Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'ai'.

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


  • CM2
    • Combat Mission - General Discussion
    • Combat Mission Cold War
    • Combat Mission Shock Force 2
    • Combat Mission Final Blitzkrieg
    • Combat Mission Black Sea
    • Combat Mission Red Thunder
    • Combat Mission Fortress Italy
    • Combat Mission Battle for Normandy
    • Combat Mission Shock Force 1
    • Combat Mission Afghanistan
    • Combat Mission: Touch (iOS / Android)
  • CM1
    • Combat Mission Campaigns
    • Combat Mission: Afrika Korps
    • Combat Mission: Barbarossa to Berlin
    • Combat Mission: Beyond Overlord
  • General Discussion Forum
    • General Discussion Forum
  • Repository Updates
  • TacOps
    • TacOps 4
  • Opponent Finder Forums
  • Archives
    • Strategic Command
    • CM Archives
    • T-72: Balkans on Fire!
    • Dan Verssen Games
    • Theatre of War
    • DropTeam
    • Assault Wave
    • Empires of Steel
    • PT Boats

Find results in...

Find results that contain...

Date Created

  • Start


Last Updated

  • Start


Filter by number of...


  • Start





Website URL











Found 22 results

  1. For the first time I caught such a bug, when the AI of tank cannot choose its target to defeat. Perhaps this is a rare bug. CMBS v 2.15 save file
  2. To be honest, i was tolernated so many times about this issue. Once a time, my men(veteran) weren't suppresedm , they have a good view for shooting ,no block, the enmey tank is just about 30-40meters far away. After shooting about 9 rounds, they still can not hit the targer for even once. No matter your men are sit in the plain or the high floor, they can never hit the target. Just now, i 've suffered on more time, the same map, another location on a floor, the enmey's tank just drive by the house about 20meters far away, and they still can not hit the target, the round even doesn't mean to hit the tank but seems to hit a ground which is about 15 meters far away(it shows like the men just never aim to the tank but somewhere higher) Anyway to solve this problem?
  3. it is quite stupid, when your troops are at a high ground but with staright plain, usually they will just prone on the edge of the hill. I mean, it is a very good place, good cover good view, but this game just make them prone at a dangerous place without cover or anything else. can't u just move back a little when they are at such a possition? The same about the roof, some times u need to shoot the rocket lancher, however , for the IS, they are low on skills to shoot the target even within the 50 meters, somtimes you didn't hit the enemy and pine down yourself, but if they stand above the roof, once they find cover, same thing happen as on the high ground Last thing is about the peek Usually the view of the troops are terribly suck and they don't even know to find a good cover, just step back a little ,stay away from wall, they can't would you make the ai more smater if they detect any bullets shoot around them? but not like a fool to cover on a dangerous place or prone on the edge of the hill of the roof
  4. Before discussing this crucial problem, i have to claim that this is not a topic about wrong tac or mere nonsense bull **** words about this game. From Us and Us marine to Nato forces, i have done lots of tests about Rocket launcher -whether they are able to shot the target from a relatively normal ranges which are within 300 meters. The results really shocked me for real, however, their terrible behaviors that can not even able to shot a target loacted 200meters far for over 50%(from green to veteran), these results remind me about some soliders talked about the training concering the Rocket Launcher "Using the Rocket Launcher? I would more likely to call that pose trainging due to the Targets were really quite large that no one shall miss that even in a quite long range" Such results are indeed true and when i played this game i always wondering that why they are so sucks at using Rocket Launcher whereas the Vehicle soliders could shoot almost a same position every time. Here is my way of testing: i let the soliders(same leadership same brave same health and so on except diffierent training levels) position in 3rd floor where faces a open ground,no barrier ,no grass no cloud no rain no and so on. They shall shoot the rocket serveal times(up to 50 times down to 25times) which can reveals the accuracies of their guns(at4 and m72law along with other types of one-shot only count their first time while other types of reload guns shall test whether how many times they can finally hit the target. I don't want to talk about the details of the results. It is worthwhile talking about some key points, but, which are exactly related to my topic , that the soliders(green) can shoot a 100 meters' target with almost 100% percent rate to hit in first time.When the range was expanded to 200 meters, nonethless,they can not even reach 10% percent rate of hiting at their target at first time. veteran are not that so bad even they still can not be quite normal(30%) For reload types,msaw soliders (veteran) need to fire 2-4 times to hit a target loaced in 300 meters. All i want to say is that, there is still a thing i haven't proved is that whether the height of firing position do incredibly affect the result of hiting or not. I am quite suffering
