instagoat

Right now they do need some micro-management, and they are very inconsistent, but you can do some cool stuff with them. What´s of course not helping is that some of the labels in the command menu are simply wrong. "Advance" tells a Unit to take point, for example. "Fall back" is Rear Guard, and the "Flank" commands tell the AI to take up Flank guard. When told to attack an enemy, they automatically try to flank him. One thing I could suggest is check rotkep´s guide here: http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?t=81123 I also made a couple of videos to show off what the AI can do on my meTyoob account: http://www.youtube.com/user/Waaaghster#p/a/u/0/MQVULjx95Uw http://www.youtube.com/user/Waaaghster#p/u/3/5TVAdGZoANc However, I agree that controlling the AI is a major pain in the backside right now, and I´ve started pondering about how I could contribute to improving it. Not much progress right now: at the moment it seems about as good as it can be without actually changing the AI command system around in a major fashion.

You Mean in Warfare? I think I had it figured out a while ago, I´m gonna re-check. I´ll update this once/if I find it out again. (Edit) Yeah, I got it. It´s a bit difficult and only works if you´re the actual commander. This is the only way I found to do this, so if there is an easier one, tell it to me Anyway, here´s what you do: Buy Units (Who get assigned to your own team). Then bring up High Command, check who needs reinforcements, and then switch back to normal Command, select the Units you want to assign to another commander, and go trough the following sequence: 0 (Comms) - 9 (Communication) - 8 (Send Units). Then you select the number of the other Commander you want to assign your Units to. As far as I could see in the SP Warfare Games I played, the AI does not replenish their Units themselves, instead they just grind themselves down, respawn and do an individual rush. The Interface of Warfare is also pretty terrible, not just because you need to switch between HC and normal command to compare data, but also because you need to personally show up everywhere to set the City Settings, for example. I love this mode, though, as it reminds me of Battlezone, which I loved too. So I hope that this will get improved too at some point in the patching process. I hope this was helpful. Cheers

I noticed the bug with teammates repeating their "go" message over and over too. On top of that I noticed that sometimes, AI squads also don´t react to taking fire unless shot by the player. Note: This is with 60718

I´ve also had the problem with the AI Units falling behind after making contact once, but I couldn´t reproduce it in the Editor. I noticed it happening when loading savegames for missions (I´ve tried two of my Cipher Savegames and had it happen both times. One was done in vanilla 1.04, one was done with beta 60393) only so far. Possibly it´s got something to do with something in the savegames not working with the new AI adjustments?

Well, it depends, I guess. IL-2 or FSX are perfectly capable of pulling collimating sights off with texture trickery. Perhaps in the case of Arma, some thinking outside of the box is necessary. I´ve tried a little to understand how the whole modding process with BIS games works since I began playing OFP in 2001, but I´ve never figured it out. Maybe one of those who were able to could enlighten me as to wether it would be possible to do this by using the GUI crosshairs, instead of a texture on the model?

DR and MW don´t need to simulate the sights properly because they have no viewbob as Arma 2 does. I think if the issue with the collimating sights can´t be resolved, it would be best to just remove that viewbob for weapons with reflector sights. Another solution I´ve already seen suggested somewhere else on the forums would be to use the already existing crosshairs, except tying them into the respective weapons config (So a weapon with an Eotech displays the ring instead of a dot), and only make the crosshair appear when one is aiming trough the sights, and change when NV goggles are used, for example.

I think, in a way, it´s moot to fix this. At the distance where the thickness of the projection becomes relevant, you can´t use the sight properly anyway because the RV engine, particularily this iteration, cannot (yet, I hope) simulate collimating gunsights properly. So at those distances (150m+), where the dot is pointing is largely irrelevant, because of the Arma2 viewbob. Once that is working, I´d also be totally in favour of fixing the actual reticule.

