If they're refusing to follow a stance order in any mode it sounds like new bug. Your other ticket should sort that out if that's the case.

As far as movement speed. The AI shouldn't cheat, but only 'know' an enemy is near if they 'see' them. Given that's the case I would hope they would move more carefully, and slowly, in stealth mode. There's nothing stopping you from setting them to "aware" if you want them to move normally, or set more waypoints in the editor.

With combat mode I don't care what they do, as everything is so random that it usually doesn't matter how hard the AI tries to be careful in a firefight. In fact it seems to me like combat mode does more harm than good a lot (if not most) of the time. Which is what this ticket is trying to solve.

I agree they need 2 separate Move commands.

Edit: Another reason you don't want AI running wildly all the time, is if you've got squad members doing things halfway across the map. If you give them a move command, it's better they move slower so you have time to react and issue orders when they spot enemies.

I've confirmed with execs at BIS it is a half-man-half-frog mating call.

Sounds fucking weird not sure what kind of drugs the devs are on anymore.

They have been crossbred with cats and can see in the dark.

Instant-death. Fucking asshole sellouts.

I'm all for random mortar shells, I mean life's a bitch. But if shells landing on my head 10 times in a row is the result of another buggy ass script then I should be f**king pissed, considering this was released late because it had to be tested and all that.

Freakin P.O.S.

The tickets you read weren't made by ARMA supporters, but rather ARMA defilers. The engine is in DIRE need of improvement visually and physically? There's plenty of room for improvement in those aspects, but there it's already better than ARMA 2.
I can't imagine wanting to play this with somebody who thinks water splashes are 'fundamentally' important to ARMA, no offense, so I'm down-voting on the grounds that maybe you and others like you will not play if they leave this out.

EDIT: Forgot to put the smiley face so people would know I'm joking... oops :) Really downvoting because, F*** water!

Won't this backpack be sticking out of the water? Are we going to have a optional 'shark fin' that we can attach to the backpack to confuse the enemy?

Besides that, how far is this regular soldier supposed to swim with all his regular gear?

And then there's getting all his other equipment and clothing soaking wet...

I could go on but I'll wait for a rebuttal on these points.

WTF?

I saw the title and thought there was no way you were talking about a snorkel.

So I said alright I'm gonna enjoy the rest of my day off and try this mission again, but this time I won't screw up the UAV with any waypoints at all - I'll do everything manually... So I play for 15 minutes, start running low on fuel so land the UAV. What do my eyes behold? The thing starts taking off again. Playing and scripting for this shit is as productive and enjoyable as rubbing my genitals against a cheese grater.

I was on 'stable' as it turns out....

I updated to dev build and tried messing with the UAV again, thinking now that Fireball showed me the noobness of my ways things would go better. I landed, turned off engine, switched to turret to keep an eye on things, and it took off. Well at least I was emotionally prepared this time, and only cried a little.

I manually cancelled the only waypoint, landed, and then it took off again. To where? I guess the old now invisible waypoint, but who knows?

Easy Peasy. Just remove this feature entirely.

Something's definitely wrong with it now. I turn to bearing to face the enemy, and all of a sudden he's behind me. Nope, to the right of me. Wait I mean the left. This mothafucka is FAST!

Derp derp derpity derp! A-DERP A-DERP A-DERP DA DERP!

Suggestion for people getting mad at the action menu:

1. Take a deep breath.
2. Take a break
3. Hire a shrink

:P

Fair enough...

Using my own argument against me you could argue that if you want them to stay crouched ALL the time then there's a command for that as well!

I dunno... where did he say that?

Probably just an airplane or something :P

You're not wrong tyl3r. But remember we're talking about AI. It's bad enough for the AI to be aware of their environment, let alone be able to interpret the situation. The more rules you try to make the AI follow, the more game performance is going to suffer, and the more bugs you're going to introduce.

I would think mostly using crouch stance even if they can't see enemies may be a good compromise, personally I'd rather they err on the side of caution than try to be 'smart'. It's about the best you can expect from the AI, and playing under an AI superior will probably always be hugely disappointing.

The good news is that as a squad leader, you can change your guys to 'aware' or tell them to stand up when no enemies are around. If you want to leapfrog through the woods, you can divide your group into teams and move them up accordingly. It's not perfect, but the controls are there.

Well the AI has to make up for being retarded with knees of rubber.

