Kieme(ITA)

Thanks for your reply. First those two other T-72 were KO but only after the T-72 alive arrived there, so its crew should conclude that there is for sure the Brad up there, the M1 arrived later. Maybe the T-72 in question could not hear the M1 but cannot ignore shots and destruction being made some tens meters behind it. Anyway tarball please note that your suggestions are referred to a possible RL situation... in this case the AI misses completely, no matter what...

So bboyle, you too can play easily any QB battle? You don't have all the bugs listed and reported? First one comes in my mind the use of explosives charges and the passages thru the destroyed walls?

Mud you're right, I didn't thought about the ambush setting. Also an AT infantry unit with such information could be really useful to decide weather to "unhide" and try a shot or not...

Hello all! Maybe someone talked about this already... anyway here it goes: in old CM1x games we had the "blast radius" reference number which was quite useful and provided a good spot to understand in a second the power of a weapon against buildings and infantry... So would it be possible to restore such information? Since it's quite difficult to understand how a 120mm HEAT round could be an infantry killer. Also seems russian equipment has much many HE rounds than US side... this could be an intriguing difference..

Now I'll prevent possible objections... -ok T-72 could not know the enemy vehicles are crippled, but anyway it should try to engage them. -T-72 crew don't have the excuse they couldn't see the enemy directly, since a lot of fighting is going on with both M1 and Brad firing at nearby enemy units (friendly to the T-72). And even with the rear periscopes the T-72 commander must spot the fight behind him between the M1 main gun and the building (with an inside HQ unit)...

I've experienced some troubles too. Did you try to aim exactly for the first floor (not gound floor) -if there's one? Maybe try to aim for the roof, sometimes I've noticed LOF will go for the facade.

Wouldn't be possible to program AI with the order to kill the nearest enemy vehicle first (keeping enemy tanks as a priority)?

Oh my, but you understand that this kind of compromise will lead to a not so good "gamey" style of play? If this is true and it gets around people will do systematically this way... Well, so much for realism :-(

Yes I'd like to see something like that (from old CM1x series just for a change), but consider also that tank engagements are quite fast, especially if playing in real time, and so you couldn't even have the time to select the right command put it on the enemy and have an idea of what where when that you got already a kill or a boomed tank... oh maybe this is the reason they took it off, it wasn't nice for RT play mode...!

Hi all! I've had some good discussions about AI and what's they way it works in this new CM game. Please consider I'm not arguing about pathfinding issues, this is another history. Actually I've some thoughts I'd like to share and a situation I've been thrown in by case that might represent the ideal description of the actual AI situation and performance. As far as I've understood there are 2 main types of AI. The TAC-AI works as the very base, it tells units to spot, engage and fire to the enemy, it tells to reload weapons and choose between them and ammunitions. This is all for vehicles. For infantry it tells also units how to get inside a building (from the door) and also will give some emergency commands like "crawl there -best protected position- if fired to" and similar to units leaving KO vehicles. The STRAT-AI is the AI planned by the scenario designer, who can work on these options: set a command "where to go" set a command "how much time there after/before exit from there" set a command "how to go" (general behaviour, active-cautious-normal) set a command "how fast to go" (speed and spotting ability balance, assault-quick etc.) set a hide command set an ambush command These are the basic commands which can be used in combination to the painting instrument available to select a certain zone to go to and in which to express these basic commands. Ok right? This is what I've understood since now. SO, this is where the discussion might become interesting ... is that ALL? I'd like to have a reply on this foundamental question, and mine for now is: yes, that is all. Think about this particular case (see screenshot): First of all I'm on US side, I've created the whole level (actually a Work in Progress): Look at it. I've a Brad and an M1 both immobilized. I've some enemy units engaged or in sight of the US vehicles. I've a T-72 who made its way where it's now by following the stratai orders I plotted before... it was the very last order of his chain of orders and so he will sit there (not inside a zone painted as objective to defend/keep etc.) it's just a spot and he is not engaging or seeing any enemy unit. The minutes pass thru.... many minutes. The T-72 will stay there 'till the end of the game I can assure you. I moved for fun 2 tanks inside its arc of fire and he killed them quite nicely (TACAI works for me). So, what would you expect from that situation as "the best thing" or the "possible things" the T-72 could do?? My two cents would go for a nice little move the T-72 could do just in front of him... some more meters and he could get an easy kill to the brad's ass thru the collapsed wall... Secondly T could do all the way around the collapsed building and get an easy shot on the M1 ass... This would be the best of the best for such a move.... this could be what a human player will do. Another kind of move could be to turn around and move to engage the M1 first, directly. Chances of success won't be high for sure, but this could be a move, a thing to do... Finally the T-72 could go another way, searching for enemy units or something like that, just because the battle is going on somewhere else, because there are still shots being fired and people being killed... [Keep in mind the T-72 crew is veteran and with high motivation (set by me for the scenario)...] So much for AI existance. There's no "medium" AI that could do anything more than executing tightly what the STRATAI told to. This is the main reason QBs don't work anymore... (first because STRATAI is absolutely necessary, and it wasn't plotted -a big and unacceptable missing for a finished game..- ; second because there's no "medium" Ai that could do even the simplest thing ever..) In old CMs we had some very basic AI... ok it wasn't able to do any smart thing, many times it was to do the worst thing ever, but at least it DID SOMETHING. At the present situation you will always go into something like this. AI will do the STRATAI plan, if the plan is a great one it will be nice game for sure, at least if the plan has the chance to go on until the end of the game (and this depends on how things will work toghether and is not a thing you can plan, since the case could make all the T-72 blown up in a second or they can survive and kill all M1s and then there's nothing... since even such a great acquired vantage is not to be used by AI...), otherwise you'll get to the struck situation of having the complete loss of initative by your enemy and you'll be able to do anything being sure enemies will keep there without a move. [ August 30, 2007, 07:31 AM: Message edited by: Kieme(ITA) ]

