The AI's Biotic X-Ray Vision through certain objects: A bit of research on the matter

[NeMeSiS 11]

It is my suspicion that editor placed objects are not really interacted with by the AI... For instance witness how the AI refuses to take cover behind sandbags

. ;)

Also, i dont so how posting experiences is somehow better then posting video's, but what do i care? My game works fine. :p

EDIT: Maybe the MAP_EU objects lack the viewlod, i doubt it but i cant be arsed to find the addon to try your mission. Or maybe editor placed objects are ignored alltogether. However map placed objects are 100% fine. All check something right now.

Edited June 5, 2010 by NeMeSiS

[SWT_Janowich 10]

Unfortunately, pointing to videos of cases where AI view blocking does work (or pretty pictures of specific view-lods for that matter) does not in any way negate the issues with AI detection that many of us experience on a daily basis. Indeed, if you start at the beginning of this thread and read the actual premise of what I'm saying, there is no myth here. Only cold hard facts.

Your an idiot. My link does not even include a video.

[calo_mir 10]

In order to specifically show exactly what I'm having an issue with, fire up ArmA2 with no addons running (only MAP_EU.pbo), and then try my test mission which I've uploaded here.

Nice one. Please put this on the bug tracker.

[NeMeSiS 11]

Well, i made another mission using a default editor placed object:

http://www.mediafire.com/file/xufzmzljmfm/AIdefaultobjectviewblocktest.utes.rar

With Radio Alpha you get a hint which tells you the knowsabout of the enemy soldier about you. As you can see being behind an object like this is fine.

I dont have any bushes i can place in the editor to test with, but i figured that a viewlod is a viewlod. And you can use this mission on map objects anyway. Just place the dude's somewhere else. Or put one of the MAP_EU bushes inbetween them and try to figure out if its their fault.

EDIT: The first link i posted in this topic also included a demo mission, it was basically the same but with grass instead of objects.

Edited June 5, 2010 by NeMeSiS

[Whoatherefatty 10]

Your an idiot. My link does not even include a video.

Just because the system got better doesn't mean it's been perfected. I have seen several AI unload their ammo into walls 3 feet in front of them. Also the talk or making smooth grass LOD transitios seems bogus to. In wooded areas the grass morphs constantly near me and further out. It's so bad on any setting I turn off grass frequently when I'm in the woods.

And don't tell me you don't constantly hear your own unit calling out enemy positions behind buildings or trees.

And no need to call anyone an idiot. Especially when you are one of 3 people who think there isn't a problem. And even more important if you call someone an idiot try not to have a typo within that statement. But if you insist please post all the articles you want. All I have to do is play for 10 minutes to see the truth.

[dmarkwick 261]

I've often thought that ArmA2 vegetation should offer more concealment at times. Specifically, I'm often annoyed when I'm spotted in a forest at distance.

I've often thought that units very cose to a tree, or close enough to several trees that it could be considered a thicket, should be more difficult for AI to spot. This isn't even very impractical, as you can see that rain for example is affected for the player if they're near to a tree. (When you're near a tree, you are partially sheltered and the near rain texture drops off.) this means that the logic for being near to a tree already exists.

I'm not saying that a unit near a tree should be invisible, just that a stationary unit near to a tree should be more difficult for an AI to spot :) this way using tree lines becomes much more effective.

[Nightrain 10]

I've often thought that ArmA2 vegetation should offer more concealment at times. Specifically, I'm often annoyed when I'm spotted in a forest at distance.

I've often thought that units very cose to a tree, or close enough to several trees that it could be considered a thicket, should be more difficult for AI to spot. This isn't even very impractical, as you can see that rain for example is affected for the player if they're near to a tree. (When you're near a tree, you are partially sheltered and the near rain texture drops off.) this means that the logic for being near to a tree already exists.

I'm not saying that a unit near a tree should be invisible, just that a stationary unit near to a tree should be more difficult for an AI to spot :) this way using tree lines becomes much more effective.

Yes! I find it very hard to setup ambushes or just attacks in the tree line. The AI Spot and kill you once the first shot is fired (most of the time). You almost have to be way back in the forest to get any kind of concealment.

[KeyCat 131]

Stop

.

FYI - No one is crying!

Observing things and discussing them to help making a great game/sim even better is at least my objective.

I think it also heavily depends on what kind of mission you prefer to play. In larger sized combat situations with lots of AI infantry/vehicles the problem may not be to notable but in smaller sniper/scouting/infiltration situations it IMO becomes an issue.

Remember that to be able to pull off somewhat realistic tactics the AI must show somewhat realistic behavior/limitations.

Personally I looked into this grass/clutter thing since I assumed that when lying completely still in a ghille (not firing) it should be very very hard (as in RL) for the AI to detect me. And this "tactic" works if you do it on a grassy field on Chernarus (i.e surfaceType = CRGrassX) where they only detected me 1 out of 10 times.

Doing the same in woods (i.e surfaceType = CRForestX) the AI detects you 100% of the time at ~40 m (IIRC) and thats the same approx distance the AI will detect you if you lay down on tarmac so something seems wrong here!?

