265 replies to this topic

[Jyi]

Jackal Noble, on 04 December 2019 - 01:04 AM, said:

This screams to me that you went into the demo with a pre-determined lense.
HAVE YOU NOT WITNESSED THE CICADA BEHAVIOR??? It's bar none almost identical in that it shows up to an engagement and then quickly, cowardly pulls back only trying to find an opportune moment to come up and try to backstab you with it's measly 2 mediums and small laser. Give credit where it's due.

I've noted in one of my comments that in MW5 demo the light / fast medium mechs did once try to circle behind me. So I did give credit where it's due. And I'm not 100% certain it's intended behaviour and not just a fluke. It might be, or it might not be.

I also noted that when I played the assassination mission, after I killed the Thunderbolt, the Locust's behaviour seemed to change and it tried to withdraw from the engagement. I'm not sure if this was intended either, and it could've just been a fluke.

Generally, the behaviour of the enemies in MW5 demo is so contradictory, confusing and braindead that it's very hard to see whether they are working as intended or not. Not a good sign, in my opinion.

Also, the example I gave of Halo and the grunt is different because of the context. Yes, the context! A concept I'm not sure you all get. In Halo, the challenge doesn't come from generally smart enemies, it comes from numbers and unfair advantage. In that context, it doesn't matter if a certain type of enemy occasionally behaves detrimentally. It makes it a character, and is good design.

In MW5 demo, it'd be absolutely awesome if the Locust hastily retreated from an engagement it can't win, AFTER it has done its best to work together with the Thunderbolt and provided an extra challenge. But currently, that's not what's happening. Currently, the Thunderbolt is a pushover and the Locust is doing its own thing, running around like a headless chicken. I can walk in front of the Thunderbolt in a light or medium mech with a couple of SRM's, sit there stationary, take my time in aiming and headshot the Thunderbolt to death, and the combined attempts of those two enemies will barely chip my armor. Then, occasionally, the Locust withdraws, goes back to the base and just sits there. It doesn't try to even run back to other friendlies in the area. It just goes back and sits there.

[Jyi]

FRAGTAST1C, on 04 December 2019 - 01:20 AM, said:

New players keep dying despite the AI 'cause the players are restricted big time. How is that good design?

That's the definition of good design!

They went for a certain style and it worked perfectly for them.

Quote

Didn't Mechwarrior games do well for the audience it was aimed for and despite the fact that the game controls were crappy and the AI bad?

I don't see how the controls have ever been that bad compared to, for example, other simulator games. But yea, the AI was never stellar. It didn't matter as much because maps were handcrafted, and the developer could finetune the challenge like that. Worked well enough, and they did well enough.

Quote

You keep saying that on a fundamental level, Dark Souls series wasn't broken but with each iteration, the fundamental aspect of the Souls-like games, which happens to be combat, was altered to the point where one style was OP and the other was like walking barefoot on broken glass. That is the definition of "broken" when it comes to the Souls games.

No, it's not the definition of broken (though if you look at a dictionary, it is one possible definition of broken). Also, it's not fundamentally broken. Combat is a central aspect of Dark Souls -games, but it has never been broken in them. There were character builds that were underpowered and others that were ridicilously overpowered, but the general gameplay has never been broken.

You might start playing the game, have a hard time and then accidentally stumble upon a build that made the game ridicilously easy or too hard, and that would take away your entertainment. But it's not like EVERYONE who started playing that game would have that experience. Most of the people playing Dark Souls would have a solid challenge and be capable of overcoming it. Thus, it's not fundamentally broken. Also, Dark Souls is designed as a single player -game with some online aspects. And in those cases, other players are more of an additional challenge than help.

It'd be somewhat similar if in MW5 you'd realize that a certain type of mech build like Gauss & PPC -boating was ridicilously overpowered, and that'd make the game a cakewalk. But based on the demo, that's not how it is. It's ridicilously easy for everyone, and as a player you need to go out there and find ways to challenge yourself even a little. It's almost the complete opposite of Dark Souls. Instead of finding a few exploits, you are trying to AVOID exploiting the game.