Blame the arthritis on the guy making AI stay in stealth mode for the entire mission :P

Anyway it's probably a WIP. We'll see.

Hey it doesn't bother me, swear all you want!

Sorry if I sounded preachy. I played a lot of ARMA 2 and got tired of the AI standing up WAY too much in stealth. Now it looks like they're finally addressing the issue, maybe.

Hence this ticket: http://feedback.arma3.com/view.php?id=11766

Wait. This is a bug? Are they supposed to sprint? It's called stealth mode a.k.a try not to be seen. If you don't want them to crouch you put them in aware. They are obviously working on and improving the AI, as they used to use bounding movements in stealth.

Oh you know what, I gave them a move order to the waypoint when I tested it. If they follow you to the waypoint they stay prone just as much it seems.

I tested out the repro mission and they definitely seemed like they were going to crawl all the way to the waypoint destination. This was with an AI squad leader. Maybe this intended behavior or part of the WIP, idk.

I tried setting myself as the squad leader and the AI seemed to behave as they always did: only going prone sometimes.

EDIT: I misspoke, when giving AI a move order as squad leader, they did not stay prone. No change otherwise.

They might ask for a repro mission in addition to those screens...

"Copy my stance" really means "do whatever you feel is best given current combat mode." Don't ask me why.

I don't know how much AI should crawl while in combat mode, or how fast they should cover 400m in combat mode, because for all AI know they are in combat or will be at any second. But this ticket may be a decent compromise:

http://feedback.arma3.com/view.php?id=3920

You just get nice and comfy in that pilot's seat and practice flying :P

Ahh this problem...

There is a reason (I think). When you swap characters AI will take control of your squad leader. He will reset your teams, often tell your units to open fire and disembark/embark vehicles, etc. Pretty much anything to screw up your careful planning and at the worst possible time.

I suspect this can be averted by using the 'disableAI' scripting command. Though I never played with it to see if that will work. Hopefully somebody out there can shed some light on that?

I can't think of a reason for wanting AI to control your squad leader other than defending himself. So I'll definitely have to upvote this.

Ouch! My head suddenly hurts...

I'm sure I speak for all when I say, thanks!

Oh my bad. I'm from 2035. I forgot you guys still use this 'recycling' nonsense.

Dude seriously!? Recucle is a word, go look it up in the dictionary before you post a ticket (please)!

Finally an excuse to empty entire magazines on people! Now everyone can stop criticizing, and start thanking me for it...

But in all seriousness, this would really add a whole new level of realistic uncertainty to the game. +1

From what I understand it's definitely planned for the game, so IMHO I say let the devs do their thing.

I think somebody might be addicted ARMA scripting.

"Let me get a little taste, just a simple api for sidechat"

I'm trying to guess what this is ticket is about by just looking at pictures. Are we debating whether Swamp Thing or Bigfoot was the coolest?

I vote for Bigfoot. He should roam around Altis randomly. Wish I thought of it.

Oh sometimes I say plane instead of helicopter because I get them confused, you know, cause they both go up and don't come down...

Right, there aren't any planes yet, sorry I was referring to experiences in Arma 2. Something up in the sky, a UFO, how's that?

Now I guess you can make arguments on how they know it's not a friendly in their vehicles - I'm not even going there. How about when you take a civilian car and then an enemy plane knows who you are? Does that still happen? That one I just can't explain.

Great ideas. The AI should use a lot more of this kind of logic, although I feel we should definitely leave room for some randomness in the numbers, so it's not too predictable.

I can't argue with you there, Grinya.

+1

They're simply examining the trajectory of the bullet through their dead buddy, try shooting more crooked.

I don't know, maybe the point of mines is to NOT walk on them. I mean I don't know for sure, I just kinda got that impression from various sources.

Looks almost like a duplicate of

http://feedback.arma3.com/view.php?id=11678

Hopefully they can close both when you get your plane.

:)

I don't make a habit of refusing demands made of those obsessed with car bombs, do you?

You guys didn't read the ticket, did you?

It states "opfor must have a car bomb."

This is not optional or open for debate.

I may be misunderstanding and forgive me if I am, but it sounds like the waypoint isn't attached to the vehicle.

If you are placing waypoints and you double click on a vehicle, that vehicle becomes 'attached' to that waypoint. If the waypoint is attached correctly (you can't move the waypoint without moving the vehicle, too) they should not go to any other vehicle.

