Stagler
-
Posts
1,164 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
3
Posts posted by Stagler
-
-
The Arena-E doesn't have masts so to speak they are little plates dotted around the turret. Their supposed effectiveness at covering all arcs is suspect.
-
Polygon is generally really good for documentaries. It at least shows you how things are done, if not the entire capabilities of the system.
-
Yeah 1000 dollars probably isnt enough, i realise it would take a significant investment for BF to step down the path of AI development, and probably not be able to develop other things in leiu, but it is the choice that they have to make whether to improve engine programming, or produce new content.
One would think that a robust engine with as much longevity as possible is required first.
-
Meh suit yourself, but yes it has gone off topic of CPU vs CPU battle definately, but the facts I have stated are not baseless otherwise there wouldnt be threads about this kind of stuff coming up all the time.
I am not going to let new forum members get hammered by these "people or groups of people", and I will call them out on their actions and views. Always.
-
So you compare the PR activity of a non-profit organization with that of a profit-driven company.
Disregarding all kinds of differences, all kinds of copyright issues, platform and organization rules of all kinds.
Even, I, with no knowledge of the game industry find this funny at least.
I'd suggest you to become a professional game developer, then you might share something useful as battlefronts, in my opinion, when it comes to deeply detailed commercialization and development methods, until then yours is just an opinion from a customer.
And any other comment on the "decency" of this community could be really avoided in the future, as it's not a good start for any conversation (a bad generalization that tends to cover all members following this Group/forum since a while). If you mean another thing ("decent" and "diverse" are different words, not synonyms, and I am not an english native Language speaker) next time think twice.
Anyway, this is just the nth thread which some people want to turn into a steam debate (advertisement), and I find this boring.
I already have a career, I would prefer to have development as something I can enjoy doing instead of doing for money, that way something I am proficient at and actually like spending time on to create does not become something that causes me undue stress.
Wargame is owned by Eugen systems, a company substantially more successful than Battlefront and offering a product that is lumped in the same genre/semantics as Combat Mission, whether people on here like it or not.
AFAIK reddit is user editable and a page can be created without any copyright issues.
To put banners on another website, im sure some kind of payment would be required, advertisement costs.
What is it Keime that you think is good for Battlefront then? You must have an opinion surely, because you so strongly condemn others?
And I dont particularly care what you think about my opinion on this community, it is mine to hold and be reinforced by how newcomers are treated every time.
Notice how after new threads are made about problem x, y or z by new posters, the posters seem to disappear or not post on here again after they get hammered into oblivion by reply posts. Where has Ikalugin gone to for example?
I also couldnt give two fooks about what vehicle is used for marketing, whether that be Steam or whatever, I was making a point using an abstract example of a mass software distribution system.
Its a fact that Battlefront does not advertise aggressively. There was no general release trailer for CMBS, however there was for CMA - I remeber it on gametrailers.com. I assume Snowball paid for this advertisement cost, not Battlefront?
You are right Baneman about others not being interested and there is no point in forcing them to be so.
The problem here is, using our cricket example again, Battlefront forums is in the position of the only guy who likes Cricket in the office.
Nobody likes Cricket, no matter how many times he likes to talk about it and get them interested. If the guy decides to not talk to anyone else about cricket outside the office, like Battlefront is doing now, then the poor guy will think that he is the only one in the world who likes Cricket, and nobody else likes it despite how cool he thinks it is and how dumb they are for not enjoying it.
But if he went out to the local sports club for example, he would meet other people who also like Cricket, and he could talk to those about Cricket all day long and they would all see how good it was. But some people at the sports club also like Football and Rugby, but they like sports in general so are also interested in talking about Cricket, and wouldnt mind going to watch it as well to get into it more and make new friends.
At the moment we are the guy who only talks about cricket at the office, not down at the sports club with the other sports fans. If anyone comes knocking at our house asking to come in and watch the cricket, then asks about the rules of the game, they get shouted down and thrown out the front door.
This going further and further wide afield anyway. Like all other threads customer feedback will get glossed over and nothing will happen about it sadly.
-
Think of this example.
Talking about the cricket world cup in your office. Your office is only what, say 10 people, so lets play 1 of 10 people in the average office like cricket.
