Hat Trick
-
Posts
109 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Hat Trick
-
-
From Battlefront:
This seems a little defeatist to me (of course, I don't have to write the code, but still). The AI already must use some form of "fuzzy logic" to choose between (in my example) the nearby scattered trees and the farther away woods. A new option, stay put, need not have a fixed rule ("only stay put if cover is more than x meters away"); rather, the decision to stay or run to a particular piece of cover would use most of the same factors that the AI currently uses to choose between nearby scattered trees and farther away woods.This is the problem with computer code. It is inherently an asswipe about stuff like this Even using Fuzzy Logic we run into situations where it is very, VERY difficult to have the AI make a realistic approximation for what real people would do in a given situation. In one situation Sneaking even 5m would be the WRONG decision, while in another running 25m would be the correct one. Trying to establish rules for this, without unit memories, is very difficultWould such a system be perfect? No. Would people still whine about how it is implemented? Yes, but hopefully less. Reasonable people can disagree about when units should (realistically) sneak for cover and when they should stay put, but I think that most people would agree that in some circumstances staying put is clearly the best option; an option that the AI does not consider now. Given how well everything else in the game is designed, I am sure that I (and many others) would be happy with whatever "weight" BFT put on "staying put" vs moving to cover, as selected by the AI.
Finally, perhaps I'm just dense, or I'm not communicating clearly, but I don't see how this solution is a memory issue. Units may stay put, then the next turn try to sneak to cover, then next turn stay put again, or whatever (not unlike real life, I imagine). This behavior would still be an improvement over the current model.
-
From Battlefront:
That seems a little extreme. Presumably right now the AI evaluates what is the best cover to sneak to -- say, the scattered trees 20 meters away or the woods 100 meters away (and taking into account other factors, like where fire is coming from). Couldn't a thrid option for the AI to consider (in this example) be "stay put and hide"? Thus, if good cover was available .0000005m away, off it would go; if there was no good cover for 300 meters, it might stay put (of course, if your unit is 300 meters from cover, you probably do have a tactics problem, but you get the idea).A unit hit by suppressive fire would remain pinned indefinitely as long as it was fired upon. No matter where it was, even if it was .0000005m from cover. -
Great, thanks.
-
Thanks. This is very helpful.
-
Is there a guide that describes the different types of German Infantry? Specifically, what are the differences between Volksgenadiers, Sturmkompanies, Pioneers, Security troops, Pz Grenadiers, Fallschirmjager, Gebirgsjager and Volksstrum? While I can look up the weapons that they use, are there other differences between the units? If I knew what their different roles were historically I could select them with more confidence (and not be accused of "gamey" selections). Thanks for any help.
-
From Schoener
What is this about?Gorodetzky is a jew and therefore i'm extremely sceptical -
There are diffences in firepower however (press enter with a selected unit to view them). There are also different troop quality levels -- green, veteran, etc.
The "debate" about CMBB's Infantry Modeling
in Combat Mission Archive #4 (2002)
Posted
From Steve at Battlefront:
Great. This type of change is what I was asking about, and its good to know that it can be done. Thanks also for taking the time to answer my questions and consider my ideas, twice no less. Having spent 6 hours on the phone with my internet service provider to get my connection working :mad: , I have to say that I'm blown away by the service you guys at Battlefront provide.