Darkmath Posted July 28, 2007 Share Posted July 28, 2007 I am still waiting my CMSF DVD box by mail delivery. So I played the Demo meanwhile. In the tank battle scenario, I send 2 abrams to cross the hill to attack AI's T72s. While I stay one or two turn at the top on the hill then attack, the T72s haven't moved from their spawn and they weren't returning fire. ALl T72 were destroyed at 100-150 metres from the Abrams. In CMX1, the AI would maneuver his tanks to the hill. So, does the AI behave differently in the final version 1.01? DO you encouner some passive AI like it is in demo or beta version? All in all , how do you like the AI in comparison with CMX1? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
George MC Posted July 28, 2007 Share Posted July 28, 2007 The strategic AI behaviour is 'written' by the designer i.e.e the designer sets out a plan for AI allocated units. What you have to mind is that at night or poor vis the US forces have better spotting abilities due to IR optics and such stuff, the T72s tend to be slower to spot. Also the demo was designed to be reasonably 'gentle' to the US player - but mind the AI does have differant plans in this. Play it again and the AI might do stuff differantly... Cheers fur noo George 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guinnessman Posted July 28, 2007 Share Posted July 28, 2007 Played the 'Al Amarah' scenario, was quite impressed with the way the AI handled the insurgents. They pulled back from buildings on the edge of the town to buildings deeper inside the town once the incoming fire got to hot. I had to go in and dig the buggers out instead of just Mk19ing them to death... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
George MC Posted July 28, 2007 Share Posted July 28, 2007 Originally posted by Guinnessman: Played the 'Al Amarah' scenario, was quite impressed with the way the AI handled the insurgents. They pulled back from buildings on the edge of the town to buildings deeper inside the town once the incoming fire got to hot. I had to go in and dig the buggers out instead of just Mk19ing them to death... He! He! It works! I did the AI plan for that but took ages to work out timings. Glad it did what I intended I think for many future built scenarios the make or break will be the time the designer puts into designing effective AI plans - they do require a lot of playtesting. All in all though this type of start AI planning is way ahead of the old CMX1 AI in that you can get the CMSF AI to do all sorts of tactcially correct actions. Cheers fur noo George 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darkmath Posted July 28, 2007 Author Share Posted July 28, 2007 The AI might be a good opponent in scenario, but I've read a lot of complaints when it comes to QBs, in which AI has pre made objective, especially in meeting engagement. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Dorosh Posted July 28, 2007 Share Posted July 28, 2007 Originally posted by George Mc: If you can get the timing right. Eventually, I'd prefer a "reactive" type AI that responds to battlefield stimuli rather than the clock. I'd also like it to cook me breakfast and cure the common cold. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
George MC Posted July 28, 2007 Share Posted July 28, 2007 Originally posted by Darkmath: The AI might be a good opponent in scenario, but I've read a lot of complaints when it comes to QBs, in which AI has pre made objective, especially in meeting engagement. The challenge with QBs and the Strat AI is you don't know what the player will buy. Makes it hard to design a generic plan. I suspect (not having done QBs) that your AI plan might work better with defend type scenarios but trying to write an effective AI plan for a non-disclosed set of units is a challenge I think. When I have time I'll see if I can come up with something that does the job, but from what I've done so far I'm not sure whether anything will be the same as a custom built scenrio where the deisgner can test out plans with a set load of units. I suspect the closest you can get will be an attack plan like the old CMX1 AI which is basically set to 'charge' with lot's of stuff coming on as reinforcments so you get waves. Cheers fur noo George 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darkmath Posted July 29, 2007 Author Share Posted July 29, 2007 I also notice problem with AI in WEGO mode in the demo. When AI moves his units, the move order is such that units always accomplish it in the middle of the turn. They are never performing orders in all the 60 seconds turn, but in the 30 first sec. then wait the other turn to continue! Does that bug still exist in retail version? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cornfleek Posted July 29, 2007 Share Posted July 29, 2007 I've noticed that AI only takes worthwhile shots, which is a good thing, but seems like passive AI. I've been facing a passive T55 with an M1, I made a little mistake (fast & target under same key, nooo!), gave the t55 my flank, and boom, gone was my m1. I'd say that some of this AI thinking is a bit annoying, it also shows up I think when blasting through walls. I'd like to open up 3 segments, but AI seems to think that 1 segment blown is enough, and refuses to blow the segments next to it. Might need some tweaking. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Janster Posted July 29, 2007 Share Posted July 29, 2007 Unless its static defense we're talking about..the AI will not engage my forces or move or basically do anything in QB.. Janster 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darkmath Posted July 29, 2007 Author Share Posted July 29, 2007 Following the manual ,the devs claims the AI is not more the dynamic AI we used to play against in CMX1, meaning the AI need some rules in order to be challenging. But when those rules doesn't fit with a situation, then AI become passive again by default. AI seem to not be able to improvise in CMSF while had a generic plan in previous CM. I think the passive AI by default is not a good idea, but it may be unrealistic to fit the WWII AI plan in the assymetrical warfare of CMSF. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darkmath Posted July 31, 2007 Author Share Posted July 31, 2007 bump 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aka_tom_w Posted July 31, 2007 Share Posted July 31, 2007 Originally posted by George Mc: The strategic AI behaviour is 'written' by the designer i.e.e the designer sets out a plan for AI allocated units. .. Cheers fur noo George a GOOD AI needs a GOOD AI plan and a GOOD AI designer, the beta testers have been learning how to do this as FAST as possible, there may only be a handfull really TOP LEVEL elite AI designers at this time. Seriously, this should not be unexpected. (Let me explain, you need two things to be done well, FIRSTLY the AI designer, must be a SOUND understanding of military tactics and come up with a tactically superior plan or strategy, (not everyone can do this) THEN its like using a sledge hammer to fix a swiss watch, to get the timing right in the way you intend to have the AI respond at the right time, so you need a good plan, then you need to figure out how to exectute the "good" plan in the AI editor and then you need to test the heck out of it! Anyone of you who owns the game can open up the editor and try to program the AI, it takes time and patience and LOTS AND LOTS of time to learn and to test. The AI designer/editor is very powerful and VERY full featured and it is possible to make it do some REALLY cool things, but it takes many many hours to learn. [ July 31, 2007, 04:38 AM: Message edited by: aka_tom_w ] 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted July 31, 2007 Share Posted July 31, 2007 deleted per user request 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taki Posted July 31, 2007 Share Posted July 31, 2007 Sometimes i play the Game i really dont think that there is any TacAI at some point. Vec. under Fire dont drive back in Cover, Squads getting Casaultys dont retreat. There is no Moral Simulation in the Game. So from my Point of view i cant assess an AI that isnt there. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Panzer76 Posted July 31, 2007 Share Posted July 31, 2007 Problem is that since the "start ai" now is made by the scen designer, it can range from sucky to good. And its only good one or two times, since there are only so many strat ai plans to choose from. So you quickly understand what the AI will do. Also, you are limited to what the designer think what you as a player are gonna do. Like, set up trigger points etc. If those arent triggered, the units just sits there. Looks awefully dumb. Further, the TacAi is poor. Yes, not mediocre or anything, its poor. It will sit there in face of overwelming firepower and just die. It will stand up and casually walk into the street under heavy fire. It will stand and trade MG fire with a tank. I really hope the TacAi will get improved, and I think it will. But I also thing it was a mistake to remove the strat ai and leave it to scen designers, alone. You wil find some good ones, but on average, Im not impressed by the quality on the included scens. There are also, bigger issues with SF, but since its not of this topic, I ll not go into that. I see there is a gem in here somewhere, but I doubt it will ever shine as bright as the CMx1 series. Infact, I dont think it wil shine at all. Here's for hopeing. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stryker Posted July 31, 2007 Share Posted July 31, 2007 The TacAI is MIA. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JOGR Posted July 31, 2007 Share Posted July 31, 2007 Originally posted by Stryker: The TacAI is MIA. I can assure you it's not. I just got my ass whooped in my own experimental scenario on a huge map. CM:SF works just as I expected. Sure it has a few glitches here and there, but nothing that will stop me from enjoying it. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darkmath Posted July 31, 2007 Author Share Posted July 31, 2007 I hope passive TacAI we encounter in some scenarios is not due to the lack of TacAI. If so, it would not take patches in order to be solved, but 3-4 months of engine rewrite. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kipanderson Posted July 31, 2007 Share Posted July 31, 2007 Hi, TacAI is the very heart of CM… it was what made CMX1 the great wargame of all time…. in my view. Strategic AI may be better done by the scenario designer, which was not very hot in CMX1. So far I have spent most of my time using the editor, what I have played, the Brandenbug scenarios and variants there of, have been outstanding. But I am a little concerned that it is only a matter of time till I experience the dodgy TacAI… which will be a great shame if it happens. . I am sure they will fix it… All the best, Kip. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dalem Posted July 31, 2007 Share Posted July 31, 2007 Originally posted by Michael Dorosh: Eventually, I'd prefer a "reactive" type AI that responds to battlefield stimuli rather than the clock. I'd also like it to cook me breakfast and cure the common cold. So they did it once, and can never do it again, like the frikkin' Silmarils? Anyway, is it true that units don't respond to fire? That seems... weird. -dale 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dirtweasle Posted July 31, 2007 Share Posted July 31, 2007 They die when shot Dale, that much is certain. Yea, seems to me the units themselves though do not pop smoke or tanks back up out of sight on there own. ...so far that I can tell anyhow. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dalem Posted July 31, 2007 Share Posted July 31, 2007 Originally posted by aka_tom_w: a GOOD AI needs a GOOD AI plan and a GOOD AI designer, No, a GOOD AI doesn't. CMSF'S AI apparently NEEDS a GOOD AI plan and a GOOD AI designer, APPARENTLY. -DALE 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dalem Posted July 31, 2007 Share Posted July 31, 2007 Originally posted by Dirtweasle: They die when shot Dale, that much is certain. Yea, seems to me the units themselves though do not pop smoke or tanks back up out of sight on there own. ...so far that I can tell anyhow. So the solution to writing a new TAC AI was to... not write one? Seems bold. -dale 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Dorosh Posted July 31, 2007 Share Posted July 31, 2007 Originally posted by dalem: </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Michael Dorosh: Eventually, I'd prefer a "reactive" type AI that responds to battlefield stimuli rather than the clock. I'd also like it to cook me breakfast and cure the common cold. So they did it once, and can never do it again, like the frikkin' Silmarils? Anyway, is it true that units don't respond to fire? That seems... weird. -dale </font> 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.