However, if you went out into the next office which has 20 people working in it, using our model that means you would find another two people who like cricket.
Its all about numbers and audience in advertisement. If you dont show them what you have then nobody will want it.
Using our basic model here, lets imagine a basic first step for advertisement. Lets say 1 of 10 people like wargames. Battlefront's PR is almost none existant. It takes research to get here to this forum.
It is how I got here. It is how most people got here, through either word of mouth or reading about it on another forum. Eugen Systems/BI Forum/SimHQ/UnitedOperations the list goes on.
Now imagine that Battlefront had aggressive advertising. Taking Burke's facetious idea for now, imagine a banner advert that would appear on some of these forums front pages to get the word out. Theres a good starting idea. There are already banner adverts on BF main page, proliferate them more.
So by proliferating the banner to say, SimHQ, which has a forum user number of say 1000 people, so theres another 100 potential combat mission players on the forum itself, but also anyone who stumbles across the SimHQ front page also and can be linked straight to the BF store.
Now lets imagine utilising a platform with an even large user base, imagine a Combat Mission reddit page.
Or imagine using an online distribution system such as, god forbid, steam to reach out to an even larger audience. Reddit and Steam have huge user bases, say at least in the hundreds of thousands, so at least that is 10,000 more wargamers if we are to look at our basic metrics again. At this time advantage is not taken of modern advertisement and proliferation methods is basically what I am saying here. At RHS, we have Reddit pages, a wiki page, a facebook group, a facebook fanpage, a twitter, steam threads, a thread on all of the websites i mentioned before - including here, and it has all cost us nothing - as we are non-profit. Wargame has its own reddit page moderated by its community manager, an employee of the company and on their pay role granted, but it is something that costs nothing to create.
-
A starter for ten would be putting the generic plans from CM1 back in.
The objective areas and starting areas marked out on the map would have to serve as a base for this AI to function on without a plan specified, and that must of been how the CM1 generic AI functioned.
Im guessing that a move to occupy objective areas was their primary directive.
The AI would have to do three things.
- Be able to split its force randomly into groups based on roughly equal point sizes.
- Know each category of unit - recce, infantry, mbt, support. This would be done by coding a unit category into each unit entry within the game config.
- Know the length of the scenario - this is specified in the QB menu, so that would have to be communicated that with the AI.
A convincing generic plan would be to split the force as stated above, and move in intervals towards objective areas, or the enemy zone if there wasnt objective areas specified (there always are in QB so this could be ommitted).
Recon would move forward in the first quarter of the game time. - the AI already knows how to call in artillery when your units are spotted.
Then MBT and Infantry category units into the objective areas in the "middle" of the game time, so the second two halves of the game time.
Support would stay in the starting zone i.e GBAD and on-map indirect fires for the entire game time.
A clear disadvantage would be the inability for the AI to pre plan fires as there was no fire zones allocated as there was no AI plan.
The set up above however would mean that when the QB AI picks its force each time it would be slightly different as it may decide to send each part of its split force to a different objective on the QB map. By hand picking the enemy AI force then further variety could be added. Also by changing the force to either infantry/mix/armour etc would add more variety.
-
I belive this community already is decent.
It could be larger, but the quality is not under discussion.
How would we endevour to expand the community then?
By decent I mean diverse. It is not very diverse - it is mostly old school wargamers and grogs.
-
I cant see where I am being antagonistic in that above post, I am sorry. I don't think they are lying, they maybe making a decision I think is the wrong one but it is my right to voice it even though people may think I am incorrect also.
The truth is that I have been suggesting these improvements for the past five years.
One of my first threads was on AI in CMA. Nothing has happened. Okay, there are some new AI plan options - but what happened to the generic one from CM1 titles. That is a retrograde as far as I am concerned.
As I said in the poll thread, I would pay for an AI upgrade. 20 dollars per game. Then pay an addition 10 per new game title to have it packaged with it.
As stated above, I will come and defend anyone who wants to see the same thing as I - whether that be AI or a proper multiplayer framework. To be frank, the attitudes of some of the CM community to strangers and newcomers that ask questions like "why cant we do x y z", or "why isn't there x" is downright toxic.