See post below if you want to try it yourself (disregard the Thirks version, it's there since I first believed the issue was with this wonderfull island but I was wrong).

http://forums.bistudio.com/showpost.php?p=1593617&postcount=99

Note that I'm talking about grass/clutter here, not Visitor/editor placed bushes/trees etc.

Again, anyone of you config guru's knows if it's possible to tweak this via config or otherwise? I know I can tweak the camoflage value of the sniper but thats not what I wan't to do since it may skew things in other situations, I would like the CRForestX surfaceType behave similar to CRGrassX.

/KC

Edited June 5, 2010 by KeyCat

[W0lle 1046]

Your an idiot. My link does not even include a video.

+2 infraction points for that.

We're slowly getting tired of you and Takko acting up here. :mad:

[terox 316]

The entire AI detection system has many elements involved.

1) Speed at which you move, (Better to walk instead of run, better to crawl instead of walk)

2) Your camouflage value

3) The ai's sensitivity of hearing

4) Time of day

5) The weapon you use

Often they fire through bushes not because they know where you are but because they think they know where you are. (Did you change direction after firing and hiding, or did you continue on the same vector allowing the AI to have a better guess)

When you fire prone, do you roll to one side before getting up, or do you just stand up where you fired?

Some models do have view blocking lods, poorer quality ones dont.

The outcome of all this, is there are some issues with the ai's accurateness in guessing, but there are also ways to help yourself as a player. This is not a one sided issue with BIS, although there is an element of this that BIS can improve

[Richey79 10]

Keycat's experiment has got me to wondering what effect moving your head around would have on the likelihood of being spotted.

Can you look around without fear, as long as your body is absolutely still (which might class as an exploit to some), or would the AI be as likely to see you as if your body were moving?

Anyone done any kind of tests?

[maturin 12]

Keycat's experiment has got me to wondering what effect moving your head around would have on the likelihood of being spotted.

Can you look around without fear, as long as your body is absolutely still (which might class as an exploit to some), or would the AI be as likely to see you as if your body were moving?

Anyone done any kind of tests?

I'm pretty sure moving your head will cause no problems. I've always played under that assumption and it has never gotten me caught. Really, I bet you could aim at the sky and lift your entire prone torso above grass level with no ill effects, but I try to play as if the game were real, most days.

[fabrizio_t 58]

Doing the same in woods (i.e surfaceType = CRForestX) the AI detects you 100% of the time at ~40 m (IIRC) and thats the same approx distance the AI will detect you if you lay down on tarmac so something seems wrong here!?

...Again, anyone of you config guru's knows if it's possible to tweak this via config or otherwise? I know I can tweak the camoflage value of the sniper but thats not what I wan't to do since it may skew things in other situations, I would like the CRForestX surfaceType behave similar to CRGrassX.

/KC

Very interesting.

Hope somebody will be able to look into this.

[zeep 3]

Of course the AI vision/sensory skills are a problem, almost to cheating levles. And it's very easy to have proof.

You don't need to look at a specific behavior of the AI to notice it, in fact. Sometimes, playing a normal mission, your own main character controlled by you will begin to shout "enemy, 200 mts!" "enemy, at left flank, far away!!", four or five times, one after other.

...meanwhile, i don't see anyone in my screen. I begin to focus carefully in the direction of the contact, and i still don't see anyone. And the same sensory system of detection is used by every AI in the game (supposing the allied and enemy AI skill is the same). That's the problem. The AI is capable of seeing people when me (a human) couldn't see anything.

We humans have problems noticing two little green pixels which maybe is moving a bit representing an enemy contact 200 mts away, sorrounded by more green/brown pixels. Even more difficult if you have a high density of objects in screen, with green, hills, forests, bushes, buildings, even if in theory there is correct line of sight, we humans have problems recognizing something small in a scenario so populated and filled with detail. AI doesn't seem to have that problem.

Yep. QFT.

[KeyCat 131]

Must have been somewhat tired the other day...I noticed there was no example hiding in the woods on Chernarus so I repacked it if anyone will try to reproduce this on their machines...

Test 1 - Hide_in_grass.Chernarus (surfaceType = CRGrass1, CRGrass2, CRGrassW1)

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

When mission starts go prone directly and do not move a fin, just wait a couple of minutes. 95% of the time the Russian AI squad just passes by within a meter or two and does not detect me (as it should be since I'm wearing a Ghillie suit and are lying completely still in vegetation).

Test 2 - Hide_in_woods.Chernarus (surfaceType = CRForest1)

-----------------------------------------------------------

The exact same mission copied an pasted to a nearby wood. Doing the same procedure as above and the Russian AI squad always detects me 100% of the time at ~30-40 m!?

Test 3 - Prone_on_tarmac.Chernarus (surfaceType = ?)

-----------------------------------------------------

Just for comparsion I copied the exact same mission to the tarmac on Chernarus airfield. Doing the same procedure as above and the Russian AI squad always detects me 100% of the time at ~40 m (as it should be since I'm on concrete).

