Triggers

[Georgie]

Still no triggers. Will they be in upgrade 3 or never? Rite now when writing a scenario all you can do when using group movement on defense is to make a WAG as to when to move them and where to move them.

[Baneman]

Also curious as to whether this sort of thing is in the works.

Right now there's not much point in me trying to create scenarios since I'm terrible at guessing ( as my PBEM opponents will attest, I'm sure - You wait and wait and wait and just when you're certain a zone is "safe" and move into it, your opponent advances and catches you moving in the open )

[Georgie]

To add to my thread starter. Who by any stretch of the imagination could say that triggers would not be an asset to the game. In a large or huge scenario they would add untold possibilities. You could have a mobile force on the defense that would be able to respond to the human attacker in a meaningful way instead of a WAG. Maybe the triggers could be fooled but so are human defense players fooled. Its what the game is about, who can outfox the other. Without triggers the game is and forever will realize only a part of its full potential.

[permanent666]

i am wondering as well because triggers for the tac ai or for calculating the battle outcome already exist. how much work would it be to implement triggers into the editor?

[Steiner14]

I'm sure BFC knows very well the benefits and exciting possibilities triggers would offer for the experience with their games and they surely also know, that many players do not design scenarios themselfes because triggers are missing. But now they have this new, quite rapid development strategy. I guess from now on the improvements will come sooner than we could dare to expect only a few days ago.

If i look at the features of CMFI, it seems to me, that they aim for a healthy balance of the kind of enhancements: easier scenario creation, better UI, improved graphics and a few new fancy features.

And they also have to weigh the benefits against the (development) costs: i can imagine, the picture-overlay in the map-editor, although sounding not very spectacular, will be a big help for map designers. CMFI seems to proove, that their priority list is quite spot on.

And with the creation of maps being shifted to a new easier level with v2, i could imagine that with the next evolution of the game engine, that easier scenario creation is ranked quite high on their priority list...

[womble]

The graphic overlay is the kind of feature that will benefit both H2H play and play vs the AI, since it will increase the ease of map generation, and that's the starting point for any new scenarion, really. Hopefully triggers will come along sooner rather than later.

[sburke]

And they also have to weigh the benefits against the (development) costs: i can imagine, the picture-overlay in the map-editor, although sounding not very spectacular, will be a big help for map designers.

An example of the variety amongst the community. For some of us this, this IS spectacular.

[Georgie]

The overlay will make map making much more accurate and easier. The features of the game are many and great. It just seems a shame for a scenario designer to have a wonderful map tool and all the groups and orders but when designing a computer defense has to "roll the dice" to see when and where to use these tools. It simply does not make sense to me.

[Georgie]

Just preordered CMFI and will order CMFI again with the trigger update. Being positive you know.

[Georgie]

Over a hundred hits on this thread in the last couple of hours. Could it be that there are thousands of players out here that want triggers to be included in this game? BF you have dedicated fans, how about getting some more.

[Mord]

Yep. I think triggers along with the ability to make plans like we have now would be the penultimate for the designers. They'd have all the control in the word. I am feeling incredibly optimistic after all the announcements last week...I feel like BFC have given us just about everything we could've wanted...and the hope for even more. I am pretty confident that we'll see this at some point.

Mord.

[Ranger33]

CMFI is giving us a whole list of new features that people have been requesting for the last couple years, they are definitely listening and I'm sure we will see triggers eventually.

I'm just happy that CMBN and CMFI and whatever other families come out before the 3.0 upgrade will still be able to benefit from it. The upgrade system is a great move on their part that will add a longer life to each title, and pay BFC well for their efforts.

[Mord]

The upgrade system is a great move on their part that will add a longer life to each title, and pay BFC well for their efforts.

It's the holy grail! Not sitting around pining; "man, I wish CMBN had such and such feature like CMFI or CMEF does..." is a dream come true. I can't believe some of the responses I've seen to the contrary, though. Here we've just been told ALL our titles won't stagnate and become obsolete as the engine progresses and there are STILL dudes that have to find something negative about it. Blows my mind.

Mord.

[Pak40]

Triggers are a slippery slope. Certain kinds of triggers can ruin the game. For instance, Theater of War had triggers that would give you a fresh platoon of tanks as soon as your current platoon of tanks was killed. This is neither realistic or desirable.

We already have triggers based on time. What CM really needs is a trigger based on area but it has to be implemented so that you can set parameters on it. For instance, trigger that is placed where a lone unit can set it off will be easily duped by a human opponent. Parameters such as X number of units or Type of Unit will add a little flexibility and brains to the AI trigger. In other words, one could create a trigger that wont fire until a total of 5 visible units have entered it. Or a trigger that wont fire until a unit such as a tank enters it.

[sburke]

It's the holy grail! Not sitting around pining; "man, I wish CMBN had such and such feature like CMFI or CMEF does..." is a dream come true. I can't believe some of the responses I've seen to the contrary, though. Here we've just been told ALL our titles won't stagnate and become obsolete as the engine progresses and there are STILL dudes that have to find something negative about it. Blows my mind.