@kavno

I would have said the same thing had I saw it in real life...

Why not? Why not have f***ing flying cars while were at it? Maybe 'The Bat' from The Dark Knight Rises as well :)

Everyone go get your grandmother so they can make a wish/ticket on what they want to see in the game :P

Whatever's in that picture is awesome, but I'm just trying to think on where the Devs are going to get the time.

Yeah this was in Arma 2 and always bothered me. Haven't made a ticket because I have a few AI tickets already. But since you made it you got my vote.

While we're responding to brians999:

I was going to suggest that the vehicles also handle differently for females, to simulate the fact that they are not good drivers. Maybe even set some of the bigger, manlier vehicles as off-limits.

Based on what I did to the children of Skyrim I can see why.

This is about civilians. If you put yourself as a female civilian in the editor, as well as an ammo-box, you should be able to arm yourself if you so chose. This was not possible in ARMA 2.

I can't see this happening again though, with all the attention the other ticket is getting.

@AD
Because you played ARMA 2.

Well I was going to say at least they keep up now but after watching the vid...

+1

Arma... started off as prospective combat sim, but the community wanted another Grand Theft Auto instead.

Close your history books, class. Now you know why games are extinct and we just have GTA 6035.

When you drive vehicles into stuff bad things happen and vehicles usually don't work right anymore. We don't need real deformations. Stop being greedy.

Yes, your kids (maybe even you when you have terrible arthritis) will be able to play games that do everything you could ever want. For now you have to face limitations in time, hardware, engine, whatever.

Haha I know... but still they might 'port' the same voice actors over from wherever they found them. Anyway I'm sure more voices are coming. I'm sure they'll be ridiculous as well, but if I played this game for the voice acting I wouldn't have gotten past Arma 2!

Whew with the annoying voices from PMC you'd think you'd have learned your lesson...

LOL @ "Sometimes"

OHHHHHH it's in beta! Thanks for clearing that up for me :P

I was having flashbacks to the last game that wasn't in beta and had these same issues - you know the ones you just found...

But maybe I'm missing the point. I'm just trying to think of a time where the AI needs to be both in STEALTH and COMBAT mode. Because I think of stealth as trying not be detected at all.

What's the use? They made the 'Combat' mode, which is more like 'Please-Get-Shot' mode. Then there's Stealth mode which is just makes AI crawl or STAND UP AND RUN AND GET US ALL SHOT.

Now they're gonna make another AI behavior that magically works?

WTF?

I saw the title and thought there was no way you were talking about a snorkel.

Won't this backpack be sticking out of the water? Are we going to have a optional 'shark fin' that we can attach to the backpack to confuse the enemy?

Besides that, how far is this regular soldier supposed to swim with all his regular gear?

And then there's getting all his other equipment and clothing soaking wet...

I could go on but I'll wait for a rebuttal on these points.

We need fewer B.S. tickets!

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO! Let's see how you climb a ladder, mister. What is this 2050? Oooooh look at the computer screen it looks like sombody's climbing up a ladder! YEAH RIGHT!

Ok yeah that would be way more important than some deer as well. But in my defense, most of the people here don't even seem know the game has an editor, as tickets regarding that have like 10 votes a piece from what I've seen. And it's the same with AI.

Yeah I'm sure they're going to work on the more important issues...

So what are you playing for? If it's to pretend to shoot a gun I recommend you join the military, go to a shooting range, or play paintball. :) If it's to fly go play a real flight sim.

What are these more important issues you're so interested in? Just wondering because most of the 'issues' getting a lot of attention are retarded, and are as about as important as this one.

Agreed bipods are more important. BUT Foxes are easier to implement!

Tip to Falloutperson416.

Some of these Beta testers have issues with differentiating reality from fantasy. The game is full of make-believe equipment on a make-believe island, but if a fox shows up then OMG IT'S NOT REALISTIC EVEN THOUGH THE AI IS SO DAMN RETARDED AND PLAYERS ARE F-ING PSYCHOTIC THAT THE ONLY THING GOOD ABOUT THE GAME IS IT LOOKS PRETTY! :)

But I doubt they'll get to this ticket as there are already some animals and unless you're really specific they'll probably ask for more info. I'd love to see more life built into the engine though. And not just the same freaking snake that loves every surface - especially runways and office buildings.

Yes, what Avi said...

