How's the new AI triggers?

[MikeyD]

Ah, I see your confusion. Applying an AI trigger over-rides the initial 'between' time (previously called 'Exit After'), in this case 0:00. So the unit will only move when their trigger is tripped or when the second 'between' number is reached. If there was no trigger the unit would indeed move out at any time between 0:00 and 38.

[mjkerner]

If there was no trigger the unit would indeed move out at any time between 0:00 and 38.

Ah, didn't realize this. So in this case, the unit would move anytime between 0:00 and 38:00 randomly, on a whim, so to speak? That could still be useful, say if you are the Germans defending and you want to simulate an uncoordinated attack by a many-units Soviet force.

[Glubokii Boy]

So in your example I think I'm correct is saying that the unit would not start moving until minute 24 at the earliest even if the trigger was tripped in minute 2. If you want the unit to move as soon as the trigger is hit, but no later than 26 minutes you need set the time as follows - exit between 0.00 and 26.00

Thanks for the clarification

[MikeyD]

the unit would move anytime between 0:00 and 38:00 randomly, on a whim, so to speak?

That's actually a tough question. Most people most of the time see units start out at the first 0:00 time. But if its a large number of units travelling over distance you'll notice not all units are exactly rushing to be first to get to the next location. The shorter interval of time the more of a race it becomes. Only brain-in-a-jar Charles could explain adequately what's going on.

[Erwin]

RSW's point in his article about making the triggers "reasonable" was good.

If a designer wants to activate something when someone gets to a location, at least have a friendly there to "spot" the activity so that the triggered response seems logical and due to him reporting activity, rather than as if it was due to a magical/telepathic ability of the opposing (AI) CO to predict the future.

Question: Has anyone used triggers in a scenario designed for H2H play? Eg: It would be good balancing mechanism if a weaker player gets reinforcements ONLY if his better oppo is making better progress than expected - ie gets to an objective b4 a certain time.

[mjkerner]

RSW's point in his article about making the triggers "reasonable" was good.

If a designer wants to activate something when someone gets to a location, at least have a friendly there to "spot" the activity so that the triggered response seems logical and due to him reporting activity, rather than as if it was due to a magical/telepathic ability of the opposing (AI) CO to predict the future.

Question: Has anyone used triggers in a scenario designed for H2H play? Eg: It would be good balancing mechanism if a weaker player gets reinforcements ONLY if his better oppo is making better progress than expected - ie gets to an objective b4 a certain time.

Erwin, triggers cannot be used to bring reinforcements onto the board. And in head to head, there's no AI (well, except the TAC AI, of course), so no triggers.

[Erwin]

shame... it would be quite useful...

BTW: When I say "reinforcements" could they be units sitting quietly minding their own business in some part of the map until a trigger activates them?

[MikeyD]

H2H all AI orders are thrown out the window.

Initially triggers had involved 'spotters', eyes on the target, but it was a frickin' nightmare. Don't think of triggers as attempting to reproduce a human opponent so much as choreographing an entertaining tactical situation.

[Battlefront.com]

Ah, didn't realize this. So in this case, the unit would move anytime between 0:00 and 38:00 randomly, on a whim, so to speak? That could still be useful, say if you are the Germans defending and you want to simulate an uncoordinated attack by a many-units Soviet force.

To reinforce what Mike and Pete said...

Without a Trigger means that the units will start their next Order any time between 00:00 and 38:00. If the Order is the first Order then units will likely start within a minute or so depending on how many units there are. The more units the more staggered their departures will be because there's 38 minutes to get to the end of their Order. However, if this was a subsequent Order and the game clock is already at 36:00 (for example) then all units would go pretty much at once because effectively the AI Group only has 2 minutes to get to the end.

What a Trigger does is instruct the AI Group to hang out for 38 minutes before moving on *unless* the Trigger action happens. The 38 minutes is a sort of failsafe where the AI is instructed to give up waiting if nothing's happened by that time.

