[Suggestion] Overhauling Squad AI: Advanced Tactical Orders, No Distance Tether, Dynamic Vehicle Automation, and more

Suggestions Other
1

I would prefer UNLIMITED SQUAD ORDER RANGE.
Because just like in real life, they used radio to command squad.

This would allow for more tactics, like for example you observe from watchtower and command your squad from there on the battlefield.

ADD TACTICAL ORDERS:

TACTICAL ORDERS

1. Combat & Engagement Behavior

  • Suppressive Fire: Command a bot to fire continuously at a specific window, trench, or bush, even if they don’t see an enemy. This applies a suppression effect to enemies, allowing the player to flank safely.
  • Hold Fire / Stealth Mode: Bots will completely stop firing unless they are directly spotted or shot at. Perfect for pulling off undetected flanks through forests or urban areas.
  • Watch Sector: Order a bot to lock their vision onto a specific 90-degree angle (e.g., covering a specific flank or a doorway). They will immediately spot and engage anyone entering that sector.

2. Dynamic Vehicle & Crew Automation (Tanks, APCs, Armored Cars, etc.)

In WWII, vehicle coordination was highly fluid. Personnel frequently moved between driving, gunning, and stepping outside the vehicle to scout from ridges, trenches, or watchtowers, directing their crew via radio. We need a system that offers absolute tactical freedom with no artificial restrictions across any vehicle type:

  • Inside the Vehicle (Commander - Crew Assist): You can stay in the Gunner seat of a tank or APC, and simply order your AI Driver to “Drive here and hold.” Or you can drive the vehicle yourself and mark an enemy position/infantry squad for your AI Gunner to automatically engage.
    And also command entire crew or just some of them to repair vehicle.

  • Outside the Vehicle (Remote Command): You can physically exit your vehicle (tank, APC, or armed motorcycle) at any moment, push forward as infantry, and use your radio/binoculars to coordinate it from a distance. You can look back and order your vehicle crew to “Advance” or “Provide heavy suppressive fire on that trench” while you’re outside. And crew AI should automatically go out off the vehicle if it’s on the fire to extinguish it, else it stays inside and only starts repairing minor damage if you give order to the Crew, but if transmission is broken they start repairing it autonomously when you give order to advance.

Important Note: This functions as an optional, toggleable mode. If you prefer to play traditional style, you can still go inside the tank and control it completely manually (manual driving/aiming), get out from the tank etc. Remote orders only activate when you use your squad’s radio.

  1. Utility & Environmental Orders
  • Man Stationary Weapons: Command a bot to take control of an Engineer’s built MG, anti-tank gun, or AA gun and actively use it to defend the area.
  • Remote Fortification (for AI Engineers): Instead of switching characters, you could use your radio to command an AI Engineer in your squad to build a pre-selected blueprint (like a Rally Point or Ammo Box) at a distance while you provide cover.
  • Breach & Clear: A command for assault squads. When targeted at a room, the first bot throws a grenade inside (if equipped), and the rest of the squad immediately rushes in to clear the space.
  1. Logistics & Survival
  • Medical Support: Call an AI Medic to your position (or to another wounded squad member) via radio to heal or provide medkits automatically without having to switch soldiers.
  • Scavenge Ammo: Command bots with low ammunition to automatically search nearby dead bodies or ammo crates to resupply themselves.

Why this change makes sense

Removing the distance restriction and adding these orders would completely change the gameplay for the better. It would make squad management feel truly tactical, reduce frustrating bot deaths caused by the AI “rubber-banding” back to the player, and justify the presence of larger squads on the battlefield.

That would make this game truly alive, right now it is like (spawn → move → (optional) kill enemy → die → respawn). It’s strictly limited boring gameplay. Squad must stay within range. If not they, move towards commander and mostly die during that.

– Tactical freedom is what makes game engaging, enjoyable and fun.

Should Advanced Tactical Orders and Vehicle Automation be added to Enlisted?

  • Yes, this is exactly what squad-based game needs!
  • Yes, but only the infantry orders (no remote vehicle control).
  • No, the current simple commands are enough.
  • No, it sounds too complicated for the AI.
0 voters

Technical Implementation (FOR DEVELOEPRS)

Modularity via GOAP / Intent-Based AI

To prevent code bloating and avoid hardcoding every single tactical order, this system can be implemented using a modular Goal-Oriented Action Planning (GOAP) or an Intent-Based Behavior Tree framework.