Ooooh, now I see! And yes, the most time I spend nowadays not actually fighting myself but watching the AI work instead. The High Command module especially lends itself to that. Yeah, true. Like I said, their exploitation of cover is sometimes more than inadequate, the AI is usually very careless when rounding corners, it has trouble noticing killing zones (Such as this one I had in a big battle setup in Vybor, I think, where a BMP planted itself square on the Spring in the Village center, and the enemy AI kept running out from all sides in front of the tank. By the end of the battle, there was a ring of bodies all around the square. Another time I had a bunch of AT gunners run out into the street to kill a tank, or take cover on the wrong side of a wall, only to get gunned down in droves) The biggest problems with the AI right now are consistency, and its persisting carelessness, as well as often, a lack of patience. The beta patches have done a lot to improve them, especially in terms of Unit coherency, and I´m hopeful that we will get scores of improvements. Especially because, if BIS really wants to make OA fly in Urban combat, the AI needs to become supremely proficient in that field. Call me utopian, but I believe that now that there´s movement in there, it will 8) As for the difficulty, I´m a believer in the notion that a Game like Arma, which tries to simulate War as it actually is, and not as the Camera sees it, should not be fair in the strictest sense. OFPs AI was ruthless, and if you made a mistake, it killed you. Arma 2 is, actually, more tame in that regard. It still forces you to really ponder about wether or not it´s a wise Idea to round the next corner, while still leaving you a chance to respond if you do take fire. Plus, practice makes perfect. (And I for one am far from that, after playing BIS Games ever since OFPs demo was released.) Cheers

AI is incredibly difficult to construct so it works without hogging system resources, while still being able to work with meaningful entity numbers (hundreds in case of Arma), and having the individuals execute their maneuvers in a clever and believable manner. If you download the FSM Editor, you will see that it takes a pretty complex system of choices to make an AI work, and every new variable you introduce into the system or want to handle needs to be implemented with as many possible outcomes as possible, and without creating stoppages inside the system. For example, if an AI moves out into a street it needs to check if there are friendlies nearby, and if yes, where are they looking and am I covering my correct sector. Are there possible hideouts of enemies nearby, if yes, am I able to cover them all, or am I unable to do it? If not, are nearby squadmates able to cover adequately or is team effort necessary to achieve the task. If I move from this position, will I expose myself to potential enemy fire: if yes, how can I minimise my chance of getting shot? It´s a virtually endless cycle of decisions, with near infinite amounts of situations to be evaluated at any time. A thing as simple as hearing an enemy, estimating their position and setting up for a shot at their estimated point of emergence is very complicated for an AI. How do you simulate the patience to do it, for example? How do you make the AI estimate for how long it should wait before moving on, if the enemy doesn´t emerge where they "expected" them? The hearing part isn´t difficult to do (the AI does this pretty well, actually, much more accurately than a human. Which is a limitation of the digital medium within which it exists, in my opinion, and something that will stick with AIs for a long time to come.), it´s the reaction to noticing an enemy that is complicated to do. I find it amazing to watch the AI at work, especially in smaller settings where it can make full use of the processing power it is granted, without needing to drop cycles because there are too many units on the map, and then they can be pretty life-like. There are a -lot- of shortcomings, but I think those are results of the limitations in processing power, general code, and the lack of a standardized system for AI, something like a DirectX equivalent.

Actually, the AI is coming pretty close to being glorious in CQC. I think the reaction times of the medium and low range AI, particularily against Tanks or other Vehicles, and the exploitation of cover are still inadequate, but on the whole this is the best procedural, free-form AI there is, and cutting it back would be like taking away the smile from Da Vinci´s Mona Lisa. The best way to survive is to listen to what your AI teammates say, and make sure to always stay on the move, always stay covered by a teammate nearby and use smoke and handgrenades wherever possible. Several types of obstacles can also be penetrated by gunfire, such as those flimsy wooden fences. I think the best way of working around this isn´t dumbing down the AI, but instead training a little more. I built a CQC shooting range in the editor with walls and the red popup targets to train my reaction times with, and one version where I replaced the popup targets with actual enemies. Such can be helpful. Cheers

I´m really looking forward to OA, even though the things I´m hoping for that´ll be changed are probably a little bit too lofty to come true. A less convoluted and more direct squad control interface, for example. Or AI using advanced tactics such as using fireteams to set up a fire base and flank, or withdrawing to set up an ambush. However it´ll end up, though, this one is a surefire buy.

Played the Demo back in the day when it first was released, and bought the game on release-day too. Since then I´ve bought the game five or six times in various iterations because discs were lost or destroyed when moving, etc. I´ve also made it a good tradition to have it on my Computer at all times. The space it occupies is always well spent.

