Second

Are you ordering them to engage (or attack) and not just target? AI sucks in fullfilling 'engage'-order usually. So it's not good thing to use it, expacewly with AT-guys as they mess around with their launchers (which is related to threat-levels maybe?) They have to have good positions so that they can open fire from where they are, without moving and expacely without engaging. In OFP 'engage'-order was fulfilled with somewhat bizare ways: When standart rifle's allowed that it can be fired from 250 meters. under 'engage'-order men (armed with rifle) usually tried to get to distance less than 200... even when he was underfire! So they usually didn't last enough long to actually fire their weapons. I've tested it in desert island (which offers quite labratory conditions)... Results didn't encourage to use 'engage'-order at all. Of course in rural-terrain they performed better because they could use cover, but still they usually ignored some very good positions like hill tops and forrests, and favored to run downhill or to open and so exposed themselves, even if their target was already inside weapons range. Something to do with gaining better success with their first shot? PS. I haven't met that "messing with AT-laucher'-thing with 'target'-order (or when men are choosing their targets without orders). Or if they have then there has been good explanation: More dangerous thing has been spotted and they try to kill it with rifle.

Most likely mixed with 125mm AT-gun (What was it: 2A46 or older?), which basicaly the same that russian tanks use. Infact Sahrani seems to be more suitable for mortars, than artillery. Expacely northern and easter areas on northern Sahrani and western and central areas of southern Sahrani. Lots of mountains and forrests. EDIT: There are reports that 125mm HEAT has compelitely penetrated BMP's side armors and BMP would be operatible, if nothing vital would been in the way of HEAT's jet. HE then again compiltely destroyed BMP. BMP had not enough armor to spread HEAT's jet, if i may say. And if i recall it was BMP-1, which armor is bit thinner than BMP-2s.

FADE issues should be made somehow visible to players... Awfully lot don't understand this and they just think that game sucks. That weapons thread is/was perfect example of it. From 20 meters handgun ain't accurate in ArmA, but when it missed meters from target it has to be FADE.

@concern Yeah. It ain't easy to command soldiers in ArmA or in OFP. It takes time to learn AI (how it behaves, what to expect and not to expect). Remeber to check that they are in right behaviour mode, for speed: aware. for staying alive: stealth. After i got used to it, i wouldn't trade this current command-menu and structure to anything simplier... I feel that i'm not in command if there's only few commands like in forexample Ghost recon (original )... I end up playing rambo in those games, as i can't communicate sufficently with team or squad. Just keep things simple and give AI some time. And might be wise to throw Spec op-tactics to trashcan. EDIT: And it good idea to keep your men near you, because that way you can keep eye on them. Don't spread men around, because if they run into trouble they are most likely dead and you can't command them efficently because you can't see what they see.

I once simulated that... It was quite ugly feeling when barrage of about 2 batallions started to close in my trench, and first mechaniced infantry company (A2 ) and tanks started to roll forward. Man what amount of firepower and mayhem... It was just amazing to watch how night turned to day, and everywhere around was expolding... Framerates were guite low too.

I have about dozen arty-scripts for different kinds of use. I'm guy who uses only selfmade stuff, If your implyilng to me with that first line ... Not that everything else would suck (not at all), but i like to use my own things. About that last line: Some article(s) before releasing ArmA... I atleast had bit higher hopes, just like with suppression. Now there are guns using direct fire and suppressive fire, but no suppression and indirect fire. Difference is that arty is easy to script but suppression... i'm not so sure, i once tried in OFP but it didn't work out... ArmA's scriptingcommands might suit better for it. Anyways back to arty. So basicaly BIS didn't break it's promise and i don't care did they break promises: They are creators of OFP and ArmA! But if they would have done built-in system for arty, arty would have become standart. Now i don't think that arty is standart, even when there are plenty of scripts for that. Maybe BIS can create something for arty in future patches? I'm hoping for it. No-one will wage a war without arty. Take away tanks, take away jets and choppers, but give us arty... Hammer of god! EDIT Not necessary to take seriously that "Take away tanks, take away jets and choppers, but give us arty... Hammer of god!"

