Did I just see a ground vehicle launch a flare?

[Witchking]

I must have had a brain fart, I just can't remember why I didn't take a screenshot. It was the first 1.2.12 release and I was flying around in the hog/flanker and trying to down some ground targets and if I saw it correctly...I saw a ground unit launch a single FLARE...like a flare gun flare. It looked freaking awesome. Something I never saw before.

 

So..I set up a practice mission with T-72s and a few BMPs, they did shoot me down quite a few times as I became fixated with the A-10A and its avenger cannon..but thats besides the point :p

 

they did not pop smoke or flares. I have although seen the pop up mushroom cloud of smoke before in the same mission.

 

Does any of u guys here know:

 

1) What is the criteria for a AI unit to pop a smoke canister or flare?

2) Is there certain units that can pop flares and smoke?

3) Can we get a mention of these in the encyclopedia in DCS 2.0?

 

thanks

 

Varun

[Flagrum]

I must have had a brain fart, I just can't remember why I didn't take a screenshot. It was the first 1.2.12 release and I was flying around in the hog/flanker and trying to down some ground targets and if I saw it correctly...I saw a ground unit launch a single FLARE...like a flare gun flare. It looked freaking awesome. Something I never saw before.

 

So..I set up a practice mission with T-72s and a few BMPs, they did shoot me down quite a few times as I became fixated with the A-10A and its avenger cannon..but thats besides the point :p

 

they did not pop smoke or flares. I have although seen the pop up mushroom cloud of smoke before in the same mission.

 

Does any of u guys here know:

 

1) What is the criteria for a AI unit to pop a smoke canister or flare?

2) Is there certain units that can pop flares and smoke?

3) Can we get a mention of these in the encyclopedia in DCS 2.0?

 

thanks

 

Varun

1) it is up to the mission designer to let a unit fire a flare or smoke grenade.

2) it is a separate function that can be triggered for every unit (and also about everywhere else)

3) no need to, imho. :o) It is a standard function of the mission editor and existed since ... ever.

[msalama]

You can command them to pop flares in the ME, but I've never seen them doing it independently. A new feature perhaps?

[Witchking]

Interesting. Never knew.

 

Ya... I did see only one flare. It was almost like a single flare from a flare gun. Looked really cool to see a lowly flare shot to a height which is still below you. it is such moments which DCS has only now started to do which makes it feel like a living world. Very nice and immersive.

[SFINX]

2) Is there certain units that can pop flares and smoke?

Varun

May be it was a SIGNAL flare? Any unit can fire it by the trigger. Or by pressing LAlt+1|2|3 when the ground unit is under your direct control (CA module).

[Witchking]

May be it was a SIGNAL flare? Any unit can fire it by the trigger. Or by pressing LAlt+1|2|3 when the ground unit is under your direct control (CA module).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yup. I am sure it was a signal flare for help. But the interesting thing was that AI did it when I came attacking a convoy on the road.

[VincentLaw]

You can command them to pop flares in the ME, but I've never seen them doing it independently. A new feature perhaps?

You can also launch white, red, or green flares from any ground vehicle you are driving in CA. I think the controls are LAlt+1, LAlt+2, and LAlt+3, but I am not on my desktop right now so I can't take screenshots. In 1.2.12 the flare trajectory was fixed so now they arc properly too.

[Witchking]

I think ED should consider an AI logic of self preservation/fear/call in support. This should be part of the routines where an AI convoy can launch a flare, signal nearby airbases to send in reinforcements if they come under attack. That would be a dramatic enhancement to the DCS world.

[Flagrum]

I think ED should consider an AI logic of self preservation/fear/call in support. This should be part of the routines where an AI convoy can launch a flare, signal nearby airbases to send in reinforcements if they come under attack. That would be a dramatic enhancement to the DCS world.

Lol, ... uhm, sorry. :o) but no.

 

What you suggest would about equal to "ED should implement AI that can make war on their own". When and why shall AI be in "fear mode"? When shall it fire flares and when better not (to give away their position)? May convois fire flares to get help, but single units not? I.e. how to prevent that each and every unit suddenly fires flares like mad as soon as the player comes in sight? And why should the AI not use their radios to call for help? And how does the airbase AI decide if and how they send help? Which priorities?

 

Etc, etc, etc ...

 

Impossible. :o)

[msalama]

ED should implement AI that can make war on their own

 

A splendid idea, although hard to implement. But still not impossible IMO ;)

[Witchking]

I know this is an old thread..but finally here is where I saw this. lol

 

 

 

 

Lol, ... uhm, sorry. :o) but no.

 

What you suggest would about equal to "ED should implement AI that can make war on their own". When and why shall AI be in "fear mode"? When shall it fire flares and when better not (to give away their position)? May convois fire flares to get help, but single units not? I.e. how to prevent that each and every unit suddenly fires flares like mad as soon as the player comes in sight? And why should the AI not use their radios to call for help? And how does the airbase AI decide if and how they send help? Which priorities?

 

Etc, etc, etc ...

 

Impossible. :o)

 

 

I agree...I think this is possible. The concept of self preservation for AI will make for some amazing battles. I am suggesting the AI of an RTS. Nothing more or less. Let the AI have logic on what they can, cannot do. Trucks in convoys may have flares... radios.. but nothing but small arms fire, in the face of a conflict, they can run away/hide when under fire. More armoured units can persist longer.... have the weapons... use appropriate weapons appropriately... ex: mounted cannon but not a AAA gun against ground troops. I understand it is hard,,, and this may take years before it can be achieved... but for sure,,, it will improve Gameplay...replability, etc. Not to mention.., its also connected to the development of a dynamic campaign. To build a full scale dynamic war, there needs to be logic for the AI to consider unit/platoon/convoy strength vs AI unit firepower/ability/resources.

