QB - AI did nothing - what's wrong?

[altipueri]

Tried two small QB meeting engagements with random selection.

The AI drove its tanks onto the edge of the lawn, and then did nothing.

Turn after turn, yet I had the objective point.

Also, it sure likes picking M8 HMCs.

Looks like it's back to CMx1 for QBs.

PS playing CMBN 1.11.

[Oddball_E8]

The problem is that there is no AI plans in the map you have loaded.

Try to make sure you have AI plans in all the QB maps you use (so do not use "random" if you have downloaded maps which are specifically marked H2H since those usually do not include AI plans)

Also, don't give up on CMx2 just because you didn't understand how Quick Battles work in CMx2...

[Moon]

In CMx2, QBs are not hardcoded into the engine and TacAI (unlike in CMx1). QBs rely almost exclusively on the map/mission you play. There are great, good and also some not so good QB maps out there. Not surprising, as it's very hard to make a really good QB map that works for all the various random settings. We have some amazing QB talent on the beta team and the packs have grown in number and quality greatly with each release since 1.x.

[James Crowley]

This is about the only area in the CM series that I am slightly disappointed with, especially in comparison to the CM1 iteration (which I used to use all the time).

Random unit selection (vital if you are playing v the AI and want an unknown enemy), especially in the tiny/small category, ranges from adequate to totally bizarre, making playing these almost impossible, unless you are happy to process through dozens of attempts to get something decent.

I concur with Moon that there are lots of maps and many are excellent but even the best ones cannot overcome the handicap of

a) Poor force selection and

the AI restrictions. The AI does not know what type of units are going to deployed in the set up areas.

I don't know too much about the AI settings but I wonder if it might be possible to have separate infantry and vehicle setup areas and groups?

I would love to see QB's get a bit more TLC.

[MarkEzra]

I am the author of All CMBN QB Maps. At this late date it is most likely NOT an error in the map but send me the full name of the map and I will check it out. What may be going on may be do to setup time delays. How I design the AI orders for Meeting engagements is Group One as NO time delay and Groups Two and up DO have time delay orders before they move. When using a Tiny or Small Setup combined with a Random Map selection it is very possible to end up with a large map with pretty long Order delays. The average I used is 3-5 minutes or 5-8 minutes. Because you are selecting Tiny or small unit purchase the Game may select only one group...and that could be one with a time delay.

[Oddball_E8]

This is about the only area in the CM series that I am slightly disappointed with, especially in comparison to the CM1 iteration (which I used to use all the time).

Random unit selection (vital if you are playing v the AI and want an unknown enemy), especially in the tiny/small category, ranges from adequate to totally bizarre, making playing these almost impossible, unless you are happy to process through dozens of attempts to get something decent.

I concur with Moon that there are lots of maps and many are excellent but even the best ones cannot overcome the handicap of

a) Poor force selection and

the AI restrictions. The AI does not know what type of units are going to deployed in the set up areas.

I don't know too much about the AI settings but I wonder if it might be possible to have separate infantry and vehicle setup areas and groups?

I would love to see QB's get a bit more TLC.

I'm currently making smaller quickbattle maps out of the ciembienne urban map, and one thing I have done is to make the AI setup only in areas where tanks and vehicles can move from (so not in the middle of a walled in area or something like that), and then as their first defensive move (if on the defense) to move into the areas they are supposed to defend.

This way the AI doesn't get stuck with tanks in the middle of a backyard or something like that, and they can still occupy buildings, they just won't do it on the first turn.

I have noticed that this has kept the AI setup blunders to a minimum.

There are both advantages and disadvantages to having AI plans on QB maps instead of the old CMx1 system.

It gives the designer freedom to make some bold and surprising AI attack/defense plans, but on the other hand it means that map designers have to put in that extra effort to make AI plans.

But I cannot for the life of me figure out why some map designers release their maps for QB with no AI plans whatsoever.

Its super easy to just add that the AI sets up in its setup phase and then moves forward section by section (or even just straight to the objectives).

It only takes a minute to set up the simplest of plans, but it seems some designers just canno be bothered.

And thats when you get new players like this loading up a random QB map only to find out it has no plans whatsoever and the AI wont move.

As for force selection, yeah, it is definately wonky. It needs work.

[Kilroy Lurking]

MarkEzra,

You say "How I design the AI orders for Meeting engagements is Group One as NO time delay and Groups Two and up DO have time delay orders before they move". I was under the impression that the QB AI lumps all the "Enemy" units in one group? If not so, does it make groups randomly, or can it separate support, vehicle and infantry?

It is a long time since I last read the Manual, but I seem to remember it is not so forthcoming on QB mechanics. For instance you also say, "When using a Tiny or Small Setup combined with a Random Map selection it is very possible to end up with a large map" - I assumed that choosing "Random" Map randomized the selection within the Tiny or Small Set up parameters...

David

[MarkEzra]

Hi Kilroy L: If the QB Map designer uses more than one "Group Plan" The in game AI will try to split units to each group used. For example: In a small Attack/Defend style map I always used at least 2 groups. The first group would be static, with only a setup order (dismounted/Ambush) The second group would have a setup order towards the rear of the map (again dismounted/ambush) along with a time delay of 20-30 minutes and then a movement order(s) to counter attack toward the maps Objectives. But always keep in mind the QB Map designer has no control over unit selection or WHERE (beyond the general areas painted yellow by the map designer) the in game AI will place a specific unit. That control is actually in the hands of the BFC code writers.

There is very little info available about the specifics of QB Map design in the manual. It took me years of trial and error to understand the mechanics of this aspect of the game. Hope this helps.

[altipueri]

Blimey, good job I've found out I can run CMx1 on my windows 8 laptop - which ironically I bought for its 8gb RAM so I thought I could play CMBN and other games that struggle or fall over on the old pc.

I only play 'em, I don't know what makes 'em work.

Arf, Arf, Arf.....That's my other dog impression.

[MikeyD]

3rd party maps you might want to go in and give the AI orders a quick peek before adding them to the pile. You can usually tell immediately if you're looking at a ME battle or one-side-defends. More than once I though I was going to be defending only to find the other side defending too! All quiet on the Western front.

[Freyberg]

Regarding force selection, it would be super if there were a 'balanced' random force selection for QBs, like the old 'combined arms' setting from CMx1. It would be even better if there were a greater range of force selection presets, or that players could define their own force-selection rules, which could include bonuses. So players could elect to fight extremely balanced QBs - which many of us already do - or one player could select a heavier force at the expense of some points.

There could be a series of presets like:

- combined arms, recon

- balanced combined arms

- armour-heavy combined

- armour-light combined

and so on, but you could buy outside these constraints at a points cost.

With a bit of thought, this could add a lot of variety, and still remain fair.

As for AI plans. Some of the setup rules are problematic. It would be useful if setup areas on the map could be allocated to particular types of units, instead of to 'group 1, group 2' etc. So the map designer could mark parts of the map as useful to AT guns, armour, HMGs, minefields, and so on. There would only be a fairly limited number of different possibilities. I don't play against the AI that much, but I've had some real wacky AI setups when I have, such as rows of empty foxholes or the whole enemy force clustered together in one strange part of the map.

[Kilroy Lurking]

Freyberg. I wish!

MarkEzra, thanks for the info.

One thing QB designers could do IMHO is to save alternative Battle Plans as new QBs. I do this sometimes in the Editor. I seldom replay Battles (I remove played QBs from the QB Folder); but when I do I prefer to have, well, a different Battle.

David