I guess the answer is be careful jumping off rocks. But it would be nice to have the ability to shoot yourself once you have injured yourself so badly that you are nothing but a burden :)

If you don't care why did you comment? Why am I commenting now when I don't care?

Yeah this is really gonna make those epic underwater battles with pellet guns so much less exciting... It's a SIM. Stop swimming to reload or play another game.

Oh what moron did that!? Should be fixed now.

Well there's clearly room for more guys to snuggle up, judging from the pic. Maybe the Devs thought we are homophobes... and in my case they would be right.

Maybe use 2 boats? I mean why be uncomfortable?

I've been on a couple boats and they were pretty slow. If the water is choppy you'll be lucky to go that fast on a small boat - I believe anyway. I don't actually like boats and I'm not sure what the average speeds are in knots, mph, or kmh... so what can I say.

Well, he did raise some interesting points.

All this shit does barely work.

I just tested as a single sniper and did get the AI to shoot RPGs at me, though I was just standing there. I guess if you give them a shot they'll take it if they don't kill you quickly enough with rifles. So I was wrong about the groups thing, but I was still asking for it...

I'd definitely be happy with them saving the last rocket, or only using RPGs on infantry when a human player orders it (or if otherwise enabled), or whatever.

I just don't want to play the game and think "Well we're just some measly rifleman so at least we never have to worry about being shot at by RPGs..."

Or in other words: once the AI starts following very strict rules on when to do what then the simulation aspect of the game is gone... Because then you know exactly what they'll do. Really anything should be possible, but the probable should happen most of the time.

If the AI wipes out an entire squad because they're bunched up and out in the open I wouldn't call it a bug.

I understand the argument for saving AT rounds, but the AI can't even suppress, and they can barely shoot. I wouldn't call them professionals. And how they supposed to know you have tanks at the end of your mission? Is there a crystal ball in one of the ammo boxes? :)

Either way, if you have Missile Specialists instead of Rifleman ATs in your missions they should save their ammo for the tanks.

I made a vid of an AI experiment regarding this topic if you care: http://youtu.be/WJpWcVP65lI

I've experimented in the editor and have found that it's just Rifleman ATs who will fire RPGs at GROUPS of STATIONARY infantry. Missile Specialists carrying Titan launchers don't seem to fire them at infantry...

This seems pretty realistic. I don't think an RPG round is so precious you wouldn't use it to wax a group of guys if you could... and it only looks like they're spamming rockets when you have a group made of nothing but Rifleman ATs. MAYBE they should fire one at a time, but that's a minor issue.

This ticket seems more geared towards the annihilation of a new FEATURE / IMPROVEMENT rather than a tweak

So we have 10 to 1 votes to get rid of:

1. an AI improvement
2. more realism and challenge
3. more variety
4. more explosions

Maybe people can enlighten me as to why they're upvoting?

Yeah I'm just glad they're not afraid to use that damn launcher. And since the AI gets killed anyway they're better off shooting rockets while they can.

Ahh just turn up the fog if you want everything dark and gloomy.

Oh no, I saw it. I thought you meant "way over the top" compared to ARMA, not compared to every bad action movie ever made :)

You were selling me on the idea until I watched the video. I expected to see something somewhat realistic. What I saw was over-the-top cartoon violence that put Max Payne to shame!

I'm gonna have to downvote, but lucky for you I'm apparently the minority.

Maybe throw in some icebergs too.

Did I not upvote this already!

Who would downvote this? Oh, an A-hole? That makes sense.

I too like to get my nature hike and gaming done all in 1 go... so votin' up

Gotchya.

I guess I can forget about becoming a detective...

So for anybody reading this is NOT a duplicate.

Sorry, I didn't read it due to all the words, but had just finished viewing another ticket talking about Dyslexci's video. It looked like he sparked some kind of uprising.

3 different tickets on the action menu all on the same page!

The tickets you read weren't made by ARMA supporters, but rather ARMA defilers. The engine is in DIRE need of improvement visually and physically? There's plenty of room for improvement in those aspects, but there it's already better than ARMA 2.
I can't imagine wanting to play this with somebody who thinks water splashes are 'fundamentally' important to ARMA, no offense, so I'm down-voting on the grounds that maybe you and others like you will not play if they leave this out.

EDIT: Forgot to put the smiley face so people would know I'm joking... oops :) Really downvoting because, F*** water!