The lower the distance, the chance of firing "accurately" increases. It is just stupidity that prevents us from opening fire at a very close enemy when we can't see shit. I've killed plenty of invisibles :)

Is the target targeting him, and is he also able to "see" using this algorithm? If so, exit and open fire.

Do a quick terrain analysis using just a few samples (more sample the longer the distance), is the surface between them "overall" convex or concave? If sufficiently concave, we can assume they can see eachother and open fire.

Everything returns a "probability factor", that influences the target box the AI is trying to shoot at. When probability is low, target box will move all over the place in the grass. Maybe a better defined enemy further away is a better choice than waisting bullets when probability to hit something is so low?

I don't know, just brainstorming loudly here. The grass issue should be addressed, but it's really not that hard to counter as long as you have the manpower to do so. Solo, I agree, we're a bit out of luck. Convex surfaces such as relatively flat terrain and hilltops present the greatest obstacles in this respect, as overwatch can be near impossible to setup.

[maturin 12]

Detection isn't that bad, barring anomalies. I think the most pressing issue is whether the AI should not be able to "see" enemies when it is lying prone with statistically determined grass in his face.

[galzohar 31]

With Zeus AI detection is quite reasonable when the terrain is well-defined, which unfortunately is rather often not the case.

The AI can flank and run away, sure, but it can't really hide and/or take cover very well.

[maturin 12]

The AI can flank and run away, sure, but it can't really hide and/or take cover very well.

Well that's what I don't really get. The AI can see cover down to minute details. They will lean around the concrete post supporting a thin telephone pole, a piece of cover so thin that they probably should be looking for a wall. That demonstrates an impressive capability that is often useful, but they simply don't do it in a consistent, practiced way. Shoot at a squad on a city street and they will try to take cover and stay in their bounding overwatch buddy formation at the same time. There isn't any situation where a group of AI will simply put large objects inbetween themselves and the direction of fire. When BI modified combat behavior to give individuals more initiative, it resulted in unplayably slow AI squad members.

[galzohar 31]

If you're not noticing anything consistent, it's probably just random or at least bad enough to be no better than just being random.

They do seem to have some kind of an ability to tell what is cover as they do lean around objects sometimes, but they do it rather rarely and not very effectively (as in, they will not run behind a wall often enough to point at them actually realizing it's effective cover).

[rübe 127]

I wonder if the best solution wouldn't be to have some kind of new LOD for models, indicating the engine where optimal places to position are and how or when to use them. Maybe not even a new LOD is needed, just a convention for these new point-types (similar to how to setup ladders and switches).

If you think about it, static structure offering good firepositions or simply good cover is not that dynamic in nature (though, certain criteria would have to be met to consider such places indeed valuable such as orientation...). As long as such a structure is intact, most people would choose the same places to take position. Think of windows and embrasures for quite precise positions. Think of walls and similar structures as a stripe of good positions.

No new idea here and some will probably say that they do not want to have anything "scripted" like this for AI. But really, where is the difference? A cover-taking algorithm is most like deterministic too to some degree. Assume we have the best find-cover algorithm there is, you wouldn't get different positions for each time you run it in the same environment.

I figure this could not only speed-up the current find-cover algorithm (in case there are objects with defined cover-spots nearby that is), but also this would make this hole thing a lot more reliable and effective (and fun for the guys modelling such structures).

To pull this off, there probaly should be at least to different types of such positions: passive-defensive positions (great cover value) and aggressive-defensive positions (great fireposition, good view - which could even be a third type, etc.). Though there might be much better types?

I imagine this could work really well at a very low cost. Imagine giving a group a simple defend waypoint. The most passive-defensive position would be taken by the leader or maybe by the corpsman, while regular units would mount watchtowers offering a good view and mg gunners would take the best aggressive firepositions.. This doesn't even have to be that deterministic: some slight randomization, maybe dependend on skill or type of group etc... and voila.

What do you guys think? Having done some basic structures myself, I certainly would be grateful such a system existed... watching the AI naturally use the modelled structure as intended, in a believable and effective way.

[Imperator[TFD] 444]

actually realizing it's effective cover

Haha, the amount of times I've seen the AI try and hide behind a street light or power pole is hilarious.

[*LK1* 10]

Haha, the amount of times I've seen the AI try and hide behind a street light or power pole is hilarious.

:o

fortunately with ace 2 AI is much better :bounce3::bounce3:

[CarlGustaffa 4]

Not more hilarious than other games where they stand still until you pass some trigger.

[walker 0]

Haha, the amount of times I've seen the AI try and hide behind a street light or power pole is hilarious.

Hi Imperator_Pete

The Amount of times I have seen a COD player new to ArmA do the same.

And we still have people, who do not remember the lessons of the Peekaboo Blankie game from when they kids, and expect the AI to forget they just ran behind a bush. Or better still expect to shoot at the AI from a bush, miss, and then are surprised they get it full auto in return.

Try using Zeus AI it improves the AI quite a bit. ;)

Kind Regards walker

[ScareCroweb 10]

Amen Walker

The amount of times I've seen "careful" teammates being so careful they forget to shoot when their comrades have allready taken fire, And then they get surprised when they get killed by surpressing AI, and they scream: "I didnt fire a bullet why did i get killed??" Or "I got killed because some stupid guy opened fire, I was laying hiding behind a bush but still got killed!"

I laugh everytime I hear that.