How the AI react to and implement, indirect fire as been a long standing issue. The engine, along with many other things suffers from cause and effect. What appears to be a single issue quite often branches off to three or four others. In this case the event handlers and the distance command offer all the triggers we need. It’s just a case of working though each branch, sequentially. Your right, it's easy to atleast force AI to lay low... I'm not arty-guy so i'm not expert, but about that 'indirectHitRange'... I missed couple things. What is used fuze-type: In ArmA shells act as fuze would be "hard" and ground would be soft (no rocks etc...). Shell sinks inside ground and most of fragments stops to soil, only fragments that would fly upwards (in about 45 degree arc) aren't caught in ground. But mostly it is used against bunkers and other hard targets. There is also "light" fuze which detonates more easily, basicaly it can detonate on tree's branches. That kind shell is much more dangerous. It shouldn't sink in ground so fragments are flying in lower arces (in about 0-20 degrees from ground level). Then one truly ugly is "timed" fuze... It blows up in mid-air, spreading fragments freely to all directions. @Heatseeker I think too that BIS should implent somekind arty-system to ArmA, because built-in-system will become standart and i think that it has best possibilites to work properly for player and AI (yup. I'm not coder...). I haven't seen that many missions using arty at all... And what buggs me most is that AI is usually left out. Just today i played my mission where AI spotter crushed my company's assault just as we were regrouping. Almost half of my company's men were killed in barrage and enemy AT-guys hunted down our remaining APCs (sweet/bitter power of arty)

For 105mm shell we would be talking value between 'indirectHitRange = 100' and 'indirectHitRange = 150'. If that 'indirectHitRange' means meters and if thinking about IRL fragmentvalues and -distances. How behaves AI with that? It get killed after few rounds. There should be way to force AI to hit the deck, and find some "hole" which by my experience offers better cover than flat ground in ArmA. Guy can stand very close impact if there ground "between" it and impact, atleast in OFP that was. About damagevalues i don't know... EDIT: But even with those original 'indirectrange'-values damage is bad what i've see in my artyscripts (usually one gun shoots and reloads in ~6 seconds and 3 or 4 guns firing, shells land inside about 120x120 meters box).

Why not just script and createshell arty? It works, it's simple and AI knows quite well how to use it. I don't care are shells true or created as long as the system works for human and for AI. It should be useful in massive battles: If attacking unit's strength is aprox. batallion, we are already talking about 80-100 tubes on it's side

Someone should really make a tactical guide of how plan AI's waypoints (+ using triggers etc).... What different easy ways there are to adjust AI's behaviour/tactic to way missiondesigner wants. This is basic stuff, but to this day i haven't noticed any guides for that. There are plenty of scripting guides but none tactical guide (to my knowledge)... And ArmA is focused on combat! EDIT: Oh! My bad english is preventing me from doing it...

This might not be because of engage, but for reason that they don't like to stay in formation when hostiles are met. Here couple suggestions: 'dostop this; this enableattack false' typed to every guys init-field. Should do the trick... Or just ungroup them all. Try 'stealth'-behaviour, 'engage-at-will'-combatmode combined 'this enableattack false' and they seek cover from known enemies, but don't engage. This is super when there's enough cover infront of them (expacely forrests), but by my experience really doesn't work in hill-positions as they run down-hill searching for cover and eventually they get shot. In OFP i've run to enemy platoon's ambush and i didn't see any of them from even 50 meters, just "bang!" and i was dead! Sometimes they take really good positions and sometimes not so good. But i'm not sure do they work same in ArmA (somehow i have feeling that they perform differently, i haven't observed it thou), but i suggest you to try it.