Mord.

I think it is an auto protective reaction to prevent having a complete meltdown from ecstasy.

[Sixxkiller]

Well there are no triggers in CMFI. Lets just concentrate on the new features. Charles and Phil are only human and if and when they ever write them into the code, it could be useful in the right hands that's for sure. As for putting them in future titles, I am pretty sure they arent against them. I think it just all comes down to time vs reward as every feature requires in CM. Be patient guys.

[MikeyD]

Not sure myself, but I suspect the fly in the ointment may have been the near-concurrent CM:BN upgrade. Its one thing to start a fresh title with triggers dominating the AI orders, its another to try to patch an existing game and run the risk of ruining all your outstanding scenarios. And the CMFI game engine is intimately tied up with CM:BN patch development, so that may have limited their ability to be overly 'creative'. Having CM:BN in the equation no doubt requires considerably more programming and testing than a clean from-scratch CMFI would've needed.

Oh, and I should confess I'm known for being the only tester showing a lack of enthusiam for bringing triggers into the game. I fear the game turning into 'whack-a-mole'.

[Rokko]

Man, I really can't understand why some people argue against the introduction of triggers, only because SOME mapmakers MIGHT use them in an unintended way.

Should scenarios with such triggers be released, just don't play them.

This is a really irrational way of thinking to me. Instead, think about the great possibilities they would add to the game and what a mighty tool they'd be in the hands of mapmakers.

Only problem I see with triggers being added to CMBN in an upgrade, they might ruin older missions, unless the old way of AI Plans was kept ingame as a possibility.

[Steiner14]

Does the AI put into account, when reserves will arrive? No.

Does the AI cheat and see, where the enemy is, without being IDd? No.

So where could be the big problem, to introduce an additional layer above the AI and below the timed AI-/scenario-plans, and this layer checking relevant game data and unit data internally (to feed the triggers with data)?

Where could be the problem for older scenarios, if they don't make use of that layer? If no triggers are present, what would change?

[Wodin]

It's the holy grail! Not sitting around pining; "man, I wish CMBN had such and such feature like CMFI or CMEF does..." is a dream come true. I can't believe some of the responses I've seen to the contrary, though. Here we've just been told ALL our titles won't stagnate and become obsolete as the engine progresses and there are STILL dudes that have to find something negative about it. Blows my mind.

Mord.

I agree, moaners going to moan and haters going to hate, the net is full of them.

[Georgie]

Not sure myself, but I suspect the fly in the ointment may have been the near-concurrent CM:BN upgrade. Its one thing to start a fresh title with triggers dominating the AI orders, its another to try to patch an existing game and run the risk of ruining all your outstanding scenarios. And the CMFI game engine is intimately tied up with CM:BN patch development, so that may have limited their ability to be overly 'creative'. Having CM:BN in the equation no doubt requires considerably more programming and testing than a clean from-scratch CMFI would've needed.

Oh, and I should confess I'm known for being the only tester showing a lack of enthusiam for bringing triggers into the game. I fear the game turning into 'whack-a-mole'.

It would be great if there was a method where an existing scenario could be loaded into the editor and and the AI portion redone to include a response to triggers instead of "time" where desired. To be done by the original designer of course. But even without this feature the triggers would add so much scope to the computer defense that it would be worth it for the original designer, at least in my case, to start over with just the map. Its fun anyway.

[Georgie]

Has there ever been a response from BF regarding triggers?

[A Canadian Cat]

Triggers are a slippery slope. Certain kinds of triggers can ruin the game. For instance, Theater of War had triggers that would give you a fresh platoon of tanks as soon as your current platoon of tanks was killed. This is neither realistic or desirable.

Yuck, no one wants triggers for that. And if any one says different I spit on them putooie.

You are of course correct, if they design triggers to do bad things then playing the game could be ruined. But, come on, this is Steve we are talking about, he would never create a feature that would be bad like that.

We just want the AI to have the ability to react to a human attack by allowing them to muse a mobile reserve effectively. Or reposition a static defense when one of its flanks collapse.

[eniced73]

Yuck, no one wants triggers for that. And if any one says different I spit on them putooie.

You are of course correct, if they design triggers to do bad things then playing the game could be ruined. But, come on, this is Steve we are talking about, he would never create a feature that would be bad like that.

We just want the AI to have the ability to react to a human attack by allowing them to muse a mobile reserve effectively. Or reposition a static defense when one of its flanks collapse.

Obviously the original poster has no idea how triggers work in TOW. Triggers are very hard to code unless they implemented an easy system with the mission editor. TOW has this but takes some time to get used to and is not that user friendly to use. Some of those that have mastered it have actually created some of their own unique triggers that can be implemented in the game. Such as limbering an ATG then transporting to a specific area and unlimbering to setup. Do a quick search on the TOW forum here and you can get an idea on what triggers would actually do for CM. There are not that many 'good' scenario designers out there but the ones that are creating stuff really take the time to understand how the editor functions. I dont think that these people would have a hard time with triggers. It is us simple people like me that dont have the patience nor time to design scenarios that it would frustrate.