And MW5 is supposedly a game that was designed with co-op in mind. With multiple humans, it's going to even easier.

Quote

Finally, your last four paragraphs are contradicting and hopefully I can show it you. You're saying that enemies in Dark Souls had quirks and specific builds. The lowly Grunts (BTW, thank you for reminding me about Halo. I need to install Halo : Reach, which I had completely forgotten about ) were detrimental to their allies.

But you suddenly changed your tone by saying that something like that would be detrimental in MW5. I mean, you said that if AI was deadly in MW5, it'd be proficient in killing its own allies but at the same time, not be deadly to the player. Instead, what you want is AI that reacts to the environment, reacts to the player loadouts, etc., but shouldn't be deadly accurate or behave badly 'cause it'll ruin the game experience.

CONTEXT! CONTEXT! CONTEXT!

In Halo, the challenge doesn't come from the quirks. The quirks exist to give the game and its NPC's extra character. The game would be even more challenging if that quirk didn't exist and the grunts never did anything stupid. But it's a good thing because 1) the grunts are small little aliens, and it's believeable that they are cowards and a bit stupid and 2) the rest of the game is still challenging enough even when the grunts do stupid things.

Like I just said: if the challenge was there to begin with, and for example the retreat of a light mech was done logically, it'd be an amazing thing.

Quote

If anything, some enemy AI with deadly loadouts in mechs and high accuracy would add character to it while the rest of its allies would be average or below average. To make it simple, the AI need specific mechs and loadouts based on mission types and have highly skilled AI as the pilot in that mech to bring variety. This pretty much happens already in HBS's Battletech and more so in Roguetech. I am almost certain that MW5 is the FPS version of Battletech and having enemies with varying levels of skill is actually good. You specifically do not need human-level thinking AI. Just an AI composition of differing skill levels.

Absolutely correct. More and less deadly enemies, and some sort of elite commanders would give the game excellent character. All kinds of different cool behaviour quirks would give the game character and would be welcome. Well, as long as they are intended and logical.

Right now, however, I'm not sure they are intended and they are definitely not logical.

Like, in the lore, they don't just give out mechs to scrubs. Especially not expensive heavy or assault mechs. So why is the extent of enemy AI in an assault mech this: sit in middle of an open area and cycle through weapons because of artificial restrictions?

And people keep saying "Oh, but the enemy AI goes only up to like regular or veteran. There's elite AI that's not available as enemies in the demo!", and to that I say this: no, you don't encounter elite enemy AI, but you can take elite friendly AI, and it's just as dumb as the rookie AI, but just with better aim.

And like I've already established earlier, multiple times: better accuracy doesn't mean the AI is better, it's just going to be a moron with a gun instead of a knife.

Edited by Jyi, 04 December 2019 - 01:58 AM.

[Koniving]

The AI has no desire to survive, no self preservation.

Mw5 is like fighting robots, so to speak.
Not people in robots.

Unlike past mw games the illusion is broken due to how many basic functions of humanity just isn't here, as if the mechs are piloted by shambling zombies.

[Jackal Noble]

Here, you want to talk about AI so much. here's an awesome positive example of lance mate AI in MW5
Below is a screenshot I took in the War Map (400 ton) at the ~4th wave with the Orion, Grasshopper and PPC Awesome.
At around the 3rd wave I ordered my AI lancemates to follow me around the big over looking hill cliff and they trundled all the way around, even navigating up the steep terrain on the backside.
Most importantly, they proceed to stay in place on the cliff overhang and snipe at the enemy rather than drop down like the non-navigational AI you imply it to be. That is a downright impressive AI behavior.
Enemy track-finding behavior is also very good.
So ya enjoi.
with 3 AI Atlai

[FRAGTAST1C]

Jyi, on 04 December 2019 - 01:52 AM, said:

...........................
And like I've already established earlier, multiple times: better accuracy doesn't mean the AI is better, it's just going to be a moron with a gun instead of a knife.

Look, I get where you're coming from and I've said a few times in different topics that the AI is serviceable and is not great. But it's just amazing how you've been bent out of shape just trying to point and poke at the AI in a DEMO and coming to all sorts of conclusions.