Well basicaly what that video shows is that un-grouped (individual) soldier is better than grouped one. It doesn't need urban enviroment to see that. If i want to create "ultimate" defencepositions i un-group men and place them individually (or issues 'dostop', and break them from formation). By that way they can repel many times bigger attacker. If defenders (guys behind building) would have been grouped... Outcome would have been very uncertain. Or If there would have been about 30-60 men in attackers side and something like half of it for defender (un-grouped) in big area, outcome would have been very uncertain. That video shows that ArmA's AI lacks things which are common in other FPSs (sidesteps, leaning, accurate and precise moving etc...). Which is bad thing, but not as bad as it seems (like in that video) as usually missions in urban enviroment are quite chaotic... Forexample some automatic rifleman supprises enemy and sweeps whole street clear of enemies. It also clear in video, that defender has all the aces. Attacker tries to moves across area that defender is holding, and there is no way to spot/engage enemy at long distances. At start they were almost next to enemy so there was not much possibilities to plan another route how to move to waypoint... One sucking thing in ArmA is that they use handgrenades only from very exact distance (~40 or ~50). Handgrenades are uber-killer when AI uses them. In FDFmod whole street(s) could be cleared when every groupmember threw one or two grenades. BANG-BANGBANG-BANG-BANG-...-BANGBANGBANG-BANG And what could have attacker do differently in that kind situation? Defender was just waiting for attacker so it has upper hand as it doesn't need to move, just to look right direction and shoot. Attacker need more time as it still moving when spoting defender and it is usually in higher stance so it's aiming takes more time because of weapon sway and recoil. Math is math and i think that any FPS would end with quite similar results... Oh, and in many FPS AI doesn't even need to aim their gun towards target to hit, because they have smart bullets (it has six letters, first is F last Y and in middle there are R and C)

That what Vilas wrote about that super-fast-shooter makes me wonder... I've never noticed something like that (well i don't know what exatly happened and how fast things happened) If we would be talking about maybe 3-5 guys in that kind of circumstances, then i wouldn't be sure that i can kill all of them. But... Man, i don't know. Lots of guys are doupting AI, as i'm very-very pleased with it. But that what Vilas wronte is indeed something strange. Maybe it's something like "this-happens-once-in-a-lifetime"-feature?

Sorry (and partially happy) to say that your research was wrong. It doesn't have any magical ability. It works just like in OFP. Here's what i just tested (to see were you right or wrong) so this was done in testing conditions. No extra fuzz around There just enemy, me and my groupmember, which is far away from me so that it wont mess the test: I rush behind corner, enemy detects me and i move back to cover. I keep going on about two meters and halt. What does AI? It doesn't know my position, as it turns it's gun at speed which bases on my speed just before contact was broken (so eventually AI's gun moves past my position as i've stopped and still gun keeps on turning). If i choose to peek around that same corner, i see that enemy is aiming to wrong direction (if it can't track me by hearing when i move to that corner). Just same that happens in OFP too. Here's my explanation why people thinks that AI can track opponent magicaly: People easily forget that ArmA's hearing values have been increased alot, when comparing to OFP (which AI was kinda deaf.). They might be too good, i don't know (or care). EDIT: Oh you shot in your research (am i right?)... That different case then, as shooting produce effect which lasts some seconds, in that time soldier is more visible and audible. That's why it is wise to shoot single shots and keep couple seconds pauses, if wanting to stay hiden. Forexample suppressed weapons are useless if they are fired constantly. It simulates (i think it does) the fact that if hearing strange or dangerous voice from somewhere, human starts to keep eye on that place. I've noticed that when i hear shooting voice from somewhere, i start to scan that direction for muzzleflashes to reveal exact location of shooter (so i kinda focus/zoom my awareness). If i don't spot anything in a while, i start to scan my whole surrounding again . Hope you get my drift as i don't know did i write it in understandable english

