Jump to content
Battlefront.com

Brief overview of where CM is headed

Recommended Posts

Then can you tells us why you think BFC should think its not worthwhile ?

 

Why are you asking me that? I (obviously) don't make the decisions about what makes it into the game and what doesn't. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Infantry under heavy fire already reposition (or rather, run away) automatically so I'm not really sure what is meant by 'routing' exactly.  The AI running troops away from heavy fire is why some complain about enemy soldiers sitting in the open instead of going off the map.  They are there because they were in a building before but were driven out by fire.  The only problem is that the AI doesn't know what to do with them after they have retreated and it never will on its own since different locations have to be added through an AI plan.  Unless an AI plan has been created with fall back positions the AI troops won't know where to go and you can't create fallback positions based on unit status - yet.  Currently I can have an AI soldier retreat on a timed basis or based upon a trigger but I can't have a soldier retreat based upon status. 

 

Incidentally troops do surrender in the game right now.  It seems to be function of morale level.  If you have games with all soldiers at high morale very few soldiers will surrender.  If you have games with soldiers that have low morale lots of them will surrender.

Edited by ASL Veteran

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think for routing units you would also need to factor in what effect that has on surrounding troops in the los of the routing troops. do they have to under go a morale check to see if they rout too? would we see whole sections of a defensive line routing just because one squad or even a sub squad routs? would other troops have their morale downgraded if troops are routing around them etc?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guys, I've said this before and I'll say it again. This thread is here to inform people about our plans going forward. This is not a free-for-all "I want this" and "why can't I have that" debate that moves on individual whims from topic to topic. That's what the rest of the Forum is for :) If that's all this thread is going to be, I'll have to lock it.

Steve

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I warned 'em Sheriff!

Buncha no good "feature rustlers" riding through town hoopin' and hollerin'....shootin' out the streetlights.

 

Your posts aren't helping to keep this thread on-topic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

  • Make the branching in AI orders have more conditions, make it non-binary.
  • Improve the TacAI so it's more aware of what's around it and can react to that knowledge. Including more surrendering when cut off, surrounded and about to be wiped out. Especially allow it to abort/reschedule script movement orders when it's being forced to run a gauntlet.
  • Tagging for units and AI order groups so that groups get orders appropriate to the kind of assets which will be assigned.

 

I thought we all established a while ago in a long and convoluted thread where I got called a mad man, a dreamer, and a herald of the apocalypse of wargaming in favour of child like "strategy games", that AI upgrades were either A: impossible, straight from the pages of blade runner, and not even invented yet, or a more likely B: not affordable for battlefront.

Edited by Stagler

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought we all established a while ago in a long and convoluted thread where I got called a mad man, a dreamer, and a herald of the apocalypse of wargaming in favour of child like "strategy games", that AI upgrades were either A: impossible, straight from the pages of blade runner, and not even invented yet, or a more likely B: not affordable for battlefront.

 

(Ahem)

 

Guys, I've said this before and I'll say it again. This thread is here to inform people about our plans going forward. This is not a free-for-all "I want this" and "why can't I have that" debate that moves on individual whims from topic to topic. That's what the rest of the Forum is for :) If that's all this thread is going to be, I'll have to lock it.

Steve

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Modeling human behavior under fire has no simple solution. Who is to say what a green troop will do if taking fire from front and flank. Maybe they will just hide in place and not run away / rout at all. Poor quality troops should tend more for self preservation with less concern about their comrades and the mission. Even in a small unit like a platoon the response to fire will be individual. If the player retains control of their troops receiving fire they decide if a tactical withdrawal make sense. Once they lose control, the TAC AI has to model what is the best course of action - hide in place, run for the hills. Perhaps a "retreat" command that takes the unit off map using a faster or most concealed route? With AI plans, the map exit makes sense. A new waypoint would need be to be developed. How to score off map retreats should not be too hard.