The fact is that we do not know if the OpFor will have special mechs with deadly loadout and a pilot with Elite skill level. Right now, AI is being worked on it seems. Will MW5 have AI that mimic human behaviour? No, it'll not. But if HBS Battletech is anything to go by, then there'll be scripted events where some AI targets will behave like one to progress the story aspects in missions.

What we know for a fact is that the game will have you and your lance (total of 4 members) against multiple lances, just like Battletech. The AI behaviour can use some adjustment to not make the missions easy, sure, but how much tweaking is needed should be determined by the cost of repairs, travel, outfitting mechs, lance maintenance, etc., This isn't like MWO where you strip away the armour and let components explode 'cause you'll suffer from repair costs, downtime and also injuries.

[Jyi]

FRAGTAST1C, on 04 December 2019 - 02:07 AM, said:

Look, I get where you're coming from and I've said a few times in different topics that the AI is serviceable and is not great. But it's just amazing how you've been bent out of shape just trying to point and poke at the AI in a DEMO and coming to all sorts of conclusions.

The fact is that we do not know if the OpFor will have special mechs with deadly loadout and a pilot with Elite skill level. Right now, AI is being worked on it seems. Will MW5 have AI that mimic human behaviour? No, it'll not. But if HBS Battletech is anything to go by, then there'll be scripted events where some AI targets will behave like one to progress the story aspects in missions.

What we know for a fact is that the game will have you and your lance (total of 4 members) against multiple lances, just like Battletech. The AI behaviour can use some adjustment to not make the missions easy, sure, but how much tweaking is needed should be determined by the cost of repairs, travel, outfitting mechs, lance maintenance, etc., This isn't like MWO where you strip away the armour and let components explode 'cause you'll suffer from repair costs, downtime and also injuries.

"Hey, look at this cool car. It has all new kind of design, sonic windshield wipers, machine guns, quantum leather seats and it's made of an alloy that's so modern it doesn't even have a name!"

"Cool, but there's no engine in it."

"The engine is serviceable."

"...but there's literally no engine there..."

"I SAID THE ENGINE IS SERVICEABLE!"

[FRAGTAST1C]

Jyi, on 04 December 2019 - 06:11 AM, said:

"Hey, look at this cool car. It has all new kind of design, sonic windshield wipers, machine guns, quantum leather seats and it's made of an alloy that's so modern it doesn't even have a name!"

"Cool, but there's no engine in it."

"The engine is serviceable."

"...but there's literally no engine there..."

"I SAID THE ENGINE IS SERVICEABLE!"

Terrible analogy. Let me help..

Me : "Hey, look at this cool car. It's an update and also based off of the needs of a niche market"

You : "Cool, but there's no engine in it."

Me : "No, it is there. It is neither the fastest nor the smoothest but it suits the car. Plus, it can be upgraded easily"

You : *Hissy fit*

[Mister Blastman]

Does the AI torso twist to spread damage?

Does the AI twist to keep their strong side facing the enemy while defending the weak side?

Does the AI peek to see if the area is clear before exposing themselves fully?

Does the AI utilize hit and run tactics?

Does the AI understand the virtue of focus fire and single out one friendly target--likely the most dangerous or most exposed and pour all firepower onto target until dead or has retreated?

These are only basics I'd hope the AI would be capable of. There's much, much more I would like it to be able to perform, too.

Edited by Mister Blastman, 04 December 2019 - 08:31 AM.

[Cypherdrene]

The beta to me is not impressive, not even the graphics (but they're pretty), we'll have to wait for release to give an actual review, but so far it's nothing PGI should be proud of

[Koniving]

Jackal Noble, on 04 December 2019 - 02:03 AM, said:

Below is a screenshot I took in the War Map (400 ton) at the ~4th wave with the Orion, Grasshopper and PPC Awesome.
At around the 3rd wave I ordered my AI lancemates to follow me around the big over looking hill cliff and they trundled all the way around, even navigating up the steep terrain on the backside.

Navigation is basic Unreal Engine nav mesh and has nothing to do with PGI's AI.

