Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Medals

Community Reputation

197 Excellent


About nkenny

  • Rank
    Master Gunnery Sergeant


  • Interests
    I live here, Really.

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling
  • Location
    Oslo, Norway

Recent Profile Visitors

867 profile views
  1. nkenny


    Some praise for Anizay. This map has become a favourite middle eastern terrain for my gaming community. It is possibly the best example of such a terrain and setting in Arma3. Chief amongst its qualities is the skill full juxtaposition of green and lush and brown and dry. From the perspective of a mission maker this opens the ability to create scenarios which include shifts in perspectives-- both tactical and scenic. The deserts of the southern sections are very different from the verdant and richly urban Northern areas. This creates a sense of scale in an otherwise reasonably sized map. From above Anizay may seem flat. With boots on the ground it is anything but. Micro-terrain adds a distinct Arma3 level quality. In vehicle convoys the rolling landscape with it creates a myriad of avenues, threats and opportunities. At times claustrophobic. At other times vast and scenic. Sight lines are tight in the Northern areas, with plenty of ground to manoeuvre (or become flanked in turn!). Finally Anizay is covered with buildings. The urban (and rural) sections of the terrain works excellently within the scale of Arma. Towns are neither too massive nor too small. Even the bigger towns feel like something a platoon can reasonably cover. While realism may be sacrificed, the craft, spread, selection and size of built up areas, again lend itself very well for Arma missions. Anizay also has generous portions of the map without buildings. Desert, mountainous areas create depopulated zones suitable for missions where the action is not centered on clearing buildings. Again this feeds into the first point: contrasts between the richly populated (green) areas and the sparsely populated South. Anizay is simply a well crafted terrain rife with mission making potential. Thanks @Temppa!
  2. nkenny

    AI Discussion (dev branch)

    Expanding Suppression I have been testing the effects of suppression on the AI and found the results to be impressive. Suppressing AI adds depth to the simulation and greatly enhances the firefight. Player survivability is vastly increased by the proper application of firepower. My experiments have used the getSuppression and setSuppression commands. Conclusions and numbers are explored HERE. The shortest description is that successfully suppressing AI by even a small amount reduces killing power considerably. A reoccurring shortcoming is that Bohemia has done a poor job of providing feedback that the AI is in a suppressed or panicked state. There are no indicators, animation, audio, or visualization to indicate a soldier is in peril. No wonder players are ignorant of the feature! With this in mind, I have a few small suggestions to enhance and expand the suppression feature. 1. Add a Suppression Eventhandler, this will allow mission designers an easy way to attach special scripted behavior to the condition. 2. Track Suppression for players. One limitation of suppression values is that it is not tracked for players. Given that it seems possible to do so for all AI, without any particular loss of performance, additionally tracking it for players would open an easy and performance friendly way for modders and mission designers to modify player suppression effects or other scripted behaviors. 3. Add a background suppression level or support for radiating suppression values . Possibly the biggest suggestion I will be making. This suggestion also marks the turn to more speculative features. Active armoured vehicles are dangerous. Being in close proximity to such a vehicle should set a default suppression level of some figure (I would suggest 0.25; roughly a close burst of fire). This allows for better modelling of the shock-and-awe factor of tracked vehicle assaults. 4. Tweak suppression regeneration. Currently suppression values regenerate very quickly. This limits their utility as a means of modeling the effect of combat stress. Increasing this time slightly or enable tweaking it, would help fine-tune the suppression mechanic as a whole. Once I set up my Arma3 rig again I will provide some numbers in this regards. Loss of suppression state is currently very rapid. There are bigger more fundamental issues in regards to the lack of visualization-- player feedback-- which I wish that Bohemia would explore. However in Arma3's current old man state, it is unrealistic to propose any major overhauls or feature introductions. For future projects: introducing animations, sounds, distinct behavior, or other indicators-- in short any feedback at all is essential. -- To give an example of how I have leveraged suppression and eventhandlers: By attaching a 'GetOut' eventhandler to vehicle crew and with a triggered condition on damaged or immobilized vehicles, and setting AI suppression to 1 (100%)-- I have created a simple, performance friendly fix, to the laser-accurate-dismounting-from-burning-wreck crew syndrome. -k
  3. nkenny