Kevin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guys, I've said this before and I'll say it again. This thread is here to inform people about our plans going forward. This is not a free-for-all "I want this" and "why can't I have that" debate that moves on individual whims from topic to topic. That's what the rest of the Forum is for :) If that's all this thread is going to be, I'll have to lock it.

Steve

Then you should have locked the thread right away.

If its only for people posting "great" then i see no point in it staying open.

 

Infantry under heavy fire already reposition (or rather, run away) automatically so I'm not really sure what is meant by 'routing' exactly.  The AI running troops away from heavy fire is why some complain about enemy soldiers sitting in the open instead of going off the map.  They are there because they were in a building before but were driven out by fire.  The only problem is that the AI doesn't know what to do with them after they have retreated and it never will on its own since different locations have to be added through an AI plan.  Unless an AI plan has been created with fall back positions the AI troops won't know where to go and you can't create fallback positions based on unit status - yet.  Currently I can have an AI soldier retreat on a timed basis or based upon a trigger but I can't have a soldier retreat based upon status.

With routing we mean exactly that, basically "running away, leaving the battlefield (which is the map)."

 

I thought we all established a while ago in a long and convoluted thread where I got called a mad man, a dreamer, and a herald of the apocalypse of wargaming in favour of child like "strategy games", that AI upgrades were either A: impossible, straight from the pages of blade runner, and not even invented yet, or a more likely B: not affordable for battlefront.

That has been said about nearly every feature ever requested anyway... :D

Edited by Wiggum15

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Then you should have locked the thread right away.

If its only for people posting "great" then i see no point in it staying open.

 

 

May I be the first to say goodbye.

 

Because I sense your time on this forum is very brief In its remaining time.

 

If you look at this thread, it was you that started it off topic once again with all your negative comments.

 

Your life must suck with all the attitude you have. I feel sorry for you.

 

So go ahead and say a few more things about what you think about the game and forum members. Because locking threads wont stop you, but banning will.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guys, I've said this before and I'll say it again. This thread is here to inform people about our plans going forward. This is not a free-for-all "I want this" and "why can't I have that" debate that moves on individual whims from topic to topic. That's what the rest of the Forum is for :) If that's all this thread is going to be, I'll have to lock it.

Steve

In that case I have a suggestion for you. Start the thread, post your plans and lock it before anybody else can have a say about it. Consensus guaranteed.

Edited by Aragorn2002

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is the Shock Force re-do still under consideration somewhere down the long and winding road?

If they followed your suggestion no one could post a question like mine and others which are on topic, or do you think allowing the people to hijack threads is okay?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm having general trouble understanding why some people are having trouble understanding what Steve said.  If you want to ask questions about why is project X not in the list or I wish project Y was higher priority or comment on the same then this is the place - in this unlocked thread.

 

If you want to push for or suggest your favourite feature feel free to create another thread on *that* topic.  If you want to create a wish list or a if unicorns could fly list then feel free to do that - same in your own thread.

 

All of the above are strongly encouraged on this forum - this is not rocket science guys.  Actually forget that rocket science is actually pretty easy - this is not brain surgery guys. :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In reality soldiers can stay hidden (prone), and from time to time raise their heads.

In CM, if the soldiers are prone, this restricts their view (ok) but they should from time to time get the LOS as if they were standing just to simulate the ability to stay hidden while still keeping a overwatch.

 

If you want LOS from the standing position, you have to stand up. Try lying down in a field of tall grass and see how far you can see, even if you raise your head a bit. LOS doesn't work that way, and there's no reason for it to be changed just to be more "gamey". Your statement is a matter of personal opinion, not a fault with the game design.

I personally advocated for an increased spotting ability while hiding many years ago, but was simply told, 'that's how it works'. Unlike you, I said 'okay', and left it at that.

The problem with most of your complaints is that they have already been done to death years ago, and we're tired of rehashing the same tired old topics.