15 seconds to get it to do that without the droning explanation for first-time users.
Instead of choosing a random spot on the nav mesh, the AI just has the goal of "reach the red dorito" instead. (which this also shows them being able to jump if they needed to without additional instructions).


A technology around since the mid-2000s.

In comparison, if I did that back in the early 2000s...

The path nodes are created by the apples, and again have nothing to do with actually programming the AI. If you want them to follow a specific path you add in path nodes along them so that they don't collide into walls. (Oh god the dial-up... the 16 MEGABYTES of ram...I hated that computer so much... but look at what I could run on it.)

Animations I could run on it... (Actually made in 2002, but made into videos on a newer computer in 2006 with the footage upped from 8 fps to 16 and I think 16 to 32. Hammer Blaster's closer to 2004/2005, but the files were from what I had as a 2006 backup.)

Quote

Most importantly, they proceed to stay in place on the cliff overhang and snipe at the enemy rather than drop down like the non-navigational AI you imply it to be. That is a downright impressive AI behavior.

Spawn point + track you to where the enemies last seen you (an inherent behavior of Unreal Engine if the AI is simply given the initial instruction "Go to last known" + "Engage at longest range" which is the default behavior of assault and heavy class mechs of classification "Ranger."
Now you have mechs that stand on a hill.

As said in the video on my mod thread, "Build the AI simple and people will create stories and think it's a lot smarter than it really is."

Quote

Enemy track-finding behavior is also very good.

If you weren't at the last known location, basic MWO radar mechanics is what enables to them to find you because if one enemy can see you then you show up on the radar of all enemies within range to see your dorito. They automatically aimbot their way to the nearest red dorito.

More impressive behavior is if they CANNOT see you, and you sneak up behind one...and they do not react. That's impressive because it means that they follow the same rules we do.
But once you enter stated range of their longest ranged weapon, they "detect you" within 360 degrees in that circle.

This is why when I enhanced engagement range to twice that of the longest range weapon, they now react to me sneaking up on them at that new range regardless of where I am in relation to them once I enter that range they all "activate" and torso twist to face me. The arms literally SNAP into action because they aimbot my way.

Quote

with 3 AI Atlai

And now I realize you're not saying the enemies did this, but they're the wingman AI doing it because you ordered them to with the F1 through F4 commands. You ordered them onto the cliff and then they're just staying stationary in a target place (they'll do that anywhere, if you order them to stand at X they will literally stand at X and either not move or if they're forced to move they stay within "30 meters" of given destination... I kid you not for some reason they're permitted only 30 meters to move, so one hex. Nice one PGI, you limited them to one Hex of movement. *Clap, clap, clap* PGI actually can check the source material once in a while).

(In Battletech Battlemech Manual, "called shots cannot be done if the mech is not considered immobile, powered down or the pilot unconscious. Even if the mech cannot move out of its hex, it still has 30 meters to thrash around and dodge fire in.")

Unfortunately the fact that your AI did this after being told to stand at the hill is Significantly less impressive than the enemy AI doing this by circumstance.

Edited by Koniving, 04 December 2019 - 09:10 AM.

[Koniving]

Side note what's hilarious is if you order them BACK into the dropship (can only get one to do it) and then the dropship takes off, the game breaks.

But because you told them to go into the spot inside the dropship, they will do it..

That's simple "If player orders move then moveto: Destination"

Which is followed by "Holdposition at: Destination. IfMustMove, limited range: 30 'meters'."

And then it only checks the behavioral tree again if assigned a new order, though from there "IfHoldFire = No, then Open Fire on Red Doritos"

"IfHoldFire = Yes, then Ignore Doritos"

There isn't even a react to fire clause, which you can test by shooting your ally after telling them to move to a position.
Edit: There is in a separate package referencing AI barks. However the only call is to play a random assortment of voice recordings stating that they're under fire and requesting permission to fire back. The actual mech does not react when under orders to hold fire. (They will look at red doritos in range, but this is default behavior, and if you get two doritos at about the same range they jostle back and forth auto-aim-switching.)

Hold fire, move to position.
Will not react to enemy fire. Will not react to friendly fire.