    The effect of weapon on AI accuracy

    Sorry, I have been busy with other projects and have therefore not followed this thread to the extent I would have wanted. I have in mind a more robust testing scenario which allow collating more numbers in an easier manner. That will happen once I have set up my Arma3 capable computer again. :) @mmm Your comments in regards to suppression match my findings quite precisely. I refer to the data collected in the final posts at LINK. Against a 6.5 Katiba equipped AI, at 200 meters, effective suppressive fire decreases AI accuracy dramatically. Successfully maintaining 20-25% suppression, comparable to near hits by two to three round bursts, changes the life expectancy of a four man fireteam from 25 seconds to 3 minutes-- with not all members killed. This is clearly an intended behaviour. Which is in turn unfortunately marred by Bohemias poor record of player feedback. It is difficult to determine if an AI is in a state of suppression-- no animations, no sounds, no immediately obvious behaviour is reported. Achieving 80 to 100% suppression on an enemy effectively neuters the shooter. As you correctly surmise, responding to AI contacts with aggression is key. It translates into increased survivability. Interestingly, this is best achieved by working closely with your own team. Players trained only to go for killing shots are in the style of Arma3 fire fights contributing less to their team in certain situations. I further suspect that the AIs reputation for laser accuracy, especially in urban or jungle environments is actually an expression of poor use of suppression fire. Hammering the position of a known, or suspected enemy, vastly increases life expectancy. I am unsure if suppression values have any bearings on any class of vehicle. RHS vs all others Is the high initial level of AI accuracy, especially seen in vanilla, CUP and (under certain circumstances NIArms) good design? I will begin by saying that the data I have collected can only inform mission designers to be aware of how these weapons behave very differently. Read the following as a small exposition on my own thoughts and preferences. My experience with playing with different communities, both public and closed, is that the AI accuracy is generally tweaked. Sharp and deadly gameplay is all well and good, but becomes an annoyance in a world filled with distractions: Radio comms, latency issues, chain of command, interpreting mission scripts, and dealing with admin (technical issues, respawning, dying and so on). To the point where I see most communities reduce AI accuracy to values comparable to the RHS default ones. This only becomes a problem if RHS and vanilla/CUP/NIArms are used interchangeably by the AI. I see RHS cutting out the middle man. Giving very plausible and playable accuracy settings, without necessitating extensive tweaks to the default values. In addition the relative low accuracy of a RHS AKM does not mean all RHS weapons fare equally poorly. RHS M4A1s with optics perform comparably to bare bones MX rifles. This adds another important element to a mission makers toolbox-- contrasts between modern and older weapons. Finally, there is a simulations side of thing. Most investigations into combat marksmanship suggests it is very low indeed. Stress, adrenaline and fatigue takes its toll. I see vanilla weapon accuracy modelled on bench accuracy tests, whereas RHS accuracy values are based on expectations of combat marksmanship. This does not mean RHS settings are perfect. For very urban, cqb styled operations in the vein of Rainbow Six or Ground Branch, I find vanilla weapons work better. At sub-30 meters AI armed with vanilla weapons will behave and react in a convincing and deadly manner. For these three reasons I see the RHS solutions as superior to the others (practical, adding contrasts, and realism).
  4. nkenny


    Yass! Not only a new Temppa map scenario, but no less than a Norwegian one. For those of you not in the know: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Vinjesvingen https://goo.gl/maps/GPb98Vhgi6tEqPYz9 -k
  5. Heavens. I never realised A3 was missing this. It just always felt meh when bodies fall or vehicles crash. Such an obvious thing. - k
  6. nkenny

    Arma 3 DLC - CONTACT

    Worth it for the tractor. -k
  7. Global mobilization is a real gem. The setting is perfect, and stands in strong contrast to the vanilla Arma3 experience. Instead of a selection of fantasy rifles and vehicles, we get a meticulously researched and modeled section of 80's hardware. Instead of a murkily defined and ahistorical setting and situation, we are transported into the tension filled age of the Cold War. Arma3 proved unable to to offer any commentary in regards to the future of war. Futuristic assets behave little more complicated than WW2 counterparts. Semi-autonomous drones, hand held thermal sensors, and stealth vehicle frames may be present in the setting, but their inclusion is only skin deep-- doing little to add true texture and depth to the tactical realities of war. Warfare in the 80s instead captures that last gasp of true operational readiness for a full on conventional war; rich with potential drama and contrasts of ability, technologies and strategy. One could only imagine what Arma3 could have been had it been closer to GM on initial release! The assets present in GM are easily extrapolated and developed into interesting new factions-- whereas the MX rifle belongs nowhere but the future. GM teems with potential. GM is what Arma3 should have been on release. Of course it must be acknowledged that GM is released deep into Arma3 development cycle, thus benefiting from lessons learned and technologies developed in the core game. It can also be noted that the German midlands, unlike a richly coloured Greek island, are comparatively drab and monothematic. GM is developed by a smaller team, and therefore comparatively lacking in air and water assets. Or the presence of independent, criminal, terrorist or ideological partisan factions for that matter. One can only hope that the vagaries of development cycles leads off in such a fruitful direction. All in all. GM is a very welcome release. :Thumbs up:
  8. Holy mother. That is amazingly cool. -k
  9. nkenny

    RHS Escalation (AFRF and USAF)

    *Laughs in Socrates*
  10. nkenny

    Extended Function Viewer

    Crazy useful!
  11. nkenny

    3CB Factions

    As a small point of feedback: Adding a unique icon for the 3CB factions pack would make navigating the arsenal a more pleasant experience. 😉 edit: also some uniforms have a hidden scope and do not appear in the vanilla Arsenal. Minor QoL thing. -k
  12. nkenny

    3CB Factions

    As a mission maker, I appreciate this mode of working. Add those things which will see use and is wanted by your content creators. Don't become hostage to wild internet requests. The current content of the 3CB faction pack is very well appreciated. Particularly the civilian assets add a wealth of potential for scenarios. All this at a reasonable small size which merges and enhances RHS assets very well. Good job 3CB, and thank you for sharing with the community. -k
  13. @Jester504 Really cool idea and implementation! Will it come with any addons dependencies? -k
  14. nkenny

    3CB Factions

    Now THIS. THIS is fantastic. -k
  15. @.kju The looks like a very useful feature indeed. Three comments: 1. Key-binds are, of course, trivial to change: I will note that by default CTRL+T is the LOCK CAMERA feature for targeting pods. This new interface seems like a similar feature. 2. Perhaps a special AI area-fire config can be used for MG fire? Often when designating 'quick' targets for MGs I simply want an area saturated with fire. (Vanilla 40mm GMGs demonstrate this behaviour perfectly) 3. The command interface looks very useful also from an infantry commanders perspective. When commanding AI troops I often find myself in need of a quick way to designate an area for fire. - It could be limited to binoculars only. - It could be enabled by the doSuppressiveFire command, but with a simple stance and line of sight check-- if failing that, simply target a building (or other terrain object) within reasonable distance. Especially [3] will add a universally applicable, and consistent element to unit command sorely missing in A3. -k