 

Currently, infantry combat is in a bad condition and full of immersion breakers like cluster ****ing beaten up enemy units at map edges waiting for you to annihilate them.

 

Then don't advance down the map edges. Ever since the days of Shock Force, the A.I. has relied on the player to click the cease fire button when they feel the battle is over. There is a point where it auto-surrenders, but it's not perfect. Secure all of the stated objectives to your satisfaction, then hit cease fire. If you make every single scenario into a bitter fight to the finish, then you will run into groups of broken soldiers hiding along the map edge.

This is not an issue with the game engine, it is an issue with how you play the game. Stop trying to murderize the A.I. in every fight, and you'll see your enjoyment of the game go up by a huge amount.

 

Now, I would like to make an on topic point. I would like to echo the request for information as to the proposed Shock Force game engine upgrade. Is this on the back burner for the immediate future, or will work on it be done in parallel with other projects?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I warned 'em Sheriff!

Buncha no good "feature rustlers" riding through town hoopin' and hollerin'....shootin' out the streetlights.

 

way to suck up kohl   :P

 

my last post on this thread as i am definitely drinking steve's kool aid   :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If sucking up and drinking the Kool-aid means only following the decorum of just about every forum on the internet and staying on topic then I'll have a full pitcher. I'm interested in more news from Battlefront. Until recently there wasn't much of late.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

May I be the first to say goodbye.

Because I sense your time on this forum is very brief In its remaining time.

If you look at this thread, it was you that started it off topic once again with all your negative comments.

Your life must suck with all the attitude you have. I feel sorry for you.

So go ahead and say a few more things about what you think about the game and forum members. Because locking threads wont stop you, but banning will.

Thats very rude and insulting !

What you do is basically pressure the admins to ban me...a move i think is very childish.

Iam not the only one who posted slightly "off" topic stuff. Look at the requests for specific vehicles...

If you hate me (for whatever reason) then put me on your ignore list and leave me alone.

 

If you want LOS from the standing position, you have to stand up. Try lying down in a field of tall grass and see how far you can see, even if you raise your head a bit. LOS doesn't work that way, and there's no reason for it to be changed just to be more "gamey". Your statement is a matter of personal opinion, not a fault with the game design.

I personally advocated for an increased spotting ability while hiding many years ago, but was simply told, 'that's how it works'. Unlike you, I said 'okay', and left it at that.

The problem with most of your complaints is that they have already been done to death years ago, and we're tired of rehashing the same tired old topics.

Oh, i already tried that with a assault rifle in my hands and a anti-tank rocket on my back... ;)

The point is, you cant compare real terrain with CM terrain and you cant compare real infantry movement with CM movement, especially all the "micro" movement like raising your head high enough to get LOS or similar.

Thats why i think they need to work on this issue.

 

Then don't advance down the map edges. Ever since the days of Shock Force, the A.I. has relied on the player to click the cease fire button when they feel the battle is over. There is a point where it auto-surrenders, but it's not perfect. Secure all of the stated objectives to your satisfaction, then hit cease fire. If you make every single scenario into a bitter fight to the finish, then you will run into groups of broken soldiers hiding along the map edge.

This is not an issue with the game engine, it is an issue with how you play the game. Stop trying to murderize the A.I. in every fight, and you'll see your enjoyment of the game go up by a huge amount.

The problem is that many CM maps are so small that your units will spot and "murder" the fleeing enemys anyway.

What you suggested is kind of a "workaround" but still i think we need more AI features regarding routing and surrendering for a more realistic gameplay.

So, i think despite the fact that many here are very rude towards me iam still behave civilized.

If Steve does not want this discussion here he maybe can just exclude it into a "new" thread if this is possible with the forum software.

Edited by Wiggum15

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Eh, that didn't last long.

I'm closing this up because this is NOT the place to have discussions about pet feature improvements that people want to see or don't think are necessary. That's what the rest of the Forums are for. As I already said.

Steve

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...