Bulletpoint Posted January 23, 2018 Share Posted January 23, 2018 2 hours ago, Macisle said: I think all them besides TRA are H2H-only, though. There's always a need for more high quality H2H scenarios. I'm currently playing your CMBN H2H scenario 'Under the Eyes of the White Manor' for the third time, and finding new perspectives on it. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Macisle Posted January 23, 2018 Share Posted January 23, 2018 (edited) 51 minutes ago, Bulletpoint said: There's always a need for more high quality H2H scenarios. I'm currently playing your CMBN H2H scenario 'Under the Eyes of the White Manor' for the third time, and finding new perspectives on it. Oh, wow --great! That makes me feel good. I do need to update that map, though. The White Manor is actually a level too short and therefore doesn't offer the defender the LOS that I intended. Kind of a big oversight! I actually started on a battle pack for it that would have a SP version for both sides, as well as an updated H2H version, but then I got into TRA and then the new map for CMRT and never got back to it. It's quite fun to play defending as a reinforced company of Amis against SS hordes and Panthers as AI attacker. I did some initial testing in that area back when I was working on the battle pack idea. I'm not sure if the pack will ever happen, but I will definitely do a H2H-version update. The map update itself is already done, IIRC. Edited January 23, 2018 by Macisle 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bulletpoint Posted January 23, 2018 Share Posted January 23, 2018 (edited) 16 minutes ago, Macisle said: The White Manor is actually a level too short and therefore doesn't offer the defender the LOS that I intended. Kind of a big oversight! Yes, it's an interesting map in that it has some brilliant defensive terrain, but at the same times often feels frustrating (in a good way, making me do hard choices between two or more options that are all only half optimal) because of the limited LOS for long range German weapons. Edited January 23, 2018 by Bulletpoint 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ncc1701e Posted February 2, 2018 Share Posted February 2, 2018 On 23/01/2018 at 7:24 AM, Macisle said: Posting to add my support to what RepsolCBR, ThePhantom, and others are saying about the current 16 AI Group limit. Expanding the number of groups to 32+ is my top choice for new Editor features by a mile. Others have detailed the issue, so I won't go into them again in this post. I am just wondering: is it a simple as changing a variable from 16 to 32? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glubokii Boy Posted February 3, 2018 Share Posted February 3, 2018 1 hour ago, ncc1701e said: I am just wondering: is it a simple as changing a variable from 16 to 32? YES !! Just kidding... If by "I am just wondering: is it a simple as changing a variable from 16 to 32? " you mean... - Will this ONE TWEAK turn the AI into a truly masterful commander ? - Then the answer is NO, unfortunatelly, but giving us this option is the greatest improvement to the AI we have any chans of getting within CM2 imo. To make the AI truely challeging we would also need something like CONDITIONAL TRIGGERS or atleast a significant increase in avaliable trigger options and not being limited to UNIT IN ZONE and ARMOUR IN ZONE (friendly and enemy a) as it is now. - unit spotted - friendly unit killed - enemy unit killed - unit value in zone higher then (maybe using QB purchase point to determin unit values) - unit out of zone - AI-group casualty level higher then - Specific unit in zone (unit objective nr) - AI group bombard zone - commit reinforcement group Etc, etc.. Will we get this within the current game engine ? Not very likely imo. Atleast not any time soon. An option could be that BFC somehow managed to significantelly increase the situatunal awarness and tactical skills of the AI to a level somewhat resembeling a human player. Will we get this ? NO WAY ! Will we get 32 AI-groups withing CM2 ? We might !! If by "I am just wondering: is it a simple as changing a variable from 16 to 32? " you mean... As far as programing goes...Is it as simple as changing a SIMPLE LINE in the game code ? I highly doubt it. If it was i would be truely amazed that BFC has not done it already... An increase in the number of AI groups is our best bet to improve the AI in CM2 imo...It ought to be doable... 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SlowMotion Posted February 4, 2018 Share Posted February 4, 2018 Yes, there could be more additional triggers that would make AI act more like human opponent. Some more possible triggers: - no enemy spotted (possibly within area) and actions that could be triggered: - artillery strike to (specifed location or location where enemy was spotted) - send signal to another AI group to do something. This way you could use a small team for recon and if they see for example that there is enemy in some part of the map, they would signal some armor to move to some area. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ncc1701e Posted February 5, 2018 Share Posted February 5, 2018 On 03/02/2018 at 1:19 AM, RepsolCBR said: To make the AI truely challeging we would also need something like CONDITIONAL TRIGGERS or atleast a significant increase in avaliable trigger options and not being limited to UNIT IN ZONE and ARMOUR IN ZONE (friendly and enemy a) as it is now. - unit spotted - friendly unit killed - enemy unit killed - unit value in zone higher then (maybe using QB purchase point to determin unit values) - unit out of zone - AI-group casualty level higher then - Specific unit in zone (unit objective nr) - AI group bombard zone - commit reinforcement group Etc, etc.. Will we get this within the current game engine ? Not very likely imo. Atleast not any time soon. Would be nice to have indeed. Teaching/learning the AI to use smoke is also important imo. Pop smoke to avoid a potential kill zone is often lacking when AI is attacking. At least, with patch 4.0, we did receive few enhancements: AI AREA FIRE ORDERS: The AI can now be scripted to use Area Fire! Each AI Order can have a target zone designated. AI FACING ORDERS: Each AI Order can be given a location for it to Face towards. AI WITHDRAW ORDERS: AI Groups can be ordered to Withdraw towards their movement destination. Vehicles will move in Reverse to the destination, while infantry will leapfrog back while turning around to face behind them. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RockinHarry Posted February 5, 2018 Share Posted February 5, 2018 23 minutes ago, ncc1701e said: Would be nice to have indeed. Teaching/learning the AI to use smoke is also important imo. Pop smoke to avoid a potential kill zone is often lacking when AI is attacking. At least, with patch 4.0, we did receive few enhancements: AI AREA FIRE ORDERS: The AI can now be scripted to use Area Fire! Each AI Order can have a target zone designated. AI FACING ORDERS: Each AI Order can be given a location for it to Face towards. AI WITHDRAW ORDERS: AI Groups can be ordered to Withdraw towards their movement destination. Vehicles will move in Reverse to the destination, while infantry will leapfrog back while turning around to face behind them. The AI withdraw order also can be used "offensively" in order to make use of the smoke throwing capability. It´s somewhat tricky to set up for the AI and not overly flexible, but yet a nice working expedient. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sgt.Squarehead Posted February 6, 2018 Share Posted February 6, 2018 Did anyone come up with a solution for the issue with vehicle hull facings with a Retreat order yet? In my own experiments the turrets would face in the correct Direction, but the hulls would point toward the unit's intended location. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MOS:96B2P Posted February 6, 2018 Share Posted February 6, 2018 1 hour ago, Sgt.Squarehead said: Did anyone come up with a solution for the issue with vehicle hull facings with a Retreat order yet? In my own experiments the turrets would face in the correct Direction, but the hulls would point toward the unit's intended location. It has been awhile since I experimented with this so my memory is a little foggy. In my scenario notes I have: Shift / Left click and paint a single action spot purple you want the unit to retreat away from. Face and Retreat both cause the unit group to Face and only one per order can be used. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.