I myself am just in the process of reinstalling the game. There cannot be a computer of mine without it. I just hope they will have some sort of win XP emulator in 2052 so it can still be played 8)

Hello, BIS Boards. First Time Poster here, have been around since OFP 1 and am not usually active on forums, but I´ve been struck with a little Idea which I thought I´d share. I´m putting this out here because I thought it may be worth looking into, be it by the community, or BIS themselves. The problem is that red dot sights and holographic sights do not work right now as they should. I´ve put this together to illustrate the problems, and then tell of the Idea I had. So, here goes. Aimpoints in the real world vs. Arma 2: I could talk a lot about how these sights work now, but I guess that´s not what this thread is about. If you want to find it out, go here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_dot_sight At any rate, summa summarum: a red dot always points to where the gun is aimed, no matter how awkward the angle at which one is looking trough the sight. The Problem in Arma 2 is that the dots are not "projected", but instead are textures inside the gunsight itself, on the lens or slightly behind it. Because of this, they are static instead of flexible, and do not represent the actual point at which the rifle is aimed. This means that while walking, turning or even when kneeling, where the sight bobs around a lot in Arma 2, the gun is never really pointed at where the red dot is. This causes several problems: the greatest of these that I noticed is a great imprecision whilst kneeling. Try it for yourself: kneel, aim trough the ironsights, and just watch the pipper move around. When firing you will notice that in aimpoint sights, especially after firing a few shots, the bullets land a fair distance to the left, right, above or below the aimpoint, which should at least represent direction in which the bullets are flying: the dispersion above and below is heavily dependant on the distance at which the weapon is zeroed. This „tracking“ around the actual point of aim is very pronounced at medium distances already, from about 100 meters onwards it becomes difficult to hit anything using the aimpoint. I have gone as far as remembering the sequence in which the aimpoint tracks around the actual point of aim, and pointing it OFF the target accordingly. http://img12.imageshack.us/img12/1981/retposvsimpact.jpg This shot was taken with time slowed down, and after recoil motion was over. The red dot is in the same place as it was when I fired the shot. Distance to target is 100 m. This is about the biggest divergence from the center I was able to discern, however it is enough to reliably miss instead of hitting the target at distances larger than 100 – 120 meters. Here are a few Illustrations of the default Arma 2 reticule in the Eotech holographic sight, and examples of where the reticule should actually be inside the projection lens. http://img406.imageshack.us/img406/2083/correctretpos01.jpg Picture taken while turning left. http://img21.imageshack.us/img21/7812/correctretpos02.jpg Picture taken while walking forwards. Reticule size is exagerrated in correct example. Idea for a solution: Instead of using a texture, a "pipper", much the same as the crosshair that is available in rookie mode, could be used. This would remove awkward alpha channel fiddling, and would at the same time give a common tool that everybody could use for any red dot sight that could be conceived. The way this would work is that, when the player is not looking trough the gunsight, the targeting reticule would be invisible. It would only be "activated" when he is switching to looking trough the gunsight. Naturally, this pipper would automatically point to the actual location of the gun by default, however when zooming in or out, the pipper would not change size, which may be unrealistic. I have no tried pointing a camera at an actual reflector sight and zooming in, so I´m not sure how this would look. The size, colour, bloom, the distinct parameters for where the sight appears and disappears when looking trough the reticule would be defined in the config of the particular gun, while the actual "template" for the red dot/reticule could be stored in a common .pbo for all weapons to access. This way a large library of correctly sized reticules could be compiled without much trouble, for everybody to access. With a setup like this, the brightness and opacity of the dot could also be more easily controlled, since it would be a part of the GUI, and not a hard texture on the weapon itself. The only problem may be getting it to work with the NV display, ie giving it the proper bloom when it is still adjusted to daytime brightness. The config could also include various other parameters which depend on the type of sight, such as range of brightness, the area inside the optics within which the red dot is displayed, the distance to which the dot is actually zeroed (since in many red dot sights you have to be at a certain distance from the target for the dot to be actually pointing at the target) and possibly some others that I can´t think of right now. Because it would be a part of the GUI, though, I am not sure if this kind of alteration could be done by the modding community, and would have to be taken up by the Devteam themselves. I have not been on the ball regarding mods for Arma, since I didn´t play it a lot, and neither am I knowledgeable in any kind of programming and coding, so if this has already been proposed in some form or the other and rejected or found to be impossible to implement, I apologize for bringing it forward again. Otherwise, I hope this is of some value as an Idea. Cheers Teh Fish Edit: Somebody apparently has had the same Idea already over in this thread: http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?t=82013&page=2 http://forums.bistudio.com/showpost.php?p=1438793&postcount=18 Possibly, this is a workeable solution?