Instead of writing custom scripts for each command, developers only need to define a small set of universal Atomic Actions (building blocks) and let the AI compile them dynamically based on updated priorities (blackboard keys) sent via the radio/command menu.

A quick note to the Gaijin Devs: I am more than willing to provide active support, break down the logic further, or help test these features if you find this concept interesting. This isn’t just a blind wish-list; I genuinely want to contribute to expanding Enlisted’s tactical potential and would love to help in any way possible.

Related References

2 Likes
2

Wrong time period, WW2 radios only really began appearing on the squad/platoon level, and more reliably on the company level. That’d mean, at best, a squad might have one radio - which was used to communicate with other units (more often higher up), not within the unit. Within the unit, the squad/platoon commander would have to either command his troops directly, or send either is XO or a runner/batman to do it in person.

This was just a correction for the history, I don’t have anything towards greater holding range (just not unlimited). Classic “I agree (partly), but it was argued poorly” moment.

Maybe you should lead with suggesting a suppression mechanic, first…?

Already exists.

Partially exists. Any marks you place will alert the AI in your squad, and they will look in that direction.

No… this did not happen, and the fault is again with the radio - a dismounted commander would not simply be carrying a spare set with him.

Yes, vehicle crews did dismount at times, to scout ahead without exposing the tank itself - useful when you want to get a look over a hill or past the edge of a forest. This did happen, and was even standard practice (at least within the British Army), but that crewman would then return to the vehicle to provide the information, not reporting back on a radio he wouldn’t have.

The irony here is that… you can already do all of this. The keybinds for moving the tank and aiming the turret represents this cooperation of the crew. We don’t need to seperate out the roles to this sad degree… you drive, you aim and fire, because you are the commander - representing the delegation of roles going on within the tank.

Tanks were not APCs, either be part of the crew or play as infantry, you can’t have your cake and eat it too.

And still no seperate radio for the commander here, again…

If you want the coordination, do you know what we already have…? That’s right! Friendly marks! You could also squad up with other people, and they can be your eyes and ears.

I would not be opposed to this.

Again… with what radio…?

Never mind… the idea of remotely putting down buildings is not a good one… there’s no way in hell any AI would be intelligent enough to place buildings in logical or intelligent positions. This is fantasy, place the blueprints yourself and have the AI build them instead.

A “throw grenade” order would be interesting - but it would likely also just get your soldiers killed, because the AI can’t cook grenades properly and the grenade will get thrown back at you by the enemy’s AI in turn (they’re quite fast when it comes to grenades).

I can’t think of how to make a “aggressive squad order” not be either an entierly abused function, or why you wouldn’t just have it on at all times… “Do I want my AI to be more alert and start shooting the enemy faster…? Yes please.”

Still no radio.

AI medics already heal on their own, if left to their own devices, as far as I am aware.

Ammo compatability issues, both in-game and IRL concerns. You can’t resupply Garands with Carbine or British ammunition.

A “ressuply from ammo crate”, either autoamtically or as an order, would be much better, and simple.

Way to many items to vote on, seperate your ideas and make new and seperate suggestions out of them.

image

5 Likes
3

Thanks for the feedback, but it seems you completely missed the point of several suggestions, and your arguments about “realism” ignore how Enlisted already functions as a videogame. Let’s break it down:

1. The Radio Argument:
You claim WW2 radios weren’t squad-level. Guess what? Enlisted literally has a Radioman class that you can put into almost every single infantry squad. The game already features portable field radios that can call in massive artillery strikes and bomber air raids anywhere on the map via a magic UI map. If a radioman can coordinate a whole artillery battery from across the region, he can surely radio his own tank or a squad member.

2. “Already Exists” (Hold Fire & Watch Sector):

  • Hold Fire: No, it does not exist in the way proposed. Currently, you can only set them to “Aggressive” or “Passive”. Passive bots still shoot back if they are aimed at. True “Stealth Mode” (Zero firing until ordered) is not in the game.
  • Watch Sector: Marking a spot tells the AI “look at this generic point”. A Watch Sector order defines an area of responsibility (a 90-degree arc) so bots actually hold a flank instead of turning around 180 degrees to look at a useless plane in the sky.