Hello all, I've experienced these two casual situation and wanted to report for help: I'm on US side. In the first one/two a brad has a T-72 on target and the T-72 is targeting as well. The fact is that the brad can hit with both 25mm and missiles, while the T-72 hits only and always the frontal (and already KO) brad. So this could be possible for both the vehicles or neither. Hint: Some AI could be added in order to make the T-72 move in case 4/6 shots all hit the wrong brad... In the second situation a computer-drove T-72 goes there, and it can hit with coax MG the US squad inside the building. Maybe such problems are already known, anyway I'd like to help with some screenshots. Regards, Kieme

Hello all! I'd like to post 2 screens about possible textures bugs related to structures' insides. In the first one the inside of the building is ok at lower levels but at higher leverls it's missing. In the second I've noticed that merged buildings show correct textures when looking from outside but when looking inside there's this kind of problem. Hope this helps. Regards Kieme

Please, keep in mind that if some people know to have a computer config that not only matches up to "suggested requirements" but even have higher performances it's quite right to be upset if the game doesn't work at 100% of its graphic (especially if graphic is one of the mainhorses for the new game). And keep in mind it's quite frustrating when a particular program doesn't work at 100% while so many others do. So much for computer configs.

Over 90% accuracy for first shots is sure at best conditions only (i.e. training grounds). During a modern battle you can have many supplement factors such as weather and crew. Even considering this a modern battle can't be compared to WW2 style one: -accuracy -ranges -gun-armor duels all of such have really different layouts. Still WW2 armor engagements can be much more funny and interesting, also much longer.

Tzen let us know about your scenario in the future!

Renaud that way you will model almost only the airstrip thoug... Consider also that a so big scenario might have big working problems... I agree with those who suggest to represent just a section of the airstrip and try to concentrate on other interesting features (I'm doing an airport map and will show some nice things soon).

Have you tryed playing a QB scenario? What's your experience with that? Do you have ANY of the ingame bugs reported? What system do you use to run CMSF? And with which settings?

Nice one! That terminal building will be a reference for me from now on.

LoL There was no shame in representing suicide attacks...

Well, seems that AI plans are wrong, and this is quite a big miss since there are not so many scenarios and not so many -non random- QB maps... I wonder if they were ever test played. On the other hand I still think AI is missing. Take this example: the scenario set in "high altitude" as a meeting engagement, with a little structure complex in the centre and BMPs vs Strykers. I've played it on Syrian side only, but computer will always behave in the very same way no matter what my forces are doing or where they are. This means having Strykers coming aside BMPs, moving to get behind the structure even if there's a BMP blocking the way.... So, in this map AI does what it has been told to do, but is this all? I mean, this way some really incredible situations happen one after the other... Now in this scenario AI at least makes its moves (StratAI set by scenario designer), and AI will also do (not without other flaws) some of its TacAI work (shooting enemies). TacAI works also during QBs (IF there enemy forces are there), they will shoot you if you get to their corner. So that I think that there's a problem with StratAI, plan executions and scenario StratAI Planning (missing!)... but I recognize there's a bit more beside this... seems that there's no "medium sized" AI, the one which makes the difference... In old CM1x it was quite basic, but I still remember computer could ask for an arty attack and could move its forces to attack your positions.. and there was no "stratAI" setting in scenarios designs. Now it seems all AI work (but TacAI) is on scenario designers' hands. It's a shame QBs are bugged (looks like there was "0" testing on this feature, and this is quite a not good thing..) and it's a shame it seems to be a problem related first to scenario designers' work... BUT even without such work old QBs worked... and so I'm quite annoyed with this.

Well, something like that happened. During '73 war an Israeli brackthru' Egyptian lines reached a SAM battery of SA-2. It is sure the egyptians fired point blank some missiles (and they are quite huge AA missiles) to incoming Israeli tanks, but without success... Anyway I still think that would take too much effort to make such units just for a very rare situation...

Seems that industrial equipment is completely missing. At least an oleoduct type would have been nice...

Foliage from trees will fall from both indirect and direct fire. From light fire too. This is quite great. I didn't noticed the complete absence of fire (but vehicles) though. Did you remember good old days in which a sherman on fire would se off an entire grain field? Those were days.

That stadium lookg great!!!!! Remember to add some mud

My god, a bug much more problematic then...