It doesn't even pretend to be alive by looking around.

Edited by Koniving, 04 December 2019 - 10:31 AM.

[Mystere]

Koniving, on 03 December 2019 - 05:43 PM, said:

I have actually just discovered some neat **** in the RTS toolkit for unreal engine 4, including premade Command AI (which I can use as a base for mw5's HQ) as well as premade squad ai that treats multiple bodies as a single unit, i.e. a squad of infantry that can act and tax the system as a single ai unit. So, if I use some lower poly but well-textured models I could put infantry on the ground and have them orchestrate to set up support guns and provide possible attacks from on or near buildings, as well as utilize a premade apc script to have them be able to board and disembark from vehicles ...

All for just 5 bucks to be able to use in my own games or modding. As you can imagine I already bought it.

Link please.

FRAGTAST1C, on 03 December 2019 - 07:28 PM, said:

It might probably be a design choice. "Let's have some war crimes in the game".

Was there really any war in which no war crimes were committed.

Ilfi, on 03 December 2019 - 08:34 PM, said:

Which one is it, lads?

It was by two different people. As such, it's a silly question.

[Koniving]

Mystere, on 04 December 2019 - 09:08 AM, said:

Link please.

https://www.unrealen...trategy-toolkit
https://www.unrealen...lug/rts-toolkit

I went with the one by fat cow games... and it was 4.99 yesterday. Now not so much.

Now it being a tool-kit, there's still the effort in making it compatible with what's going on in Mw5. But it makes an interesting starting point because it can show me how a controlling AI is done without having to resort to a Finite State Machine...which I'd really hate to have to do.

[Koniving]

The infantry thing is an added bonus, because I needed a way to chain multiple meshes that move and animate separately to a single AI entity in order to have a resource-saving way of doing infantry on the field.

In this way, I could chain 5 (and hopefully up to 12) lower poly "soldiers" to have them perform specific actions in the field like set up Support MG, Support Laser, and Support Pulse Lasers.
(note: Effective ranges against infantry listed for each... SPL, 1,500 meters....)

Eventually, hoping to have them be able to do this.



Though the dropship I really wanted to try for it isn't in the timeline.

https://www.sarna.net/wiki/Seleucus


It's an infantry / battle armor troop transport dropship.

Another wanted choice...

https://www.sarna.ne...(Combat_Vehicle)
Also not in production yet.

Wait, found one. Funny enough I found it by searching for the weapon I wanted Omicron 950 ML...

Note both the Pinto and Cobra have it stated that the Omicron 950 is more flash than umph...
https://www.sarna.ne...(Combat_Vehicle)

I think that's important, because it's the predecessor to the Omicron 950 MPL... and it's also canonically the first prototype MPL.. at 1 ton and 4 damage, 3 heat (accumulatively, it fires like a machine gun). Cheap, economic, worthless to the average mechwarrior but sufficiently overkill for lighting up a drop zone against infantry when delivering infantry.

See spoiler for more info.

Edited below. Not by kilowatt/hours per millisecond. It was Megajoules per shot.
(Omicron lasers are numbered by the Megajoules per shot, so while the 3000 and 4000 have a lot of umph to them, the Omicron 950 is actually a civilian class laser weapon meant for dealing with unruly hostile animals, later evolved by the Terran Hegemony to produce the first pulse lasers in 26...2610 I think? 2609...)

Spoiler

(For comparison, Omicron 3000, 1.25 per shot, 4 shots in under 5 seconds to get 5 damage. Omicron 950 rounded up to 0.4 per shot, 10 shots to get 4 damage in under 5 seconds against 1x armor/structure [so 10 shots to get 8 damage in current MW5). Not a laser you'd want to keep, but fittingly underpowered for a troop transport to harass you with as it passes by to drop off infantry.)

Btw need help picking a look for the Omicron 3000. Below are two references, one from the 1980s and one from 2017 as the new official look. Below that is the Diverse Optics 2.

Spoiler

Omicron 3000 using Stinger 3050 unseen, (just need to modify 25% of the gun to avoid being copyright stealing Harmony Gold)




Omicron 3000, 2017 Newseen?