-
Whatever. Slamming the game as being "90s" tech is going to get you the response it got. Hyperbole from someone who's livelihood is not dependent on the income generated by the product always goes over flat. The point of all the above is you are not making a living off any game you produced. That kind of puts the hyperbole in perspective. We all want combat mission to be the best game it can be. The difference is most of us don't start with some smug unwarranted exclamation from some holier than thou supposedly knowledgable place. You want to pretend to know more than Charles, have at it. I won't stand in the way of that train wreck. If you knew as much as you imply one thinks you would not be on this forum but rather on your own responding to users of your product.
My spare time hobby is someone's real income dependent job? Does it mean they am better at it than I? Maybe, maybe not. There is no independent AI in this game. All games in similar genres/categories/semantics have one. These are facts. My unwarranted opinion may be I want to see proper AI soon, yes, but it seems that many others think the same. Otherwise this thread and the poll thread would not have been created. Maybe not as unwarranted as you think then.
Its already been explained many times that BFC doesn't have the budget/time for these major changes like to the AI, Stagler you said you might be making 200,000$ soon, why not send that BFC's way?
If they offered me a job to code their AI in my spare time, I would take it.
As for the 200,000 euros for the MANW prize, it is split between the dev team of 30 odd people. Provided that we win, which is highly likely, I could give my 6000 euroes to battlefront. But what good would that do? They must have taken in sales of CMBN, its modules, CMFI, its modules, CMRT, and CMBS something much greater in the magnitude of 6000 euroes and it has not changed the AI in the past five years I have been on this forum and buying their products.
I am dedicated to tipping up to any thread where another poster, in this case a new member of the forums, highlights an issue that is precious to me. As I am sure many of you do also. I will back that poster up and remind him that he is not alone as he is drowned out by the same old rubbish that kills every thread on game improvement.
-
Meh, VR2 engine. Take it or leave it. Iron Front was a sadly poor attempt at making a WW2 ARMA. The I44 mod for the base game was better imho. The subsequent open source access granted and porting of Iron Front into A3 however is even better than both. Shows you what happens when you let people play around with your source.
CMBN on metacritic has 81 based on 4 critics, and user of 6.6 from 38 ratings.
Iron Front has 55 based on 20 Critics , and user of 6.5 based on 91 ratings.CMBN hasn't even been reviewed by Gamespot.
I guess in a "wargame" or "combat sim" niche its the users that make the best reviewers right? -
What's that, sorry I missed it while googling "games that Stagler has designed". Try as I might I couldn't get any matches. Damn search engines are screwed up cause it is obvious you are cranking them out all the time.
Has anyone here designed a game from the ground up single handedly? I don't think anyone has. BF is a team at the end of the day. But what published work I have done in my spare time mind is there, your not looking hard enough.
http://store.steampowered.com/news/8440/
Didn't ever get paid by AWAR sadly.
I'm just curious as to whether you actually like the game ?
Its a good concept - same as all CM games. I rotate between ARMA, CMSF/CMA/CMBN/CMBS, SB, and DCS.
The game is good. But nowhere near as good as I would like to see it. Nowhere near as good as it could be with proper funding and a decent community. This will only come from better advertisement and proliferation of the game, which in turn requires a good base to build from - i.e with the features that most people expect nowadays. As Jim Morrison said, book them and they will come. Dilemma - yes. Despite common belief, I didn't pitch up with the last bunch of people to come just before CMBS was released. I have been here since CMA came out, ergo, I see the same things, the same stagnation.
-
If you all are so willing to pay for smart AI.
I can solve your problem.
You can call me AI, send your checks directly to me and I will quite my job and will be available for your services each and every day.
I promise you to provide a high level of play and you will have complete control over any battle and situation you would like to play.
I even promise to never speak a word so that you have that true AI feeling of not having to deal with another Human being.
If I could play you at real time any time I saw fit then I would pay for this service.
-
i voted #1/10$ and #2/5$.
I agree with Baneman who said:
If BFC manages it do make an AI that is truely capable of beeing aware of itself and the situation around it and play CMBS as a good as or even better than a human, DoD would probably pay them millions and millions $ though. But given that the most advanced AIs that currently exists on planet earth are compareably as sentient as a tapeworm, that is rather unlikely to happen. I think that it is just not worth for BFC to invest time in making a dynamic AI. Give us more complex triggers with if-then-or-else capabilities, that should be sufficient.