3. Vehicle Control:
You say “you drive, you aim, because you represent the delegation”. No, that’s exactly the problem. Right now, if I drive, the AI gunner does absolutely nothing. If I switch to gunner, the tank stops dead in its tracks. That is not delegation; that is a single player doing everything while 4 bots sit like statues.
As for remote control: tank commanders like Michael Wittmann or forward observers frequently dismounted to scout positions. Since Enlisted already allows players to exit vehicles and play as infantry, giving orders to your remaining crew via the squad radio makes perfect gameplay sense.

4. Remote Fortification:
“There’s no way the AI would be intelligent enough to place buildings.” Read the post again. I specifically wrote: “build a pre-selected blueprint at a distance.” The player places the green silhouette (blueprint), and the AI Engineer just goes over to build it. You already do this in-game, you just have to manually switch characters to the Engineer first. This order just removes the annoying character-swapping.

5. Ammo Scavenging & Medics:

  • Ammo: You mentioned caliber compatibility. We already have a “Request Ammo” button where bots magically hand you ammo matching your gun. The logic is already in the game code.
  • Medics: AI Medics only heal you if they are right next to you. A dedicated command to call them over saves you from having to switch characters.

Conclusion:
This suggestion isn’t about creating “fantasy mechanics”. It’s about taking systems that already exist in Enlisted’s code (pathfinding, blueprints, ammo sharing, marking) and giving the player a better interface to utilize them without annoying character-swapping or dealing with brain-dead AI.

4

Regarding “One Idea per Thread”:
This thread is focused on a single, core idea: Overhauling the Squad AI Command System. The infantry orders, vehicle automation, and distance modifications are not unrelated suggestions—they are all individual parts of a single, unified blueprint for a modern modular AI framework. Splitting this into 5 different threads would just spam the forum and make it impossible to discuss how these systems interact with each other.

5

I literally didn’t.

The truth remains the same, a squad was lucky if it got a radio. That radio would be carried and used by a radio operator, with the C.O close by to instruct its usage.

The C.O would not be commanding his unit through the radio, because the rest of the soldiers within unit did not themselves have radios. Command of an infantry squad was verbal, or through visual cues like handsignlas - or even whistles. You did not ring up your rifle section and order them to attack, you’re describing the wrong war here.

Communicating with a squad member who doesn’t have a radio…?

And what radioman class soldier exists in tanker squads…?

You’re talking out of your rear.

Huh…?

Your own words… this is how the passive mode works, AI won’t shoot unless they are under threat. This already exists.

You want the more permanent version of a mark, only for your squad.

I say you should consider directing your soldiers instead, like a true commander.

If you say so, chief, I have no idea why you are sitting in the driver’s seat in the first place.

Current gameplay does represent this delegation of roles, this is why certain parts of your tank will cease function if there is no crew to occupy it. I am not in favour of having to type out or hot-key clumsy commands to tell the AI to drive sub-optimally somewhere, or to order the AI to fire the main gun, when the WASD+mouse keys already represents this delegation perfectly well, with gameplay constraints in mind.

I already described the practice, yet you left out an important detail:

With. What. Radio???

Ammo, which your squadmates might well be carrying specifically for you… this was not an uncommon practice, that squadmates would carry spares for others. Every member of a British platoon carried spares for the Bren gunner (which could be used as a supply of rifle ammo, in a pinch), Soviet assault troops were at times supported by gentlemen carrying spare drums and box magazines.

This is an entierly fair simplification. AI also have unlimited ammo, because they’re more like extras in a movie - the focus is on the player, the hero, and he just asked [faceless soldier number 11] for a spare magazine… the script demands you hand him one.

No, they will actively seek out nearby wounded allies, if given the oppertunity to. You could put the squad on passive, if you want your medics to heal with less interruptions.

Do not redefine the rules…

Read the intent, and you should realize that “I want to direct my tank remotely” has nothing to do with “please add a suppression mechanic”, and “please remove the squad holding distance limit”, and “please let AI loot dead bodies”, etc, etc.

One idea for the suggestion, that is actionable, and that is easy for the helpers to read the feedback from.

As you can tell already, I am having about 15 different conversations right now within one reply - this is not concise, this is not clear, this is not actionable.

The fact that you’ve combined all your ideas into one single poll, makes everything worse.