Preference?

This was the Diverse Optics 2

Which I actually used the Macross art of the Wasp I printed ages ago to start it but discovered I had that Stinger art with the same gun drawn and a few more details I didn't have that I'll be including.

It's not finished yet, obviously.

Edited by Koniving, 04 December 2019 - 10:27 AM.

[Koniving]

Mister Blastman, on 04 December 2019 - 08:31 AM, said:

Does the AI torso twist to spread damage?

No, but it gives the illusion when it changes target based on range preference, especially if it rapidly changes when you "mess" with it.

Quote

Does the AI twist to keep their strong side facing the enemy while defending the weak side?

No.

Quote

Does the AI peek to see if the area is clear before exposing themselves fully?

No. Behavior is they auto-aim toward the nearest red dorito while navigating, sometimes without any feasible way to see where they are going, yet able to navigate just fine provided they aren't going too fast. Edit: If no dorito is detected, they simply look straight.

Quote

Does the AI utilize hit and run tactics?

No, but mechs of a certain AI package perform a "circle of death" with occasional breaks that could only be described as "headless chicken syndrome."

Edit: Technically vehicles do. Sorta. It isn't done very well, but you can see them try to get into a range, fire a few times and then try to evade the crosshairs. In practice it looks more like they try a loop first, then that's affected by aiming at them (so you can actually steer them and direct them around by aiming at them). It's actually a lot of fun to do this, isolate a vehicle and have fun.
Aircraft does..to a very limited extent. For some reason aircraft has a deliberate preference to fly in front of you more often than not, likely so as to not be too frustrating to fight off.

Edit 2: See end of post.

Quote

Does the AI understand the virtue of focus fire and single out one friendly target--likely the most dangerous or most exposed and pour all firepower onto target until dead or has retreated?

No.
AI has a preference of range and will target any enemy at the closest point to that preferred range, while trying to stay at that range (which is probably why headless chicken syndrome starts when you 'mess' with that range). They do not focus single targets intentionally, the target is just in that ideal range for multiple AI and they'll switch the instant something else enters that range.

They do have the concept of recognizing the retreat, with an earlier version of the beta "recognizing it" as moving at an away-angle from the AI at 16 kph...
Now they're quite a bit more aggressive, but if you run away and do not engage, they will start "missing" you more often (which is intentional, the game uses a basic aimbot with a selector picking body parts at random with a very low to 0% chance of headshots depending on the AI package, so the only reason to miss with lasers is to intentionally miss).

Quote

These are only basics I'd hope the AI would be capable of. There's much, much more I would like it to be able to perform, too.

Then like for JYI and myself, this AI fails to reach the basics of what is expected.

To be fair though, preference of exposing strong or weak sides isn't within the behavioral tree and would need to be added in by a coder. So it's not something I could add in either.

Last edit:
Javelin may have some hit and run behavior. It'll be worth studying, but it likes to run directly at you, launch an attack, run past, and then a loop leading into a circle of death if close enough. However once you aim at it the circle of death breaks (usually accompanied with immediately firing if possible) and running away followed by another loop which if you pursued results in another circle of death but if you kept your distance resumes the original "rush at and then past you" behavior.
That's the closest thing to hit and run and I've only seen the Javelin do it. I chalked it up to a fluke but it's repeatable.

So 1 check of 6.
In the words of Rare during the development of Goldeneye in 1995 [3 year development cycle] when wanting to stray from the conventions of Doom and Wolfenstein: "A good AI could be having existential conversations about life, the universe, and everything but it means nothing if the player can't see it. Show the AI. It's important for the player to see the AI and what it is doing."

Edited by Koniving, 04 December 2019 - 11:18 AM.

[Koniving]

(Also sorry about all the edits. )

(Followup on the golden eye tidbit. The AI is heralded as great though it has many issues that MW5's AI has... but because it's good elements are demonstrated to the player, we believe it's amazing. A combination of animations and "States" give us an illusion of life that isn't actually there, making them seem far more amazing than they really are. MW5 doesn't even try to show the qualities of its AI.)

And it's sad, because the AI does have some awesome traits..

