Second

Well why do you test that kind flagpole marker things which might not show real results and ways AI works Those might be fancy ways but i prefer to see how AI actually performs, what info it thinks to be useful and what not. Why not use team switch to enemy side and watch how enemy reacts and what it does for real. What it thinks to be essential and what not. They chase that engage square. Not the flagpole or markers

Okay i tested my own version, and i think that your results are partially true partially false. My test was like this: 1. I was sniper i shot at squad they shot at me 2. I went to hide inside spunce (no better cover than that) and shot few times in side it 3. Teamswitched to squad that i shot at and observed their actions 4. engage square wasn't anywhere near the spot from where i shot at them or where i (sniper) is. Troops did check the close area of engage square. they didn't care the actual spot where i shot first time. Or the spoot i was in to (that sprunce). So this test resulted that AI don't know the actual spot. But then i tested differently. 1. I shot at squad from 300 meters. allowed them to shoot me. 2. Pulled back about 100 meter and shot few times to air (in visual cover of enemy: Hill was in between)). Spot was marked with road cone. 3. Pulled back 100 meter again (is was now over 500 meters away from their leader) and shot several times and laid down to that spot. And started to observe. They seemed to check that spot which was marked by road cone (second shooting spot). And when found it clear went back to their squads. Team switching to target squad did confirm this. and again i tested differently. Same test as earlier, but now when i went to 500 meters away from squad i hid inside sprunce (again) and when units were checking that first or second spot. [side note] This was depend of how much noise i produced in second spot, one shot wasn't enough (they checked the first spot where they had visual on me spot) but seemed that over 5 shots was enough for them to "find" my position with their ears from that second spot. [/side note] so once they searched me from last spot i shot again (they were about 200-300 meters away) they received istantly my new position and it was accurate (i could shoot the sniper using engage square). But funny thing that they didn't engage me anymore, which most likely was because of long range (over 500 meter from leader). But if i chosed to move sneakly away from sprunce, they ofcourse did think that i was under that sprunce still, if not noticing me. So. They pick locations very well with their ears, the spot is accurately where some one shot or caused other noise that they did hear. But it's possible to counter with movement: they have to quess where did you move after they saw you. This infact was what happened in my first test: they saw me moving after i shot, and then they lost me. They didn't track the last place where i was seen, but estimated place where i would be. That is the reason why the engage square was in totally wrong place. So best idea to avoid them to finding your place is to move after you shoot. I've been saying this from begining and now it seems that my gut-feeling was right: Shoot and move after that (this is what OFP told too). It's nothing but reqular sniper- or AT-way. EDIT: Sorry about typos. Hopefully everyone understood even part of it. I would guess that it has more to do with suppressive fire ability of some vehicles or weapons, as some weapons seems to be able to suppress. Those are mostly vehicle weapons, which seems to be able to shoot targets inside buildings (i tested it with gamelogic), without visual contact. Not necessarily suppressive fire, but i'll call it like that. I'd quess that this has something to do with that my test: They shoot that engage square, and if their squadmember with better "sensors" (like infantry on foot) hears from you last then that engage square points directly to your position. Sometimes vehicles might shoot totally wrong place, but might be because of you were lastly seen (and not heard) and they shoot at you esitmated position.

Still hobbyist made missions are what is lacking in ArmA. There plenty of re-textured addons and such, but missions (expacely for SP) are rare... And mostly seems that they are "black-opping-behind-enemy-lines-heavily-outnumbered-evac-goes-bad"-missions. Still Ambush and others BIS made missions for OFP are in the front line of best missions for OFP and why is that? Because BIS had resourses to make missions with somewhat realistic setup, good quality voiceacting and good script for mission + many other things that my kind amateur can't even think of to be valuable things for good mission/atmosphere. How about missions in OFP? Excuse me, but: Crap- and average-class mostly. I myself belong to same group: my missions can be considered to be crap or average... even when i've edited missions for several years and i like to play them (which doesn't mean that most would)! But simply i don't have the focus, team of voiceactors, other missionmakers as backup or education to mission making... so mission can be good in one aspect (in my case mission's setup which tries to reach realism) but lacks other areas complitely (in my case that is voiceacting and cutscenes). For ArmA there is not yet gem missions and that is VERY big lack in game. No Ambush-like missions which can, almost must, be played thru tens of times, because mission itself is so good. And campaign doesn't seem to gain too much praise too (am i the only one who likes it?). Engine can be screwed if there is no flesh (permium-class..- not crap-class) on the bones and that flesh is missions to most people. So hopefully expansion is great.