2 Likes
7

Wow, you are genuinely trying to turn a gameplay suggestion for an arcade-tactical shooter into a pedantic, literal history lecture—and you’re still getting the history wrong.

Let’s clear up your confusion:

1. “What radioman class exists in tanker squads?”
Are you seriously asking this? Tanks in WWII didn’t need a “radioman class” soldier carrying a backpack radio because the tank itself was literally a driving radio station. Intercoms, throat microphones, and vehicle-mounted transceivers (like the German FuG 5 or Soviet 9-R) were standard equipment. Tank commanders constantly used them to coordinate with infantry and other units.

2. The Radio vs. Infantry:
You are obsessing over meaningless historical details, claiming that “command of an infantry squad was verbal, through hand signals, or whistles.” You completely fail to realize that Enlisted operates on abstract video game mechanics, not hard simulations.

The game already completely ignores these granular details: we don’t have a dedicated “hand signal” or “whistle” button. Instead, we have an abstract baseline UI system where you press a single key (X) and bots instantly move to a marker 40 meters away. My suggestion simply expands this pre-existing abstract interface. Forcing a literal “radio simulation” into a standard UI command layer is entirely a psychological barrier of your own making, not an issue for how game design actually works.

3. “Passive mode already does this”
No, it doesn’t. Passive mode makes bots not shoot until they are targeted or under direct threat. Stealth mode means zero firing until the player initiates contact or gives an explicit green light. There is a massive tactical difference between the two when attempting a surprise flank.

4. The Tank Controls:
You asked why anyone would sit in the driver’s seat. Maybe because some players actually enjoy tactical driving, positioning the hull, or maneuvering while wanting their AI crew to handle the turret suppression? Right now, if you drive, the AI Gunner is dead weight. Saying “WASD represents delegation perfectly” is just a massive cope for a clunky, outdated mechanic.

5. One Idea per Thread:
An overhaul of the AI Command System is one single, core concept. Giving examples of how that system applies to infantry, vehicles, and distance limits is called providing a complete design specification. Breaking this down into 5 micro-threads would just fragment the discussion and clutter the forum.

If this conversation is too overwhelming for you to follow, feel free to step away. The suggestion is perfectly concise for anyone who understands game design, modular AI programming, and how Enlisted actually plays.

8

Oh, this will be good…

Right, there’s a radio. Inside of the tank.

What will you be calling it with, buckaroo…???

Intercoms were wired, they did not function outside of the tank. Microphones do nothing if they’re not plugged in, and you cant use your large, fancy, vehicle-mounted radio set if you are not in the vehicle to use it.

Either use realism, or object to it, stick to one lane please.

If you even bothered to read what I originally wrote, rather than having your AI friend translate for you (tell ChatGPT I said hi, btw), then you’d have realized that the historical objection was just that - a historical objection.

We do…? Have you never used the squad commands before…?

No, I’d rather not have to push-to-talk to give my soldiers orders, that’s why we have the wheel commands, and the few key-bind. They represent these commands.

Never noticed that your soldier shouts orders when you use a command…?

Lets agree to disagree at this point, especially since you moved the goal post.

What…?

How can you enjoy something that is not in the game…? Your suggestion literaly asks to add this to the game, you can’t be enjoying it already.

By all rights, roleplay as the driver. But when action comes, become the commander… this is a game about squads, lead it.

With lots of ideas within it. Sorry, you’re not getting my point - this is not in keeping with the spirit and intent of the rule.

Since you’ve missunderstood several of my points, and applied them where they’re not relevant to other portions of your suggestion, you should understand that this is not reasonable.

I would be more humble about complexity when using AI to (poorly) argue for me, if I were you…

Damn, you didn’t correct any of my history, this was dissapointing…

1 Like
9

Everything has already been clearly explained and debunked in my previous replies. I am not going to waste any more time running in circles with you, reading your desperate pivots, or clogging this thread with endless walls of text. Have a nice day. Also it would be nice to let others talk too.

10

Where…? :laughing:

Where did I pivot? You’re the one running in circles…

And “walls of text”…? Talk about throwing bricks in a glass house. At least I write my walls of text myself.

It’s fine, relying on AI as a writing aid, I do so too at times, but I don’t then get on my high horse and say “meheheh, it seems the topic is too intricate for you to understand, mehehehe.” I got more class than that.

You too, good sir. I hope you also extended my greetings, as I requested - no, that was not a joke.