For example, the fact that the helicopters will try to run from LRMs locked onto them...
But you go to aim at them and they don't react allowing you to easily shoot them down with an AC.
So what was the point if they don't showcase the fact that the pilots wanna live? It's only showcased f you lock them with LRMs, and as such the immersion and illusion of smart AI is broken because the expectation of "What would I do in that situation?" is not met with an appropriate reaction.

I mean they have that skill in for vehicles... Aim at a vehicle on the ground and it'll do figure eights and loop in circles and all kinds of things to very slowly evade your crosshair. So why do the helicopters not also try to evade you? Instead, PGI chose a 70%+ preference to attack you from within your sight, so if a helicopter is behind you there's over a 70% chance it'll fly in front of you before shooting or shoot on its way to get in front of you. Why? Welp it's intentional to keep you from getting frustrated... but because of this, they seem to have left out the "I don't wanna die lets evade player's aim" clause... Instead we have the "Hold still so Russ can finally get the joystick crosshair on me" clause.

The good traits need to be front and center, there's no point in good AI if it only happens the moment a player turns a corner to shoot them. It needs to be evident throughout. Lost signal? Patrol patterns. Lost communications with someone? Send a few of the nearest units out to investigate and search the area. Identify wreckage and search.

Arkham Knight's AI was heralded for being great...but it's pretty simple too. What sells it is that it does what is expected of people for the situation.

Watch as the guy messes with the AI.
Extremely simple behavior, but it's sold by animation and barks.
Skip to 4:40 for explanation of the AI finite state machine.
Skip to 6 minutes to watch AI get messed with.

In MW5, if you get into an undetected state, the AI either stands still or walks in small squares, unless spawned with seek out player in which case they go toward the last known position of the player and from there they'll stop for a bit and then instantly know where you are and change to it.. (Why squares?? See MW5 Mercs "War Stories" for the answer, watch the map editor in action and it may make sense.)

Edited by Koniving, 04 December 2019 - 12:10 PM.

[Jackal Noble]

Koniving, on 04 December 2019 - 08:49 AM, said:

Navigation is basic Unreal Engine nav mesh and has nothing to do with PGI's AI.

15 seconds to get it to do that without the droning explanation for first-time users.
Instead of choosing a random spot on the nav mesh, the AI just has the goal of "reach the red dorito" instead. (which this also shows them being able to jump if they needed to without additional instructions).


A technology around since the mid-2000s.

In comparison, if I did that back in the early 2000s...

The path nodes are created by the apples, and again have nothing to do with actually programming the AI. If you want them to follow a specific path you add in path nodes along them so that they don't collide into walls. (Oh god the dial-up... the 16 MEGABYTES of ram...I hated that computer so much... but look at what I could run on it.)

Animations I could run on it... (Actually made in 2002, but made into videos on a newer computer in 2006 with the footage upped from 8 fps to 16 and I think 16 to 32. Hammer Blaster's closer to 2004/2005, but the files were from what I had as a 2006 backup.)


Spawn point + track you to where the enemies last seen you (an inherent behavior of Unreal Engine if the AI is simply given the initial instruction "Go to last known" + "Engage at longest range" which is the default behavior of assault and heavy class mechs of classification "Ranger."
Now you have mechs that stand on a hill.

As said in the video on my mod thread, "Build the AI simple and people will create stories and think it's a lot smarter than it really is."


If you weren't at the last known location, basic MWO radar mechanics is what enables to them to find you because if one enemy can see you then you show up on the radar of all enemies within range to see your dorito. They automatically aimbot their way to the nearest red dorito.

More impressive behavior is if they CANNOT see you, and you sneak up behind one...and they do not react. That's impressive because it means that they follow the same rules we do.
But once you enter stated range of their longest ranged weapon, they "detect you" within 360 degrees in that circle.

This is why when I enhanced engagement range to twice that of the longest range weapon, they now react to me sneaking up on them at that new range regardless of where I am in relation to them once I enter that range they all "activate" and torso twist to face me. The arms literally SNAP into action because they aimbot my way.



