Quick Battle Set-ups

[kevinkin]

I noticed that the QB Light Forest-Farmland Probe 001.btt describes all attacker set-ups are East and Defender are West.

As I try to modify the map AI I noticed this to be true. The AI ignores the owner of the zone and will place (in my case) the German attackers in the eastern Soviet zone and the Soviets defenders in the west German Zone.

How can this behavior be turned off? Right now the Germans attack from the East as if cut off. I guess the bigger question is how to design QB AI to accommodate the four possible user selections:

German attacker (Human or AI) vs Soviet defender

Soviet attacker (Human or AI) vs German defender

Trying to put together an AI plan for both defense and offense is confusing. If you know that a side will always set-up using your programed zones it would be a little easier. It would be nice to be able to design offensive and defensive operations into separate AI plans so the appropriate plan is called up depending on user selection of sides at the beginning.

If I select a QB and ask for Human Soviet Defender a German Offense AI plan is loaded into the game.

Kevin

PS Once placed the Germans follow the Soviet plan from the Soviet zone and the Soviets the German plan from the German zone if the orders are spaced just right. This is really crazy.

[MarkEzra]

Nothing crazy about it at all. First let me remove all doubts you may have about the map: It's a correctly made Allied attack style map. The attacker setup is East. The Axis Defender is West. In the QB Game setup screen the player Gets to choose who attacks and who defends. You picked the Germans to attack and they did... from the East. Just like the QB Map was made.

[kevinkin]

Mark

 

Why are the set up zones ignored? What tells the AI always attack from the east regardless of nationality? If I select an Axis attack then they set up in Soviet zones. If the user goes this route can the orders and objectives  be ready to provide the right battle even if the battle is not set is as specified? On this type of map should German attackers and Russian defenders not be recommended?

 

Sorry for the questions - a have a nice project that depends of further understanding of the system.

 

Kevin

[womble]

Mark

 

Why are the set up zones ignored? What tells the AI always attack from the east regardless of nationality? If I select an Axis attack then they set up in Soviet zones. If the user goes this route can the orders and objectives  be ready to provide the right battle even if the battle is not set is as specified? On this type of map should German attackers and Russian defenders not be recommended?

 

Sorry for the questions - a have a nice project that depends of further understanding of the system.

 

Kevin

QB maps have to deal with the possibility that either side may be the attacker or the defender, since there is no way the designer can fix which force will be which. However, the editor requires that you specify that a map is an "Axis attack/probe/assault" or a "Russian/Allied attack/probe/assault" unless it's a Meeting Engagement. That way it knows the direction the attacker is going to be coming from, and where it's going to. Attack-Defend maps usually have a much deeper defender setup zone, and a shallow attacker setup zone, and it would be nonsense for the defender to be forced to setup in a narrow strip at the edge of the map and for the attacker to be permitted to setup 2/3 of the way across the map. The defender's setup zone also usually includes most of the victory locations which are the sole map-based victory conditions in QBs.

 

So, if a map is set up as a "Russian Probe", the logical orientation is for the Russians to be coming from the east, so the Russians (designated the attackers) are given a setup zone on the eastern edge of the map, and the western portion (usually about 2/3) is designated as the defender's (initially assumed to be the Germans) setup zone, and the victory locations are placed in that part of the map. Then (and this is really significant) the designer puts in one or more AI plans. For a scenario (as opposed to QB), this is all that's needed. The originally-specified attackers will always be the attackers and the original defenders will always be the defenders. But for a QB, either side can be attacker or defender. So, if you wanted the same terrain to "know" that the attacker and defender roles had swapped, and change accordingly, you'd have to have a way of specifying a different setup zones and victory locations depending on who's attacking and who defending, and you'd have to set up new AI plans to reflect the differing roles, setups and objectives. Might as well set up a whole new map.