Edited January 5, 2015 by Witchking

[Flagrum]

I agree...I think this is possible. The concept of self preservation for AI will make for some amazing battles. I am suggesting the AI of an RTS. Nothing more or less. Let the AI have logic on what they can, cannot do. Trucks in convoys may have flares... radios.. but nothing but small arms fire, in the face of a conflict, they can run away/hide when under fire. More armoured units can persist longer.... have the weapons... use appropriate weapons appropriately... ex: mounted cannon but not a AAA gun against ground troops. I understand it is hard,,, and this may take years before it can be achieved... but for sure,,, it will improve Gameplay...replability, etc. Not to mention.., its also connected to the development of a dynamic campaign. To build a full scale dynamic war, there needs to be logic for the AI to consider unit/platoon/convoy strength vs AI unit firepower/ability/resources.

No, you disagree - I said, I think it is not possible. :o)

 

I mean, yeah, there are some aspects where the AI could certainly be improved and which then could be used by mission designers to create an impression of intelligent behavior. There are already scripts, developed by community members, that help here a bit. For example scripts that allow attacked units to get "supressed" so they cease to fire temporarily for a certain amount of time - to simulate a more human like behavior (I.e. who in the right mind would be totally unimpressed and continue to fire his AA MG on a unarmored truck when there are cluster bombs exploding all around him? Answer: the AI)

 

Other aspects are not yet covered. Personally I would like to see some mechanisms that allow AI units to actually "flee". When attacked, a convoi may spread out a bit to not be such an easy target. But they never really retreat if confronted with an overwhelming enemy. All it would probably need for a mission designer to accomplish this would be a method to define alternate/secondary routes, which then could be activated by triggers or conditions. Similar to those we have already). "IF unit.dead > 20% THEN unit.route.activate("retreat")" or so.

 

But it would - and should imho - be all still have to be in the responsibility of the mission designer. "Automatic Warefare" will always be flawed. Typical RTS make the AI harder to beat often just by superiority in terms of number of units. It is very hard to implement some "believable" behavior even for RTS games with their often rather limited capabilities per unit. And not to forget: RTS games are an entirely different genre - so ED would have to develop TWO games: the sim AND the RTS

[Witchking]

Haha... I meant I agree to the post after urs by msalama where he said its not impossible. ;)

 

I see what you mean...I know it mean almost two separate engines in the backend.. an AI engine and a sim engine for all the physics calculations, but I think that is a better way to go than make the mission designer responsible for all the scripts to model behavior. I don't know how Falcon 4 dynamic campaign engine accomplishes it... is there a proper AI? Or is it just smart programming? AI definitely needs to get worked on and I am sure will be worked during 2.0. Some element of preservation on its own will help make the battles a lot more dynamic and lively, Let's see where dcs goes to in version 3.0. :)

[fltsimbuff]

I agree with Witchking on this one. ED has already added elements of RTS play to DCS world (particularly with CA), and with EDGE purportedly using less CPU for graphics it seems they might be able to allocate more cycles for improved AI. Using mission scripts is fine for those that play a lot of pre-made missions, but the randomly generated missions would benefit a lot from better AI.

 

The best of both worlds to me would be implementing these behaviors (such as stationary units moving when under attack) as scripted actions or macros that could be placed on randomly generated units, or assigned manually when creating a mission in the editor.

 

As much as I hate it when convoys don't hold still for my CBU-97s, it is kind of unrealistic that they will just sit there when an A-10 flies over.

Edited January 5, 2015 by fltsimbuff
grammar error

[Flagrum]

I am not against it - I just doubt that it is feasible.

 

I am also not a big fan of using complicated scripts. Hats off to those who implement them, but these behaviours should be available "out of the box", imo. Then mission designers would have at least the tools at their disposal to create immersive missions.

 

Also, these new tools - these new AI behaviours - would be necessary for anything more sophisticated anyway - anything that could evolve into this idea of "automated warefare". But that could come later, if at all.

[Pikey]

I've long been wishing there was an in built 'fleeing' trigger at unit health and group health. But really I only desire that from the aspect of endlessly shooting stationary targets. The initial reaction is fine, you can disrupt a convoy, but thereafter the AI remains comfortable repositioning a few meters whilst watching his buddies die around him. This is a contentious code to play with.

[McBlemmen]

I dont know for how long this has been possible , but i just noticed CA players can now manually launch flares with left alt 1 trough 3... maybe that has been there forever , but now that i just found out i'm more interested in playing some co-op CA with helo or A10 cap

[Witchking]

players is fine...the cool thing is they either had a trigger or the AI truck was programmed to launch a flare as this was a su-27 training mission. :)

[vicx]

Flag, I dunno. I understand the desire to want everything built-in but I don't think there would be as much unanimity (everyone thinking the same) on what the default behaviors should be as you might think. People will have different ideas on what the AI should do.

 

This is for everyone in the thread - I really think scripting is the way to go for AI development. You would be surprised what is possible with scripts.

 

If you want better AI, support scripters who are writing good scripts and boost their threads when they ask ED for scripting hooks. That's one thing. The other thing is to keep harrassing ED to release a Dedicated Server. These two things are connected because scripts use processor and slow your frames BUT if the scripts is running on the server then you get the AI for free.

 

So yeah support scripters and demand a dedicated server

[Witchking]

Here you go.. there is a trigger for that first vehicle to launch a flare when within 1500m of the vehicle?