And now I realize you're not saying the enemies did this, but they're the wingman AI doing it because you ordered them to with the F1 through F4 commands. You ordered them onto the cliff and then they're just staying stationary in a target place (they'll do that anywhere, if you order them to stand at X they will literally stand at X and either not move or if they're forced to move they stay within "30 meters" of given destination... I kid you not for some reason they're permitted only 30 meters to move, so one hex. Nice one PGI, you limited them to one Hex of movement. *Clap, clap, clap* PGI actually can check the source material once in a while).

(In Battletech Battlemech Manual, "called shots cannot be done if the mech is not considered immobile, powered down or the pilot unconscious. Even if the mech cannot move out of its hex, it still has 30 meters to thrash around and dodge fire in.")

Unfortunately the fact that your AI did this after being told to stand at the hill is Significantly less impressive than the enemy AI doing this by circumstance.

The more I read your and Jyi's posts about A.I. and what 'you guys think A.I. is' and or how it works I'm realizing you've both bit off more than you can chew. Like seriously, I don't care how many videos you post (from the exact same source) it's not going to influence anyone
No offense, I like your enthusiasm but you have said a lot without actually saying much, if that makes sense to ya.
You leave a long post with lots of words, with neat, fictional seeming ideas full of creative criticisms and fanciful solutions. It's cute at first, but when I have to read through it makes no sense and smacks of insanity.


The important bit
Example 1 - I'm not sure you realize what happened in that photo, or if your logic created a different, convenient narrative.
I ordered my lancemate AI to follow me -one command, they followed me around the big hill to the back from the city center and then proceeded to auto-engage appropriately. At no point did I issue another command, and despite moving all over and around, not one of the lancemates misread that movement on the cliff and walked off.
Here's why that's impressive - in a sandbox setting it can be difficult for A.I. to recognize terrain and drop off points, or drop-off points that should not be traversed.

If you can't appreciate that for what it is... Do yourself a favor and make a game with all of this 'Deep-lurned' AI and proceed to become rich.
ugh.

Edited by Jackal Noble, 04 December 2019 - 12:26 PM.

[Jackal Noble]

That might have come out a little strong.
What I meant to come across as was look, I'm aware of your posting history, having seen and read some of your many posts regarding how 'you' would like to make 'your' ideal game and seem to have worked out all of the trappings on how the a.i. in it would work. That's great and all but it lacks one thing - actual substance. You haven't actually made a game, where all the gears turn properly enough and the engine starts and everything is chugging along without a hitch.

PGI actually made a game - a good one at that - and it's not exactly accurate to bring in a bucket list of material(literally spanning 25+ years) from various genres just because the video has 'A.I.' in the title.

If you want to be accurate, compare what you know of Mechwarrior 5 to all of the previous Mechwarrior titles and then we can talk. I would be curious about that as I've played 2 and 3, parts of 4 and would like to see that type of breakdown. As in strictly those titles, not Goldeneye 64 chrissake lmao.

[Anomalocaris]

I think you're missing the point of Koniving's posts. He's not only describing what he'd like to see in an AI, but he's actually digging into how the UE AI functions work. And that's exactly what PGI is using in MW5 to drive their AI combatants.

So in developing a knowledge base about UE AI functions, he's providing an understanding of what PGI has done and what _can_ be done with the engine. He's laying the groundwork for aftermarket optimization of the AI within the strictures of UE and the desires of the modding community.

Yes, he's pointed out plenty of poorly optimized/constructed/designed behavior in MW5. How could he not, the AI in the demo is pretty weak by any standard. But he's also providing useful information on fixing it, if PGI isn't going to do it.

I've found Koniving irritating at times in the past with his way back posts that felt like they had no relevance to the current game. But on the topic of the MW5 AI, he's doing everyone a favor IMO.

[A1Ste4kSauce]

Yeah, the game looks great in so many ways. Pissed I didn't pre-order for the demo, but I never pre-order, so yeah. It has some problems, but the core game looks fun. I hate epic and what Russ did, but I already waited an eternity for MW5. PGI pulled it off. The game is potentially going to be a huge hit, maybe not at first, but some time after release. The salt will flow from people here who seem to want it to fail.