Here's a quick example of what you can do with Triggers:

A battle is 30 minutes long. Group 1 is set to make the first move to a Point A. Group 2 is set to wait for Group 1 to arrive at Point A, at which point it goes to Point B. Group 1's second order is to go to Point C only after Group 2 gets to Point B. This creates a leap frog action where one group is always stationary while one group is in motion. You expect both Groups to be in position by 20 minutes.

You set the timers for Groups 1 and 2 to 00:00 and 20:00. This means that if either Group has failed to reach it's final objective by 20 minutes the other Group will move no matter what.

Group 3 is a reserve force that you only want to move when as your units move between Point B and Point C. It's objective is close to Point C. You don't want them to wait until Point C has been occupied because you figure Group 3 won't have enough time to get there, and Point B would have them move a little too soon. In this case you put down a Terrain Objective Trigger set to Friendly units somewhere between Point B and C. The first one of your units, be it from Group 1 or Group 2, that moves into the Objective area causes Group 3 to move.

For Group 3 you set the timer to 00:00 and 17:00 because you think that if nobody has reached the Objective by 18:00 there's probably trouble and maybe Group 3 can bail them out.

This is a crude example, but it shows you how to have two or more Groups intertwined and also use the timers as "failsafes" in the event things don't go exactly as planned.

Obviously the next thing we're interested in doing is having "Conditional Plans". Now that we have Groups capable of moving or not moving based on conditions, we want to have Groups capable of different course of action based on conditions. It's a major undertaking but we've taken a step towards that goal. And in the mean time, the AI definitely has some more kick to it.

Steve

[Collingwood]

Obviously the next thing we're interested in doing is having "Conditional Plans". Now that we have Groups capable of moving or not moving based on conditions, we want to have Groups capable of different course of action based on conditions. It's a major undertaking but we've taken a step towards that goal. And in the mean time, the AI definitely has some more kick to it.

At what point do you expect to introduce "if" or branching triggers Steve?

e.g. If enemy touches area A, execute order to move there.

If enemy touches area B, execute a different order to move elsewhere.

Obviously this would allow for some really neat and intelligent seeming use of reserves by the AI.

I know we've all thought of it already, just wondering if this is thought to be "much later on" development, or if it is included in "conditional triggers" timeline. I'm not asking for concrete promises either

[mjkerner]

Thanks Steve, and Pete and Mike!

And Erwin, as you can see from Steve's post, yes.

[Battlefront.com]

At what point do you expect to introduce "if" or branching triggers Steve?

e.g. If enemy touches area A, execute order to move there.

If enemy touches area B, execute a different order to move elsewhere.

Obviously this would allow for some really neat and intelligent seeming use of reserves by the AI.

Yeah, that's what I was talking about in my last paragraph. It's the logical direction to go in and it required this step first. The problem is it's quite complicated and will require some changes to the UI to make it practical to use.

I know we've all thought of it already, just wondering if this is thought to be "much later on" development, or if it is included in "conditional triggers" timeline. I'm not asking for concrete promises either

I don't know, but I think we will probably get at least partially there for v4.0, if not more than that. We haven't had a chance to look into the details yet and so we can't assess the practicality yet.

Steve

[Glubokii Boy]

I have done some simple test-scenarios in the editor to get the hang of this 'trigger thing'..

After the suggestions in this thread i have got it working

It's very easy to use them once you understand it and it will be most helpful in designing some nice scenarios...

Well done ! BFC

[Battlefront.com]

Good to hear!

As the manual stresses, there is one important concept that you have to grasp or all is lost. And that is the part about the Trigger determining when the NEXT Order starts. If you have Orders 2 and 3, and you want 3 to be the one that responds to a Trigger, you have to set Order 2 to be the one that is Triggered and not Order 3. Because it all is hinged on when Orders are "exited", not when they are started. A bit counter intuitive to us Humans, but not to a computer.

Anyway, the manual talks about this in detail. I just think it's a good idea to mention it as often as I can while people are getting used to how they work.

Steve