Jump to content

ncc1701e

Members
  • Posts

    669
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    12

Posts posted by ncc1701e

  1. 46 minutes ago, chuckdyke said:

    It is a human player who plots the waypoint or an AI trigger. 

    I know. But the TacAi continues to follow impossible orders losing waves after waves. It could be less idiot by stopping orders when losing too much personal. Or maybe the scenario designer does not have the necessary tools to do a nice asssault like request pop smoke (my earlier point about more AI artillery commands).

  2. So many things I would like to see. So many things that was said in this thread and other threads.

    More AI programming, more AI artillery commands, more AI groups, triggers for reinforcements ... I agree

    Ability to split squads in vehicule... I agree

    Ability to unacquire ammos or weapons... I agree

    But, the most important to me, is to teach the TacAi that when it is done, it is done.

    When your pixeltruppen enter in a kill zone, avoid it. Find another way. I know this is not a human player. But, as soon as bullets are coming to you, run, avoid them, don't do like a terminator, you are not a terminator.

    And don't continue to try using the same way, it is done. It is done!

    hos3df.jpg

  3. On 11/16/2020 at 7:03 PM, BFCElvis said:

    These are all interesting changes. Some of the scenario makers in the crowd might want to chime in about it.

    That said, it very unlikely that any kind of changes that you are suggesting will make it into the game anytime soon (even if HQ thinks they are worth adding). They are the kind of thing that would be in an engine Upgrade, not in a patch. A 5.0 Upgrade is not even in the works yet.....For that matter, if there is ever going to be a 5.0 Upgrade has not been decided yet. I know it's not what you want to hear. And it doesn't mean that these ideas don't make it into the next incarnation of Combat Mission.

     

    (P.S. Did I ever tell you that I love your user name? I've been thinking about getting a vanity license plate for my car with some variation of it)

    Happy New Year 2021 to the Battlefront team and to you @BFCElvis!

    With the recent announcement of the 5.0 Engine Upgrade, I really hope all of the above requests could be added to your wishlist for the next engine.

    Thanks a lot

    P.S: Is your car the right size for a license plate like this? 🤣

  4. Fourth one: Revamp the Support Targets interface

    Today the Support Targets interface are pretty useless since it can only act at the beginning of a scenario for indirect fires. It contains only two button:
    1. The target to hit
    2. The type of mission (Destroy, Damage, Suppress, Smoke)

    kaVwo.jpg

    I am requesting to add few additional buttons in the interface (see carefully the following screenshot😞
    1. The AI group that will perform the attack. We can then select off map artillery units and/or air units to perform a dedicated mission (if they are in the AI group of course)
    2. The possibility to delay an attack by Exit between ...and OR better to select a trigger to wait for before calling the attack

    VWmbv.jpg

    And, a small note, if in the same AI group, I am selecting a FO team plus some off map units (artillery or air units), I am expecting the AI to move the FO team in a good spotting position.

     

    Here it is for my list, I do not think I am asking for the moon in term of changes in the interface. And, I really think these small changes can really beef up the AI of my scenario but not only. Thanks @BFCElvis for your consideration.

  5. Third one: Enhance the Unit Objectives interface

    I am requesting to pass the maximum number of Unit objectives from 7 to 16.

    eWq3j.jpg

    And same than for the Terrain Objectives interface (see carefully the following screenshot), I am adding a third button that is a trigger possibility on an Unit objective.

    XWP1g.jpg

    This third button contains the same choice between A.I. Trigger (friendly), A.I. Trigger (friendly armor), A.I. Trigger (enemy), A.I. Trigger (enemy armor)

    NWXQZ.jpg

    With the first button untouched, I can design that if an enemy unit is spotted, I can trigger something else. An air attack for example... see next post.

    dW8aa.jpg

  6. Second one: Revamp the Terrain Objectives interface

    I am requesting to pass the maximum number of Terrain objectives from 15 to 32.

    ngn0m.jpg

    The first button is indeed combining two functions (one for usual objective, one for trigger).

    9rV8V.jpg

    Thus you have to use two triggers if, for example, the occupation of one terrain objective is also a trigger to go to another objective.

     

    I would request to change the interface as follow (see carefully the following screenshot) :
    1. I am splitting the first button in two. First button still serves to say Occupy, Preserve, Destroy, Touch, Exit
    3. A new button, the third one, is a choice between A.I. Trigger (friendly), A.I. Trigger (friendly armor), A.I. Trigger (enemy), A.I. Trigger (enemy armor)

    Grm3n.jpg

    This allows much more flexibility and avoids to use two objectives for the same above example.

  7. @BFCElvis

    I am playing around AI since a lot of time now and I would like to design something cool in terms of AI responsiveness. I think few changes in the AI interface may change and ease a lot AI design and level up the AI of my scenario. So, here are few requests for you to implement. Few of them are not new.

     

    First one: Increase the number of AI groups

    Dividing units into small AI groups is the key to make good AI behavior. So I am requesting to pass the maximum number of AI groups from 16 to 32.

    3r1Rq.jpg

  8. 8 hours ago, MOS:96B2P said:

    I give each vehicle a single order action spot.  So for two vehicles each order would have 2 action spots.  It is easier to control the route they take and to keep them from getting to close and in each others way.

    Absolutely, the number of action spot is important.

     

    As per your tutorial request, please check also this one, it can give you an insight of how the AI works:

    Cheers

  9. 28 minutes ago, Roter Stern said:

    Yes, completely true. Therefore should be a complete non-issue to add it to the other NATO countries.

    However, if you currently play a quick battle as the Canadians you won't get an option to purchase anything non-Canadian.

    To best honest, I'd rather get an option to select "All Blue" and "All Red" forces as combatants in a quick battle setup. That would then also allow multi-national NATO ops, as well as a Syrian Army+UNCON mix, with the side-effect of giving Canadians and the Dutch some UAV's in QBs.

    Yes, you are absolutely right. It doesn't work in QB. And your idea is good for sharing equipment in QB.

  10. The RQ-11B Raven is already available in the game for US Army or US Marines. The good news is that you can purchase the RQ-11B Raven for Canadian or Dutch armies in your own scenario. I have just tested it, it works fine. See these Canadians working with a RQ-11B Raven.

    v4PXZ.jpg

  11. I very much like the information sharing of what the drone sees and the ability to bring indirect fires with just the drone's LOS. It is pretty well done.

    One thing I would like to ask that seems consistent to me with a 2007-timeframe. Would it be possible to add an armed MQ-1 Predator with two AGM-114 Hellfire missiles for the US player?

    I see there is already the MQ-1C Grey Eagle in CMBS. I assume it is armed. Bringing this code back by patch in CMSF2, to add a MQ-1 Predator, then seems possible although it may not be desired today. I think it will add a lot of new possibilities to the game.

    Thanks for your consideration

×
×
  • Create New...