Haha. You know there is such thing as computer game "AI". It doesnt have to be a self sentient skynet to be a good opponent at game. Go play something else for ten minutes and see. As I have said time and time again they are not skynet self sentient AIs. They are just algorithms. If X then Y. If Y then Z. If X and Y, but not Z, then W.
Attack point X. If moved in that direction for 15 minutes and not at point X, then move in another direction to point X.
-
2S7 > all static defences
-
I suspect that the importance of the quality of the game's AI will shrivel to nothingness once Battlefront comes up with their own in-house multiplayer lobby. If Slitherine can pull it off...
We have the technology! But we dont want to spend alot of money...
-
Howabout putting the "guy" where the radar is instead? I know hes not there in reality. But like with all BMP-3 chassis, he is dead anyway if it gets so much as a scratch.
-
I wonder how much Real Time - which I would see dropped in a heartbeat - hinders what BFC feel they can achieve with the AI. For example, is the 7 second spotting cycle to help support a certain minimum frame rate in Real Time?
Haha. The 90s called, they asked if they could get any tips on game design from the future. I told them not to call here again it was a waste of time.
-
I would much much rather see a proper lobby system and real time MP options than an AI development change.
Infintely so.
-
Anterior note. The same chassis we can see on 2S35 production models will be same as armata, with turret design similar to concept art vehicles and the technology demonstrator testbed from Kubinka I posted a while ago.
-
Very difficult. The way AI plans work is all steps are run sequentially, with no branching decision tree. You can have a time delay or a terrain trigger (or both!) for the next step, but it is always 1,2,3...8, never 1, 2, IF Casualties taken -2A; IF No Casualties -2B.
That may present another development avenue.
IF not in next zone by 01:00 game time THEN etc etc
Things already run on time hurdles.
-
If I am correct, the spotting comes from the position of the guy within the vehicle - i.e from his eyes, right?
-
The presence of 'Uussican SOF within the separatist ranks seems to indicate otherwise. And the recent admissions of Putin seem to indicate they are used in that sort of role as policy, regardless of title or stated mission.
Either way, if we're simply going above board, US Army SOF, and Delta both do extensive operations with host nation forces in both a training/advising*, and technical support role. For future modules, the UK operates much the same way, and there's some strong smells of Deutchland in places. Including those teams as a defacto Ukrainian uncon JTAC node is in my opinion, a given
*In the sense they attach themselves to the host nation force. We already see the "regular" forces version of this with US liaison teams, but those are not the sort of elements we'd commit to non-uniformed allies.
There are no Russian troops in Ukraine!
No I jest. Seriously though, they don't operate like that. People are much confused about the term spetsnaznacheniya - the types of troops that are scattered around DNR and LNR units are not those that are within the scope of a CM game. Next we will be buying 4 man seal squads in the editor. Sure you have the US advisory section available to the Ukrainian troops. But there is no Russian equivalent with access to the same capabilities as the advisory teams at this time. Russia surges their in disguise units and actually has them operate on the pointy end, in large groupings. Then withdraws them. Individuals and small groups attached to DNR and LNR militia HQ elements are from ministry of interior and military strategic reconnaissance, do we have CIA/DIA officers ingame? No we don't.
-
1. As available support for unconventional fighters. Both Russia, and NATO members have in the past used SOF as liaison/augmentation for friendly unconventional forces. Basically it'd be a way to give your Ukrainian National Force of Liberation in Donbass forces Predator or fixed wing support/Give separatist militias something similar.
They would not operate as such. There is no equivalent.
They would operate as a platoon strength element. Russia does not operate any platform like reaper with the same support base, availability or provision of integrated istar capability. Closest analogue is Pchela which is owned by artillery brigades, or Zala which is raven equivalent.
Special purpose troop units would operate on the battlefield at platoon/company level dismounted from their vehicles as light infantry as the 45th ORP does at this time. Alpha or Lynx units would not fit into CMBS - they are not battlefield forces.
When Grad fell on Mariupol
in Combat Mission Black Sea
Posted
I don't there is enough fire finders or counter battery radars up that neck of the woods to determine the location of the fires anyway.