  5. Hi, I have had reason to be inspired to create a SP scenario that will feature the player as the attacker. It has occurred to me that there are some basic game concepts that I deal with as a player that I do not know how or if are they dealt/are made to be dealt with by the AI. I know there are things like "AI plans" and "AI triggers" now in the game, but I'm just looking for a basic run down on how the following things are typically dealt with by scenario designers when managing/scripting the AI. - Off map artillery: I am guessing the AI doesn't call in a fire mission whenever or where ever it thinks it is appropriate. If the scenario designer doesn't "code " it in somehow there will be no arty fire missions. How then are AI arty fire missions controlled by the scenario designer? I can imagine the most basic types are just fixed "scripted" pre-planned fire missions designed to strike at one spot at a given time. I'm guessing that perhaps these same kind of fire missions could instead be "triggered" to occur is and when an enemy unit enters some kind of predetermined "zone". What else is possible? PS: does an AI trigger get activated by a player unit moving in to a zone regardless of whether it is spotted or not? - Covered Arcs/Hiding: What exactly is/isn't possible as far as assigning unit orders like covered arcs and hiding to individual units? I am pretty sure from experience playing vs AI that it is at least possible to set the two types of covered arcs. I can kind of imagine assigning these orders at setup (including hide) but once they are assigned I am guessing that order will remain with the unit (unless it breaks/retreats/rallies).
  6. Hi guys, I mainly play PBEM versus my buddy and also like to play quick battles against the computer. However, the computer player never seems to do anything. It doesn't seem to deploy tactically and it makes no attempt to move any units or vehicles. It will call down arty strikes, but that's as aggressive as it gets. Units will react as normal when spotting my units and will shoot or retreat, but never anything else. Is there anything I'm doing wrong? I've tried playing at various difficulty settings and nothing seems to change.
  7. So from some long experience with this game its become clear to me that the accuracy of tanks and AT guns are way too accurate once they are zeroed in. The AI will aim pixel perfect on the same spot every shot, only the gun accuracy itself will deviate the hits. Here is some tests i did with and without cover infront of the tank (hull down). The lesson here seems to be that a tank with enough armor SHOULD NOT go hull down cus its a death sentence due to how AI aims and mixed with the unreal zeroed accuracy the main gun will get knocked out very quickly. Tiger 2, behind a 2m hill (hull down) at 1000m vs 76mm guns. At 1000m i do not expect the hit area to be this tiny. The side and top turret is nearly untouched and the muzzle break is completely perforated from existance. Tiger 2, at 1000m not hull down vs 76mm guns. Here we can see that the AI targeting has changed to the hull instead and the turret is nearly untouched (only 3 shells hit the very lowest part of the turret). In this scenario the shermans ran out of AP so i deacivated the target arc for the tiger and it knocked out all 5 of them, while in the hull down scenario the main gun was knocked out almost instantly and would render the tank useless. Here we have a jagdpanther at 600m behind a 1m hill vs 76mm guns. Only the lower front is hull down. Again we see the insane accuracy once the tanks have been fully zeroed that gives a unreal hit area. The only deviation is the gun accuracy, not the "humans" aiming it. The mantlet for tank destroyers also seem unrealisticly weak to get penetrated at those insane angles and thus knocking out the main gun. Another thing with this one is that odd penetration on the barrel. How on earth can a shell penetrate the barrel at that angle, this should not be possible. Jagdpanzer IV L/70 at 600m behind 1m hill vs 76mm guns. Only the lower front is hull down. Here again the insane accuracy and main gun knocked out instantly. Jagdpanzer at 600m on flat ground vs 75mm guns. Here we see the targeting area has changed cus it has no terrain infront of it. In this scenario the main gun remains operational cus the AI cannot abuse its accuracy on the mantlet area so this tank would be better off than if it was hull down. The thing im saying is not that the overall accuracy is too good, cus that works just fine. What i am saying is that once the AI gets fully zeroed, they have no deviation what so ever in their aiming. Only the gun accuracy itself shows on the hit area of the target and it gives a unrealistic scenario of hits. All rounds land within tiny areas and if you use terrain to get hull down (which should be a good tactic) you will risk loosing the main gun very quickly. I expect to see hits all over the tanks in these scenarios and not within a tiny circle at +600m, remember there is supposed to be humans actually aiming the cannons, but the AI clearly aims at a single dot on the target with no deviation once the gun is fully zeroed. The few shells you see away from the main hit area is made before the gun is fully zeroed inwhich deviation is fine. I have only