Would be intresting to know what things BIS has added to AI. Shame that all of them aren't listed. From Main new features: What all this AI-part holds inside??? AI seems to be smarter and "human"-like. Not enough experience with AI in 1.08 yet, but it feels somewhat better now. Finally Howitzers shoot at MBT's! This adds lots to mission making: I got AT-guns finally Version 1.08 feels very good: Nothing negative to say about it. This is ArmA that i can consider already to be final, few things are still bit odd, but no biggies. BIG SALUTATION TO BIS

Blah! It freezes fps in combat, because of script(s) tries to take over some parts of AI. Very complicated... Too complicated it seems I'm freezing this project. LOS-thing works well (and that doesn't cause lag ), but trying to get AI to check "blind area's of AI" is't very easy, takes too much resources and effect that AI gains from it is too small: more like eye candy in safe enviroment and deadweight in combat. Not to mention spaces where is lots of "extra" objects like Rahmidi island village's market carden. Has AI has been patched to better urban-warfare-stage in 1.08? They seem to work even better in my limited testings.

And same happens when they target something, they do get LOS. But that is done by 'boundingbox'-command i would quess (same with dynamic sounds)... That might explain lots of their urban-stupidness. As Blanco said they might get values with 'boundingbox' which tells that object is 3 meter high, when to player it seems to be much lower (like 0.5 meters high). Overhauling LOS system complitely... Now that is a challenge I'm getting script somewhat AI-cooperative.

I didn't found a way to use laserdesignator. but now that addon works like it should: no impact on humans and no tracers. Next thing is to get script compatible with AI... Checking for alleys and streets is being guite a hazzle. Altough they try to do it, but script is too limited at the moment to allow them to do it well... Lots more of optimizing and brainstorming.

In Liberation-mod in OFP i once saw something like it when it was part of mission to be in truck that towed 45mm AT-gun. And it even seemed like gun was actually towed by truck and not just fixed to back of a truck, if i remember right. It's scriptable alright, but who has inspiration for it? And how well it will behave?

I agree. They are in section (or under it) which usually is considered to be unimportant. Just before removing the editing thread from "ArmA - general" i was thinking the same thing that editing section should be somewhere else and and it should have more "subgroups", there was only one editing section (ArmA editing), was there? My memory is vaining so i don't remeber the reason why i thought about it, but maybe because every "older than one day"-topic in editing section wen't old (to second or third page) soon as front page was almost totaly filled with new post daily.

I just tried to use ammo classnamed laserbeam, but it's impossible to be affected with setpos or setvelocity, because of it's simulation-type i'd quess. Right no i'm having self made ammo-addon that uses shotbullet as simulation with no audio, visual properties and not affecting damage of anykind... Only thing is that if it hits object which is man-class, then object suffers from impact: his arms&weapon shake to random direction... No biggie hopefully. And there's tracer visible from ammo and i haven't yet haven't tested it in lowlight conditions EDIT: Disabling tracer isn't big deal i'd quess, but effect of impact might become such, atleast it's very anoying if teammate bombs player with it and player tries to aim something... Need to research more about this.

Bounding box returns extreme points of buildings or objects... If building is more complicated than only a box, L-shaped building forexample, then it cannot determe all corners of building (only extreme points are returned). This is what i am getting with my experiments. Best bet for most reliable info, that i've can think of, is to make object that has these kind properties: -it's velocity is set to [0,0,0] instantly when it hits something. Falls to ground and doesn't bounce anywhere (bullets and grenades aren't very good because of this: low hit-angles causes them to bounce). -It shouldn't be visible and don't have any kind audible data attached. Don't know does velocity of object bring some noise of it's own (don't remeber that did barrels/shut down vehicles at high speeds produce bit of a noise) -It shouldn't damage anything even if it hits objects (soldiers mostly) at speed of 100 or 1000 meters in second. This far i've found that only handgrenade and smokeshells doesn't kill it's target (soldiers and such) when hitting it at high speeds. Then using this object (sending it with setvelocity to it's journey) as surrounding's "low range"-sensor of soldier to detect solid surfaces and free space. Problem with longer distances would be that object falls to ground by gravity and stops. but i need to sensor distances of less than 20 meters. Can that kind system be created to be lag free... Or is there possibility to create that kind of object... So it's highly likely that i need to use that boundingbox+modeltoworld too. Btw: Good luck with your searchlight.