Link to testmissions:

http://keycat.no-ip.com/files/A2_Hide_in_clutter.zip

/KC

Edited June 7, 2010 by KeyCat

[SteveJA 12]

Wouldnt it be good if the AI could get confused, like they see you from 80m on concrete in a ghillie suit, and they start shouting and aiming on your postion, maybe a couple of people come close looking inquisitively, and then shoot you once they realise your an enemy.

Maybe even act dead if you dont move or something. I dunno, be good tho if your whole squad gets decimated by a bmp and you survive because the ai thinks your just a corpce. Ive made that mistake many a times so why shouldnt the AI.

(Once again i know this wouldnt be HIGH on prioritys, but be a nice feature)

[dmarkwick 261]

Wouldnt it be good if the AI could get confused, like they see you from 80m on concrete in a ghillie suit, and they start shouting and aiming on your postion, maybe a couple of people come close looking inquisitively, and then shoot you once they realise your an enemy.

Maybe even act dead if you dont move or something. I dunno, be good tho if your whole squad gets decimated by a bmp and you survive because the ai thinks your just a corpce. Ive made that mistake many a times so why shouldnt the AI.

(Once again i know this wouldnt be HIGH on prioritys, but be a nice feature)

Right alongside this idea is the notion of friendly fire, I often cannot tell who's who at distance, and I have to rely on who I *expect* is at that location. this means that communication (and its subsequent comprehension) becomes more important or you'll either target the wrong side, or will be targeted by your own side.

I've often thought that the near-faultless IDing abilities of the AI (OK I know there is *some* amount of logic for it, but it's pretty rigid and good) was a little robotic. The only friendly fire reports I ever hear are the result of accidental hits, never mis-identified targets.

In particular, I would expect that if I used an abandoned enemy vehicle, that I might expect to be targeted by my own side unless I made some sort of communication.

[CarlGustaffa 4]

Wouldnt it be good if the AI could get confused, like they see you from 80m on concrete in a ghillie suit, and they start shouting and aiming on your postion, maybe a couple of people come close looking inquisitively, and then shoot you once they realise your an enemy.

No. For several reasons:

1) AI is confused enough as it is :p

2) AI shouldn't do "planned" friendly fire. Enough of "accidental" ones at it is.

3) AI enemy side (center) "knows" where his own personnel are. Even if knowsAbout isn't updated, at least it prevents them from doing friendly fire.

4) In real life, you wouldn't be walking around in a ghillie while attached to another squad, or near friendly forces, unless you're getting ready for mission. While attached, you wait until separation before you put it on.

[alef 0]

I just want to add here my repro about the issue I did time ago: http://dev-heaven.net/projects/cis/wiki/Test_missions. It's the first .sqm.

After what I've read here about surfaceType, I'll add that to the test missions and see what happens.

[maturin 12]

I've often thought that the near-faultless IDing abilities of the AI (OK I know there is *some* amount of logic for it, but it's pretty rigid and good) was a little robotic. The only friendly fire reports I ever hear are the result of accidental hits, never mis-identified targets.

.

Only because they never fire upon 'Unknown' targets unless ordered. If there was a chance for them to attack them, you would have friendly fire out the ears.

[SteveJA 12]

No. For several reasons:

1) AI is confused enough as it is :p

2) AI shouldn't do "planned" friendly fire. Enough of "accidental" ones at it is.

3) AI enemy side (center) "knows" where his own personnel are. Even if knowsAbout isn't updated, at least it prevents them from doing friendly fire.

4) In real life, you wouldn't be walking around in a ghillie while attached to another squad, or near friendly forces, unless you're getting ready for mission. While attached, you wait until separation before you put it on.

Well just throwing some ideas out there, so to make the AI more human i guess but i didnt suggest more freindly fire, no thanks lol i get shot enough by my own team, but i do like the mistaken identity idea. You could have a squad leader say "contact 12o'clock" if he spots something and then "HQ any freindlys at 124,098" or something like that.

[KeyCat 131]

I just want to add here my repro about the issue I did time ago: http://dev-heaven.net/projects/cis/wiki/Test_missions. It's the first .sqm. After what I've read here about surfaceType, I'll add that to the test missions and see what happens.

Haven't had time to test your mission yet but will. Also, if you (or anyone else) want to, feel free to upload my simple repro testmissions to CIT2, I still haven't got around to sign up there...

Since no one commented on any possible config tweaks for surfaceTypes I assume this is hardcoded into ArmA 2 and would need BIS attention to fix, right?

/KC

[andromedagalaxe 10]

One thing I'd like to see worked in if it isn;t already is a light system for AI. when you are crouched in in a dense forest completely in shadow and under the brush, the AI located outside the forest in bright light should have a harder time picking you up. AI should rely on sound (gunfire) and muzzle flash to pick you out. They certainly wouldn't be able to see you without a scope IRL

I notice this especially in user-made missions

[calo_mir 10]

Anything ever come of this? From what I gathered from the whole of the thread, one of the major issues is that the AI can spot units far too easily in forests due to an incorrect (or poorly chosen) value for the forest surface type.

Shouldn't this be an easy one to fix?

[KeyCat 131]

I tried to find the corresponding value/something in the configs to see if if it was possible to fix/tweak this specific AI issue myself but couldn't find anything so I guess it needs BIS attention to be properly fixed.

/KC