terrible experiences with StuGs for example cus the only thing that gets hit on those is the mantlet. And once the mantlet is hit (even by a stuarts 37mm) the main gun will be knocked out. In my games with stugs i get a unreal amount of main gun damages for shells hitting the gun directly or the mantlet (which should be 80mm like the rest of the front, but still get pierced for some reason) EDIT: Here is the deviation at 2000m. Notice how all rounds hit in a nice circle at center mass, the few shells that hit the sides and lower plate was before the gun was fully zeroed in and still had some aiming deviation. For refrence this is how the target would look from the gunners perspective, 5x gunner optics zoom. The target is tiny so managing to hit within that circle every time would be nearly impossible.
  8. I can't get the new (4.0 Engine) withdraw or Facing orders to work properly. Most of the time vehicles will stop at their destination order map zone and turn their back on the OpFor. Then when it is time to withdraw they spin the front hull towards the OpFor, as they are suppose to, and back away. They seem to want to face their next destination order which means turning their back to the OpFor when the next order is withdraw. Also the infantry never seem to face the OpFor as they withdraw. I have tried about everything I can think of. Facing and withdraw cancel each other out so that didn't work. Any adult supervision would be appreciated.
  9. I'm sure this has been answered, but searching for this topic just turns up a ton of (interesting) discussions of RL tactics. I know what this command does - targets for arty - but what are the mechanics/limitations/possibilities?
  10. Are there any articles/threads/AAR/dev blogs that can explain the AI in combat mission in detail? I am looking for something quite in-dept, as I am aware of the basic levels of AI like tacAI. operational AI and strategic AI. But I would like to delve deeper and understand it better.
  11. Purchased the CMBS Battlepack. Haven't played for a while and this first mission in the US campaign is reminding me of how this game frustrates. If a gunner in a Stryker is shooting at a target, but then is fired upon by the enemy, he should duck back into the vehicle to stay out of harm's way. But the AI does not do this. The gunner will stay out in the open until he is killed/wounded. Anyone agree that this should be changed? Another thing is the attacking behavior of the enemy units. In the middle of the mission, two enemy jeeps came rushing towards my units. They ended up driving around in a small village, weaving around buildings at high speed until they were taken out. Not realistic/immersive. The game is being held back by these AI problems, among others. I would opt for AI improvements over new content.
  12. One thing I've noticed with CM games, is that the AI is not reactive. For example, I'm playing the "First Clash" battle in CMBS. Three enemy tanks approach my front line. One is knocked out. The other two proceed to advance in the next turn and are promptly knocked out. I've experienced this many times. I've never attempted to create a scenario myself. Is it simply because the scenario designer decided that the tanks were going to advance full throttle regardless of whether contacts are made? Is it possible to create scenarios where the two tanks do instead what is rational (e.g. stop, pop smoke, and reverse)?
  13. Is there any difference in the AI (playing against it in single player) depending on the turn system? I am specifically interested in only this one, not on the other differences.
  14. I have seen this situation in many of my turn based battles, also in game engine version 4.0. In turn planning phase I give my tank a Face order, let's say turn 90 degrees Then during the 60 second movie this tank starts turning and while this is mostly still in progress a dangerous enemy unit appears, like infantry with AT weapons or enemy tank. Despite this my tank continues turning AND cannot use its gun before turning has finished. Often this means the enemy unit kills my tank which just keeps turning its hull instead of defending itself. the improvement: IMO once this dangerous enemy unit is spotted the tank should stop turning and use its gun for defense. Once no dangerous enemy is at sight (like the enemy moves behind cover or gets destroyed) then continue turning the hull. Or I can redo the Face command during next turn. But DO NOT TURN THE HULL for ages while your enemy unit can kill you.
  15. On a scale of 1 to 10, with 1 being terrible and 10 being perfect, what is your opinion of the quality of the AI in the Combat Mission series (engine x2)? My opinion after many hours logged with CMBN and CMBS: 7/10
  16. If anyone already thought of this or asked this question already and I missed it...sorry. But I thought there was a way--for instance: When Enemy armor triggers phase line Allied reinforcements enter... Etc. What say you all?
  17. Hello all, I would like to know if it is possible to define when created a scenario, some units in the allied side as computer control instead of human control. (like the ones defined in the opponent side) I would like to have just some units controlled by the user, and the others that are controlled by the AI, but not sure if it is possible or not. I saw that you can define plans for both sides, but not sure if for the sides of the players, the plan is following for his units. Thanks and regards !