Not exactly, but whatever - call it what you like. And what difficulty did you play it? Easy+ right? Not all of those are vehicles (like that pulling back to woods when enemy is spotted), there was/are/will be infatry facing infantry situations also. Well, whatever was the name of that radar-thingie (hearing, eyes etc...), suits me just fine. Difficulties? ArmA: skilllevel 0.6 and veteran. Farcry: realistic. Farcrys AI has only one pattern how it tries to take out player, so AI is easy to win when using brains. They have this strange desire to run to my line of fire... So they die. If they would hide more and shoot smarter (not just spray) they would do good job. But right now i serously think that ArmA's AI is better: It doesn't have just one general tactic (this is the part where missiondesigner comes in). There are stupidities (ofpforum listed few), but they are deadly smart sometimes (like that T-72s flanking). Maybe my bad english made the trick for me or you are arrocant little kid (you understanded it complitely wrong)... Have fun, i have strong feeling that you wouldn't belive me (or anyother) no matter what. With that being said: i rest my case.

Than you have put it below medium, the difficulty. I didn't plan their waypoints. The difficulty is "realistic" and i kill 10 of them with ease. "wait them to come for you and kill them one-by-one" is good way to deal with them, in almost every situation. But that is offtopic. ArmA/OFP: Then someone else has planed their waypoints wrong (missiondesigner). They just choose routes how to get to that waypoint, what they do quite good = using cover from observation. If there is any cover to use, that is. Ofcourse not always it works, but then again: that is what lack of info results. They also change their original route in right conditions (but never ingnore waypoints). Here's few i've noticed: Platoon of T-72s has circled to my back... performing big flanking move, when waypoint tells them to move by road and not mountain. They choose to "climb" across mountain. -infantry squad pulling back to nearby woods when facing enemy. -Squad which should defend (stay in one place), starts to pullback when seeing platoon of tanks. -Squad, when spotting enemy airplane, starts to move inside woods to get cover from observation. They don't know about you, if they can't hear or see you, other group doesn't give them info or if reveal (script command) isn't used. It's that simple, if you want that it's called radar, then i'm fine. EDIT: If it isn't mission that you designed, then things might look like stupid. Because you don't see things like missiondesigner sees. One Grunt sees only minor piece of battlefield. Maybe they acted strange, because there was some other bigger threat (that they know about) than you (which they possibly don't know)... Oh that can't happen in Farcry as player is usually alone. But one thing yet remains to be said: In urban warfare AI sucks quite a bit. Farcry's AI is better in use of cover. Expacely in build-in areas (ArmA sucks, Farcry rocks). In wilderness they act much better, but not in level of Farcry. Farcry just messes things by being too agressive and moving (which, by my experience, can't be fine tuned)

No I mean that they run to places which don't make any sense, there is no tactical advantage or such where they run to, so why should they run there? This indeed would be a partial observation. Exactly. But regardless of what is said, won't you agree there is something wrong with the AI in ArmA? Compare the AI to Far Cry for example and hopefully you'll notice. Just a simple example. I know its a diffirent game and all blah blah! then you plan their waypoints wrong way. You just don't know how the whole thing works. It takes long time (using and learning) to understand how AI in OFP or ArmA works, It isn't that easy and simple as you think. And Ofpforum knows guite lot more about it than i What i can say that i'm with Ofpforum. Farcry's AI... It just runs and shoots from hip. It don't offer challenge. Those rocketfellows were only one, which offered challenge... Snipers were standing (waiting for to be shot), and mercs and rest of the monsters were just moving, shooting and proving to be easy targets. I don't know how much missioneditor can affect to it. In OFP/ArmA missioneditor has big affect to overall efficency of the AI. Few small things (behaviour, combat-mode etc...) can make AI to behave agressive or passive (selfpreserving). To my knowledge Farcry can't offer that kind of felxibility. And they do have "hearing".

I think pretty much same as Rom_un. AI is quite great, when it comes to eyes and ears. OFP's AI was both blind and deaf when comparing to human (FFUR increased both and AI was fighting/spotting hard). If man is aware that he's under threat, he's very-very sharp when it comes to hearing and "sensing" danger. If conditions are optimal that is... When raining, breezing, man is relaxed, in foreign terrain etc. It is another matter. I'm very much into thing that human has sixth sense or intuition to spot some minor but important things in lighting fast speed, things that we nomally wouldn't spot but after long time of observation. I've seen it too much to not believe.