I would say that skill level in editor do have effect. Fired few shootingrange-tests with it, nothing solid sientific style... Late night alredy should get to bed. Target was standing man at about 100 meters, which started to move after a while. Distance was low so stationary target proved to be easy target for both and my difficulty setting with presision is at 0.5. Moving target was much more harder to novice. Other sniper's skill set to 1 and other's to 0.2 (skill bar to bottom)... Difference was noticeable. -Novice sniper missed more (not all target were hit with first shot. I'd say that about 1.3 shots needed to hit stationary target). When target was moving, novice might spent about 7-8 shots to hit. -With expert first shot was always hit in stationary target. if target was moving then he might have used even 2 shots. Infact expert sniper had bad tendensy to shoot novice's targets, as target was getting away Test with assault rifles and such aren't very reliable as recoil might pull weapon so much up that AI might fire his whole mag above target. With FDF i noticed this, as experts shot as worse as novices (in shootingrange tests) if first shot missed target -> rest mag was spent to birds.

This is the right topic: My post was about disappointing... rather small disappointment overall, but my mental health is on edge already. Knowsabout dosen't work for that. It's about knowing, my issue is with seeing. But yeah, i think i will try to ask about it in editing section.

I'm having bad day again: Why couldn't BIS give one more scripting command so that i could check that can soldier see another soldier or is there something (and possibly what) in between. I'm driving myself nuts when trying to figure out way to do this. But even if it's possible it's not going to be pretty if even functioning. Arma would be just... awesome, if i just could find a way.

More ArmA style and i'm very pleased. Here's few notes from my personal view point. To be noted that i value ArmA's campaign higher than any OFP's campaign. -Keep choosable missions or even choosable roles in campaign. I hate OFP's way to force play every goddam pilot/tanker/black op mission. -Team switch off. Was not good idea, expacely final mission in ArmA was setback in good overall level of main-missions: Nearly impossible to do without using team switch. Blood, sweat and tears seems to have good touch in using team switch. -Screw the storytelling from individual soldier's view and give me info of war. AAN-network's news was good idea, but maybe officer's (who actually leads the war/large unit), viewpoint would be better. Wide info works for me and not individual focus. -Big battles with small role of player! If player and his squad chooses to get left behind, then he is left behind. Glory is for those who can keep up. -Small battles like in OFP. Going on patrol, saving poor lietunant from enemy fire etc... Am i disapointed... We'll see

Naah. No way to get LOS with that. (should have known) Performace with buildings is quite limited with those 'findcover'-related commands, mostly ignored and chosed bushes instead (Should have known this too)

It's bad thing that there isn't command for asking that can unit see from his position to some spot. It's possible to ask that recarding land-shapes (basically: is there hill or something in between). But objects are another thing. Somekind system might be possible by using 'findcover', but i haven't tested how well it behaves and how accurate it is... Infact i think i try to throw some tests with it.

One way is to put "note"-markers (douple click on map) to map. It's fast&easy way to assign them new move-order, but for fixed wing aircrafts that is too slow. But usually i don't let AI to move out of my sight... Expacely if area isn't known to be secure.

If you do a quick study, you'll find the SLA (from the 1.07 patch onwards) are actually wearing helmets from WWII. Yes it seems so. Just recently installed 1.08 over 1.05 and helmet seems to have changed to different. I though that it was XAM-mod that changed it, but it seems to be ArmA's default helmet. Waiting for AK47s, SKSs or something other (before-revolution) hardware to appear to configs in comming patches

That picture seems quite strange... Is AT4 that dangerous to it's user? 90 degrees... 45 degrees should be enough even for bigger weapons like Apilas. And i've heard from people who have standed in front of back blast of 66mm M72 LAV that it's just for scaring the rookies: Both guys are breathing, walking and running. No missing legs or anything. Don't know the distance, but other of them said that it wasn't long distance. So i'd quess that if shooters ass is infront of back blast his ass will suffer from bruises and maybe burning-injuries