  18. To all scenario designers: Let's say there is a mechanised platoon and I wish to assign the vehicles of the platoon as a separate AI group (separate from the infantry squads). Is it, nevertheless, possible to start with the squads mounted on the AFVs, order the latter to dismount at some point, and only then assign separate orders to the infantry AI group? Or do I have to start everything dismounted the setup phase? Thank you
  19. A couple of threads have prompted this poll. I hope that: a) it works (it's my first poll ever anywhere; be gentle with me ) it has some use or entertainment value. BFC is convinced that nobody would pay an economically sustainable price to make spending a lot of development time on AI improvement to the detriment of new features. I'm thinking that if the game is largely feature-complete (what's missing? Flares and proper nighttime illumination sources; environmental fire; mast-mounted vision equipment... can't think of anything else immediately) and they're working on a UI improvement already, perhaps an AI upgrade might be next if there's enough support for it. Whadday'all think? Edit: by "Nobody" I mean "insufficient people". Edit2: I know there are only 4 game families in the upgradeable stream at the moment; I added "all of them" because Bulge, at least, will be out before anything of this ilk gets a green light.
  20. I'm interested in Red AIs for the two biggest maps. Lots of AIs. I like Quick Battles, I like building my own force, and I like playing U.S. So if one of you geniuses built lots and lots (more is better) different, scattered, diverse, weird, huge, wise, foolish, uninhibited, classical, strange, standard, completely unhinged Red force OBs and AIs, life would be grand. Use all the points. Follow the doctrine or break all the rules. Call in the airstrikes or dig the infantry in. Order a cavalry charge with the armor or set perfect ambushes. I have demonstrated rather clearly that I have absolutely no talent for building AIs. Playing one of my AIs is like listening to a dog with one nut stuck in the gate "sing". My AI commanders wait patiently for the enemy, and when they see them coming sit down for a nice cup of tea. Then the survivors throw up their hands and leave. So I need a real AI commander to go wild.
  21. Hi all, I can't seem to get "Can Trigger" orders to work, specifically the following example: AI Group 2 is supposed to exit its setup zone and secure a farm complex, then wait to advance until AI Group 3 appears on map as reinforcements and begin their advance on a different farm complex. Group 3's second order is set to "Can Trigger," and Group 2's second order has the Group 3, Order 2 trigger listed as "Wait For," and then they have order three, like so: Group 2: Setup (exit between 0:00 and 0:30), Order 2 (wait for Group 3, Order 2, exit between X and Y), Order 3, Order 4, etc. Group 3: Setup (exit between 0:00 and 1:00), Order 2 (Can Trigger, exit between 0:00 and 1:00), Order 3, Order 4, etc. But Group 2 just isn't waiting for Group 3 - rather, whatever time is set as the exit after for Group 2's third order is when they leave to execute order 3. I have tried setting the earliest exit time for Group 2 at 0:00, 5:00 (the earliest Group 3 can appear on map), and 1:00:00, and in each instance that is when Group 2 exits for their third order regardless of what Group 3 is doing or even if they're on map (that is, if Group 2's exit after time is 0:00, Group 2 immediately moves from its second to its third order, regardless of the fact that Group 3, who they are supposed to be waiting on, isn't even on map; same for 5:00. If I set the exit after for Group 2 to 1:00:00, Group 2 sits in its second position until 1:00:00, even if Group 3 has come on map and moved several orders beyond their "Can Trigger" second order). I tried switching the triggered order for Group 2 from the second order to the third order as well (that is, Setup (exit between 0:00 and 0:30), Order 2 (exit between 0:00 and 1:30:00), Order 3 (wait for Group 3, Order 2, exit between X and Y), etc.), but this still resulted in Group 2 just blitzing through its plan. I know with objective triggers I've had success by setting an exit after time of 0:00 and an exit before time of the end of the scenario, with the trigger as the "wait for" condition, but this doesn't seem to be how an orders trigger works. I assume there's an error on my part here somewhere but I've tried just about every variation on the plan I can think of with no change in outcome. The manual doesn't really discuss these triggers; I also tried searching the forums and had no luck. I looked through some of the stock scenarios and couldn't find an example of an Orders trigger being used either. Any tips would be appreciated.
  22. Hi all, and hope this isn't a repost -- My luck is that the M25 CDTE guy is the first to eat it when squads take casualties, and I noticed that the weapon seemed to never get salvaged, despite it being a "RPG/Panzerschreck" level force multiplier in terms of the firepower of the squad and what it can kill. Does anyone else notice this, or is it just my bad luck and the game simulating the weapon being damaged?
  • Create New...