For anyone it concerns: You died because you didnt use your gun, to support your comrades!

Sorry I just had to get that off my chest :)

[Second 0]

AI hiding in bush or behind rock or wall or anything? And i mean actually hiding, not just using it as temporary cover while they move on to die glorious death. I mean i think most people don't know what defending is for... Because there's not much talking about it. I see it's been talked about, only by few guys. Well it's not biggie, it just ruins about 90% what you are supposed to do while you are in battlefield. Well maintaining formation and looking cool for screenshots is always better way to do things.

Have you ever seen AI actually taking firing positions when they halt or see hostiles but are not moving them selves? You probably haven't. I know i haven't, and i've tried to make them do that for like last couple of days in editor. They lack ability to use sandbags, trench-objects, buildings or anything. And if you place sandbags in front of them they do not rise to shoot, they just lie in there and wait for bad men to get tired and go away. And i'm staring game released in 2009... And they say it has advanced AI... And i stare back and say "oh reaaaally."

I just wonder how this is possible, i really can just nod my head out of cheer wonder. Why in earth BIS keeps disabling things which has been there before... Atleast they could have kept it if they don't feel that it's good idea to improve it. But no. This is like between OFP-ArmA, other testicle grows while other shrinks. Soon it has just another testicle and i wonder how it's going to be then...

[Imperator[TFD] 444]

Try using Zeus AI it improves the AI quite a bit.

Already am mate, cept I primarily play online where the server isn't using Zeus so unforutunately the enemy AI still do it a bit. As for human players doing it, gotta say I've been guilty a few times of using a tree as cover (and not concealment), but those are usually in desperate times haha.

Have you ever seen AI actually taking firing positions when they halt or see hostiles but are not moving them selves?

As a defensive player in Warfare missions I know how to get my own AI to effectively use sandbags and bunkers rather easily. Just select the AI member you want, tell them to go into crouch and then tell them to 'move to bunker' and they'll place themselves inside it, or it's a larger one you tell them which position within that bunker to go to by moving your mouse around until you see the corresponding position within the structure that you want. The AI will even climb ladders to get to that position if neccessary.

[ScareCroweb 10]

As a defensive player in Warfare missions I know how to get my own AI to effectively use sandbags and bunkers rather easily. Just select the AI member you want, tell them to go into crouch and then tell them to 'move to bunker' and they'll place themselves inside it, or it's a larger one you tell them which position within that bunker to go to by moving your mouse around until you see the corresponding position within the structure that you want. The AI will even climb ladders to get to that position if neccessary.

But those are your own AI's I wish the enemy AI would utilize this feature aswell, is it so much to create a set of scripts for an AI Squadleader to use, I really think this is possible with all the excellent programmers in this world, I mean the AI is allready telling his soldiers to go 50 meters north and so on why not tell them to "enter" cover positions

[Second 0]

But those are your own AI's I wish the enemy AI would utilize this feature aswell, is it so much to create a set of scripts for an AI Squadleader to use, I really think this is possible with all the excellent programmers in this world, I mean the AI is allready telling his soldiers to go 50 meters north and so on why not tell them to "enter" cover positions

Yeah. This. It's not very immersive for me to storm defensive positions when AI can't take any kind of advantage of cover it has.

I've used couple of hours to try to remake my take cover scripts from ArmA, but seems like BIS disabled set of scripting commands from ArmA 1 and right now i'm out of ideas how to even script AI to take cover... If it's even possible anymore.

[galzohar 31]

Yeah, I've noticed the only way to force AI into taking good positions in a bunker or the likes is by placing them at a specific location and telling them to stay put for the whole mission...

[nichevo 2]

AI hiding in bush or behind rock or wall or anything? And i mean actually hiding, not just using it as temporary cover while they move on to die glorious death.

I know exactly what you mean. In one of the missions I worked on I found several brilliant foliaged hidey-holes and stuck AI in there, told them to stay lying down, don't ever move away, and (possibly) keep watching the direction that offers them the best view.

(I'm a big fan of randomness. While there were a lot of these positions, there was only a small chance any particular one would be occupied. I don't want to spoil all the suprises on the first play-through. ;) )

Seasoned ArmA vets are used to seeing AI either on the move or standing about in formation, they're not used to peering into bushes. So when they see an AI hidden in a very clever spot, it adds to immersion. (Regardless of if they're seeing the hidden AI before or after they've been killed.)

They lack ability to use sandbags, trench-objects, buildings or anything.

This is a shame, and why urban fights with AI are so bizarre. I know it's a hard problem to solve in the context of ArmA AI, and I know it's gotten better slowly over time, but the fact still remains.

[Imperator[TFD] 444]

Perhaps BIS could implement a high priority on what contitutes cover for certain objects.

Eg:

Sandbags/bunkers are #1 priority

Buildings/hulks are #2

Trees/light poles are #never

That way the AI can be doing radious checks from its current position or even the position it's heading to and determine whether or not within a certain radious if there is cover available and that if there is, how far up on the priority list it is and then to utilitise that cover.

[maturin 12]

Perhaps BIS could implement a high priority on what contitutes cover for certain objects.

Eg:

Sandbags/bunkers are #1 priority

Buildings/hulks are #2

Trees/light poles are #never

What do you mean, never? A three-foot thick oak tree is far, far better than a blade of grass, and they should always seek concealment if no harder cover is available. And you hide behind a sandbag when there are no buildings or wrecked tanks around, not vice versa.