Something is right in this MOD, i wish that i just knew what is it. First i was bit dispointed when i tried it: where went all that space from my harddrive, as it seems that there is almost nothing new. New desert camo for vehicles mostly. And i can't speak/write/read anything in french, so i might have missed few (or lots) features But then i started to play ArmA's campaign with it and WOW-experience followed: My ears are still bleeding when my squad opened fire with their M4s. Shooting felt good, and fixed zoom level for weapons is great thing. I like it

The reason why their groundforces don't have much fancy modern stuff is that they spent their budget in high-tech aircrafts... It's realistic thing: Most countries with considerable big army (when compared to population of country) are making quite the same thing. Tip of spear (or PR-units in other words) has high-tech or modern stuff to show to media and rest that are kept in shadows away from media, are equiped with old equipment. Our so called "tractor-brigades" are one good example of thi: can't fight war without them, but not happy to show them either. I wouldn't be suprised if SLA would still have their units (local militia and such) who uses Equipment from 40s-50s...

My official .PDF OFP manual tells me that T-80 has reactive armor!!! What a lie, i've enjoyed OFP for years... But now it's all gone, every thing was a lie and OFP SUCKS! Luckly my ArmA .PDF manual is in German . i consider false data in official game manuals to be worse than moneythristy publisher's false info which is part of it's (the publisher) ways... So ArmA is great and OFP is shitty (think that you ArmA bashers)

Like NoRailgunner and Mr Reality said their behaviour in fullfilling engage-order isn't very optimum in sense of self preserving. But i think that from viewpoint of getting the job done before whole squad gets killed by enemy vehicle, the current way of duing things is good. It relies on speed and to fact (or wishful thinking) that enemies wont notice that AT-guy is running towards them. They survive from task alive if vehicle is on it's own and it gets destroyed or enemy vehicles are in target rich enviroment where single AT-guy is no biggie. I'm not sure is it possible to make it much better. Keeping low and in cover would be one possible thing to improve (but then it leads to other issues like: they fulfill their task very slowly)... About rest i'm not very sure. Quality of firing position has big effect in survival of AT-guy. Quality of path towards the target is another. Quality of path seems to be quite okay in ArmA, but guality of firing position (if we even can use that kind of term) isn't very good.

I don't understand this fuzz over improving AI to level that it can be called smart. Because ArmA's AI heavily relies on waypoints and instructions given by mission designer, so AI can't perform very much better even if it's given "intelligence of human". Waypoints and mission designing has the biggest responsibility. If AI hasn't been given good instructions then it's performace is bad. And AI in armA can't be very reactive to surroundings because of the fact that it has to follow it's waypoint. ArmA has big squadsizes which somewhat makes things easier for bigger units, but it still it doesn't make some smart tactics/technigues very easy, like tanks moving on road and infantry securing the forest that surrounds the road. Or syncronicing tasks for units in better manner. War-things needs lots of coordination which lacks in ArmA and result in ArmA is that cooperation of different groups doesn't work very well if at all For Game 2 (or modded in ArmA) best thing BIS would do would be to create alternative way which can be used also (waypoints still exists for cutscenes and such "unnimportant" stuff). It would let AI to work more in dynamic manner with set of instructions given to it. -Unit organization (it's subunits, superunits etc...), from where to request reserves, air, and firesupport. And who will do what:"my squad suppresses, your squads charges and their squad can take a break" and so forth. -AI would have given it's objective(s) which it has to reach. Objective is given to unit (AI) who commands the unit (batallion etc) that needs to reach that objective. Subunits then follows. -what it's expected to do in it's way to objective (attack, patrol, defend etc..) -in what manner it tries to behave in it's way to objective and in objective (in aggressive or cautious manner. choosing evading, quickest or shortes route etc...) by these kind instructions let AI to do it own judgementions (from something like tactical pool) acording those instructions. Hard for my kind complete noob to say it's it doable in FPS (i've made one bit like it for ArmA but it's severly limited), but in strategy games it's in use (Airborne Assault-series anyone? the system is unbelivable flex and efficent) up to corps level i've seen it. EDIT: Sorry about my bad english and other strange conclusions. Had to take care of my kid in mean time as i was writing this.