Please improve ground AI

[dooom]

Not to be insulting but the IL-2 video above shows even more simplistic behavior under attack than DCS demonstrates. At least in DCS the vehicles go around instead of stopping.

 

If you're referring to the little running guys, that's not AI at all. That's simply a visual animation played when damage is taken.

 

i think quite a few folks would love the little running guys - if not just for the sake of the illusion.

[My Fing ID]

What is the convoy suppose to do in the open road? Also, the fact is, every ground unit will engage you if you are within the range. I am not arguing the AI is good. However, what you said is a bit too harsh and not factual. And it is good to hear that developer is working to improve AI.

 

It's factual, I just named it wrong. I guess it's herringbone not fish bone.;

 

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/policy/army/fm/44-8/ch4.htm#s1p3

 

4-20. Make arrangements for an attack by moving the vehicles to opposite sides of the road to seek cover: The lead vehicle goes to the right, the second vehicle pulls to the left, and so on. This technique is called "Herringbone" (see Figure 4-7). If possible, have vehicles drive 45 degrees off the road and move to a covered and concealed position. Establish rally points for the convoy to reassemble after the attack. In cases where not all vehicles in the convoy have radios, the unit must develop a means to signal drivers that enemy aircraft are coming. The use of protective vehicle-launched or hand grenade smoke can cause the threat air to lose weapons lock or disrupt target acquisition long enough for convoy vehicles to find suitable concealed or dispersed positions.

 

 

I've done training to enter this maneuver before. Convoy reactions are different I'll admit, but unless something changed this is the standard for dealing with an air threat. That's not to say all convoys need to enter into this maneuver, it would actually be nice to have options like having them speed up on contact or dismount. Unit SOP is more of a consideration than the FMs, but that would be harder to model and the FMs would be more accurate IMO.

 

BTW that video above is awesome. It would be really cool if we could get people to abandon their vehicles and find cover or return fire. Same with infantry in the field. While you don't really want to engage an air threat, if you're being shot at it's better to shoot back and hope you hit something than sit in the open and wait to die.

 

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/policy/army/fm/44-8/ch5.htm#s1p2

 

Chances are you're not going to hit anything but still. In all honesty though the current infantry model would work if they'd return fire and preferably try to find some cover when not being shot at.

[winz]

IMHO this maneuver is a no go, it's too complicated. Seeking cover autonomously is one of the hardest and most expensive task you can throw on an A.I.

Look at Arma2 which got the best autonomous A.I. I've seen, how hard for them is to seek effective cover.(and we are talking about a game, that's is multhread and can use entire core for AI operations)

Exiting the road without cover would not make them much less of a sitting ducks. That said, I would really like to see such behaviour, but don't think it's real to expect it.

 

I personally would like to see smarter, intergrated, airdefenses that try to play smart with you. AA in DCS/FC is very predictable, they'll fire at you at maximum range and all you have to do is to turn back and go around.

[4c Hajduk Veljko]

Second is the problem of no units reacting to contact. This has been brought up a few times. A convoy rolls down the road and takes contact from the KA-50. It doesn't react at all, it just keeps going.

This statement is not completely factual. Vehicles in the convoy will shoot at you if you are within the range. Convoy will attempt to go around obstacles such as destroyed units.

 

Furthermore, what will "Herringbone" do when there is nowhere to hide? Look what happened to Iraqi convoys pulling out of Kuwait. They were decimated. No "Herringbone" can help when you are caught in the open.

 

On the other hand, in a recent NATO military use, more then 20 000 sorties were flown (not all against mobile ground targets) and there was only less then 20 verifiable mobile ground targets destroyed. Guess why?

 

When playing BS, we usual set up an ambush based on known convoy movement and in the open. That convoy is dead within minutes and at maximum range. And "Herringbone" would not help them at all. The only way that convoy would survive is to provide it with a good air cover.

[My Fing ID]

I know they shoot back and drive around dead vehicles which is good, however I doubt we'd see a convoy continue to move in a straight line when fired upon. I think it depends on SOP for the unit but think of how easy a target a straight line makes. It makes more sense, unless cover or friendly units are just ahead, to disperse and return fire, which is what the herring bones allows. This is especially true if we can get troops to dismount and return fire, then every unarmed truck turns into a rifle man or two. Assuming 2 people per truck (driver and commander) thats 10 rifles in 5 trucks plus what's already mounted, so machineguns and whatever other equipment is moving around. Dispersing in a manner similar to the herringbone also allows units to avoid losing 2 trucks to 1 round. How much easier is a perform a rocket run or use guns if the enemy is in a straight line? Still you're correct that if you're attacking correctly you are out of range. However I do not see this as a reason to not make improvements.

 

For the post above regarding cover I agree that would be too much to model. I was thinking of grabbing cover more for the infantry because they could simply run into the woodline. Another trick that could be used would be setting up zones in the editor when infantry run to if fired upon. Then the check goes from the closest woodline, which there are a lot of, to the closest zone, which could be as few or as many as the mission designer wished.

 

In any case It's good to see that there is already improvement in ground AI in progress. I do hope the Herring bone makes it because it'll be a lot more relevant when the A-10 is flying around.

Edited June 10, 2010 by My Fing ID
clarity

[Frederf]

I think SOP would be not to have (relatively) unprotected convoys in places subject to Ka-50 attack. It also might behoove the enemy not to publish their route timetable for the Ka-50's "just in time" benefit like 99% of missions are made.

[isoul]

Let me give you an example of typical real life behavior in case of a truck convoy attack.

 

What the attacker usually do :

 

In real life, in case of a truck convoy attack, the attacker would hit the first large vehicle of the convoy forcing the rest to stop. In case of a Ka-50, a Vikhr(launched from close range(3.5-4km) using a pop-up attack) on the first vehicle should suddenly cause the whole convoy to a complete stop. When at 3km away 1-2 salvos of S-8OFP2 would destroy some vehicles, kill much personnel and create confusion to the rest. The rest can be dealt with the cannon. This should take a few minutes and the "hunter" shouldn't get close enough to be hit by small arm's fire.

 

How the defender should react :

 

If the convoy is consisting of trucks carrying personne,l the foot soldiers should always dismount their vehicles and spread on the left and right sides of the road to find any possible cover(this is part of the basic training of any soldier). This way they would be less exposed and they would minimize human losses. Using MANPADS at that time would be ideal but I doubt it is possible(due to confusion most would try to "hit the ditch" rather than having the courage to return fire). The trucks doesn't provide any protection, is hard to move in such situations and it acts more as a trap rather than protection. Any effort to move them out of the line, while the attack continues, is more or less futile and exposes the personnel to danger.

 

What may be a pain in the ass for a mission designer :

 

If you try to simulate such action using the editor the procedure would become quite complex to create and difficult to process (and maybe inaccurate). How many triggers you have to use to simulate such behavior? On the other hand the result may not be even noticed by the attack helicopter if the pilot perform his attack right and fast. Is this something easy to create? Iif the convoy stopped for a few minutes and resume its course (if the attack stops) bypassing any destroyed vehicles would be enough. But still this sound complex to me. IMHO trying to simulate combat spread by dispersing vehicles and foot soldiers is way to complex to worth the effort.

Edited June 10, 2010 by isoul

[m0jo]

This could solve the AI problem in multi-player:

at 1:55

 

One player could control one coalition while another player could control the other coalition and these player could move their respective ground forces and strategically engage the enemy forces. This seem to be already implemented for the BS/FC engine. Also, this player could serve as a ATC/commander for his team if he have access to the AWACS and ground radar

[norm]

I think that the convoy detecting a hostile aircraft within a dome of a certain range would work better than round detection.