MBot

Free SP/Coop with advanced AI for Kickstarter backers is big news! New interview at fpsgeneral: http://www.fpsgeneral.com/news/ground-branch/20746-exclusive-ground-branch-interview-with-blackfoot

Here are some words from SideStrafe about Ground Branch: He has 33'000 subscribers. Hope this will cause a boost :)

Well spoken Disaster!

I agree, $15 (if you don't feel to give more) for a new hardcore tactical shooter is just an awesome price (you actually buy a copy of it with that, it's no charity). And if they don't make the Kickstarter you don't loose anything. I am surprised that the Arma community is so reluctant. I mean it must be a player base of thousands that is interested in exactly this sort of game. And BlackFoot has has already produced the pre-alpha build that shows that they are willing and capable to do it. Now they need the funds to make it happen.

New video with developer commentary of the movement and shooting mechanics: Looks simply awesome to me :)

http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/670743543/ground-branch The Kickstarter page has been adjusted a bit to give a better overall idea what Ground Branch is about.

Already pledged. I think this project looks extremely promising. But it won't happen without the support of the tactical gamers (we who have been lamenting the sorry state of the gaming industry for years). So this is our chance to change that. Pledge and spread to word.

Currently the AI seems to rely a lot on vertical cover and almost not (or not at all?) on horizontal cover. Let me explain what I mean with horizontal and vertical cover. Vertical cover is a corner of a house or a large rock. Behind it you are covered, to fire you move or lean left and right. Horizontal cover is terrain, you go low to be covered and move up to fire. If the AI uses cover it is mostly of the vertical type, primary world objects. The problem is that such cover in Arma is actually quite rare. The AI loves to go behind trees, bushes or poles. But these provide almost no protection at all, the AI is still easily shot. The only working vertical cover is houses, high walls and large rocks, which leaves the AI with very little actual working cover to use across the complete map. One solution might be to write an AI that relies more on horizontal cover (where you can hide low and shoot over), such as low walls and most importantly the actual terrain. The terrain provides a large number of covered positions, the AI would benefit greatly if it was able to recognize and use them. Even better would of course be if more terrain detail is introduced, such as ditches along streets, to give the AI (and the player) even more opportunity to find cover and firing positions. So the basically: AI less dependent on world objects for cover, which are relatively rare, and more on the actual topography, which is plentiful. A game I would like to positively mention in regard to this is Steel Beasts Pro PE. I think the gameplay of playing with tanks in Steel Beasts and infantry in Arma is remarkably similar. Please note that I am not comparing Steel Beasts’ tanks to Arma’s tanks, but to Arma’s infantry. They have a similar amount of simulation and abstraction on the unit you play (tank or soldier respectively), similar controls to move and shoot and landscapes of similar scale. Steel Beasts does not have a high level AI that has complex path finding nor can flank, but its AI units have quite good individual combat drills. The AI in Steel Beasts does not recognise vertical cover, it won’t hide behind houses or trees. But it makes extensive use of horizontal cover. The tanks in SB are able to find terrain where they can only expose their top sensors to observe, their turrets to fire or move back down to reload completely protected. It is actually quite impressive and makes fire fights very interesting. Of course tank warfare cannot be compared 1 to 1 with infantry warfare, but some principles are still the same. And for demonstrating AI using horizontal cover in large scale terrain with large number of units, Steel Beasts deserves to be mentioned. One concept I would like the AI to understand is that of fire superiority. The AI should be able to make a good guess at which side currently holds the advantage in firepower. Only if the friendly units in the vicinity are able to put out enough fire to suppress the enemy units in the vicinity, should own units initiate flanking moves. No movement without fire superiority. If clear fire superiority cannot be achieved, the AI should remain in covered positions and request fire support if available (reinforcements, mortars, artillery, air support etc.). If fire support is not available or fire superiority can still not be achieved over the enemy, AI should switch to the defensive and hold the current position. Of course assault type movement options should also be provided in the editor to let AI perform assaults under fire in situations the mission designers finds appropriate.

-Will the terrain resolution be higher, feature micro terrain details? -Will there be streams or dry riverbeds? -Will there be weapon resting on objetcs? -Will the movement system feature "verical leaning" (other than the current workaround solution)? -Will AI be conscious of their role and act differently depending on it (e.g. machinegunner acts differently than rifleman)? Thanks and looking forward to news of the show.

A-10 can carry a maximum of 6 Mavs only (on tripple launcher racks on the station outboard of the main gear). Since 6 Mavs and the LAU-88 tripple launcher are pretty heavy and draggy, a two AGM-65 loadout is not uncommon.

Regarding the AI being so great at using cover, have a look at that: http://dev-heaven.net/issues/show/2556 They just love to leave any cover and suicidaly storm over open ground.

Now that is good news for us flightsimmers. I think this small thing is a big step in realism of the flying expierience in Arma 2. Will this also apply to the collective control of the helicopters? One small additional suggestion on the throttle topic: Would it be possible to inverse the throttle axis for helicopters (or aircraft, depending on what your control settings are). It is common to have the throttle axis inversed for helicopter sims (so pulling means + and pushing -). You can already do that in Arma 2 but then it is the wrong way for aircraft. If the throttle becomes more important now, it would be nice if the axis would be automatically inversed depending on helicopter/aircraft.

Of course I didn't mean that literal :) All I am saying is that you don't need a bayonet (and thus making your weapon more cumbersome in CQB) since you can shoot any enemy as quick and reliable as you can stab him.

Sorry I sound like a broken record but if you can impale someone, you can by definition also shoot him. Both acts require your victim to be at the point of your rifle. If you are worried so much you could miss the shot, simply imagine a non-extisting bayonet on your rifle, stab him, and shoot when your muzzle connects his body :)

I don't get it. If the enemy is beyond your muzzle you have to point your rifle at him, either to stab/cut or shoot. If he is closer than your muzzle you can't use the bayonet anyway and you have to resort to a buttstrike. I don't see what the bayonet can do what you can't do with ammo. I guess it is mostly a psychological factor for the one that is mounting it. Edit: But exactly the same applies to stabbing someone with your bayonet mounted your our rifle. Your rifle stabs or shoots in the same direction, so why not shoot?