That's correct. Farcry had some pretty nice things and ideas, but that was that. Crysis most likely don't offer same thing as ArmA, as far cy didn't offer same things that OFP... So crysis might nuke... On it's own ground and among it's own kind (while ArmA is standing firmly on it's own tall mountain).

That's correct. Farcry had some pretty nice things and ideas, but that was that. Crysis most likely don't offer same thing as ArmA, as far cy didn't offer same things that OFP... So crysis might nuke... On it's own ground and among it's own kind (while ArmA is standing firmly on it's own tall mountain).

But AI does that. Just don't give them targets and they shoot when they spot enemy. Using watching direction is very good way to increase possibilities that they also look (and point with their guns) where they should. But if you are after somekind of "cover arces" or firing zones, then your right. They would provide useful... MGs suppressive fire isn't effective in ArmA, as there is no suppression. You just would kill your MG-guy by ordering him to shoot enemy positions, because he reveals his positions with shooting and enemy shoots him instead... Your MG-guy would last about 5-10 seconds... Well that depends of enemy equipment. EDIT: Default button for watch-command is left alt (same that enables freelook)

There can't be anykind of improvising involved in use of handsignals in game, like: Should i wave my hand only little bit so that enemy infornt of me doesn't notice it? Are my guys close enough to see my signals clearly (aka not messing them to another), so do i need to wave my hand very clearly? and so on... Efficency of handsignals bases very much in these kinds of things + that slim FOV and that monitors have bad resolution (is handsignal noticetable from another from 10 meters?) + that player is usually goofing around and not watching his teammates or sticking in formation (essential for handsignals). So In-game they are pretty much useless = eyecandy. I can think situation when leader of formation shows halt-signal (or enemy-signal), as he spots hostiles (hostiles spots group) -> every man in formation repeats that signal (so that everyone gets it) -> showing that signal lasts about 5 seconds (lesser amount in seconds are probably useless) -> hostiles wipe out whole group in that time (and i as dead group member do this to my monitor: )

FDF did it. It worked lots like a vehicle, but it was still a nice touch. Yes it "worked"... If no-one didn't have to hurry, and could wait for AI to perform it's rather "funny" skiing style and tactic (pretend to be heavily drunk and no-one shoots you). Sking downhill and shooting from hip with SMG (with decent 70 rounds drum mag) was impossible as they were handled like vehicle. It was pain or impossible to rush with skis, player couldn't crawl with them. Not to dis FDF's work, it is/was nice try, but FDF's skis lacks tactical advantage over boot. And i don't think that it could be done better in ArmA... Or maybe by doing character animations for skis (so that it is a way character, not vehicle, moves)? Anyways i'm not part of winter warfare team, so i'll keep my mouth shut. I'm happy with everything thay can make.

Well as long as we are talking about 10-30 cm of snow, it will not be problem... Movement by feet is kinda slow and tiring, vehicle's mobility shouldn't be that bad yet... But Skis are most likely no-no in ArmA, like they were in OFP. something about minus 0-15 celsius is (i think) what this mod represents... When starting to talk about -40 then there indeed should be many kinds of "special" featrues Most intresting tiem of year would be at fall or spring... Tons of very-"special" features: Like wet and warm at days and everything freezing to ice at nights

Those videos show what is penetrable with what... Those videos are good base to talk about ArmA's penetration-values. To ArmA: All trees are penetrable with M240 and PKM, only thinest are penetrable with rifles and SAW. That big hotel has strudy outer walls: i think that M16 and AK can't pierce them, but PKM and M240 can... Inner walls can be punched thru with allkinds of weapons (floors too). Infact i'm suppriesed that no-one offers andkind testing results about ArmA's materials and what is penetrable with what... I was sure that this would be first thing someone would check and report. Well... Those who have knowledge (and don't share it) have upper hand in MP (i'm not against that)