 

Which might be the best way round your problem: save a copy of the map you're interested in, but change its type to "German Probe", paint new setup zones and objectives and set up AI plans for the new force posture if you want to make it a valid QB map. If it's for HvH play, you can skip the AI plans. If it's for your own satisfaction, you'll need to make an AI plan for one or t'other side. Enlighten us as to the nature of your project and people many times more knowledgeable than myself in the field of map/QB/scenario design might be able to pitch in with suggestions that are actually helpful

[kevinkin]

The nature of the project is described in the post "Quick Battle replay" and has received a small but positive response.

 

It involves adding new AI plans to the existing QB maps for replay value. Since the maps are already very nice I thought to spend most time

on the AI and crank out a dozen maps with 3 new AI plans each at a time for posting. But this has slowed down due to my rookie understanding of the on the inner mechanics of the QB system.

 

Thanks for the help. My next question is I have a set-up zone set for a move between 0 and 3:00. Half the time they wait till the 7th minute to begin.

The otherwise they seem OK. Its as if the TACAi is taking over. I never saw this in regular scenario design so if you or someone can help it would be great. BTW, order 2 is right under the nose of the start up zone. All plans are turned off and other than number 1.

 

Kevin

[MarkEzra]

To create a good QB Map the designer must master the use of time variable triggers.

CM's QB AI always have groups that move within the default 0-1 min. They also have group movement orders and follow up movement orders that are of variable times based on map size and tactical need. Movement triggers requires some thought and patience.

Re-working an existing Scen or QB Map is actually very complicated and fraught with troubles. From a self teaching perspective itis better to start with a fresh canvas. I learned by my own mistakes...and I made plenty of them.

[kevinkin]

Thanks ... each posting is sheading light on the system. Looks like the TAC is very active to a point where it may trump the AI plans.

 

I still have no clue why the AI waits till the 7th minute every other attempt. It must be related to (like you mention) map size and tactical

situation. But in any event the troops are moving well and I have something to work with over the next week or so. I am noticing a lot - almost all - assaults and attacks are for the Soviets - this make sense given the offensive being simulated. I may add a few German attacks for city, village, forest/hills and open battles to the list of things to work on.

 

Kevin

[womble]

I am noticing a lot - almost all - assaults and attacks are for the Soviets - this make sense given the offensive being simulated. I may add a few German attacks for city, village, forest/hills and open battles to the list of things to work on.

 

If you're making QB maps, you don't really have to do that. Set them up for whichever side you like, and if the players involved choose to have the Germans attack, they'll be assigned to the attacker's setup zone. So they'll (probably) be oriented the "wrong way" according to the "natural" compass directions for the period of the war, but heck, it's only a QB; does it really matter that much that the Jerries are coming out of the sun? Of course, switching it all around so the attacker is in the west would be "natural" for a German Attack map.

[kevinkin]

When playing  vs the AI, wouldn't that screw things up since the AI plans anticipate an initial basic enemy set-up. See Mark's suggestion above about making a new map to cover these situations. I don not think this is a big deal for the player especially if it gives a good fight on a quality map.

 

BTW,I am making progress today so Thanks for the help guys.

 

Kevin

[womble]

When playing  vs the AI, wouldn't that screw things up since the AI plans anticipate an initial basic enemy set-up. See Mark's suggestion above about making a new map to cover these situations. I don not think this is a big deal for the player especially if it gives a good fight on a quality map.

I don't think so, but we may be talking at cross-purposes.

 

As I see it, the AI plan for a QB can never be sufficiently force-specific that it matters which nationality it's actually operating on, since the QB could be infantry-only, or armour-only and the difference in how you'd approach the battle is greater between those two possibilities than it would be between different armed forces, even Italians v American airborne. So since the plan is "for the defender (or attacker), on the terrain they are defending (or attacking)", whether the battle is Russians defending against Germans or Germans defending against Russians matters less as to whether the relevant plan is plausible than whether the Attacker brought all tanks or a mix or all inf plus arty or 2 companies of ATG...

 

And the AI plans only "anticipate" what the AI planner has anticipated. The deployment within the inital areas is entirely based on the terrain and whether the elements are attacking or defending. It doesn't even matter to the "deployment algorithm" what that given AI group's future moves in the Plan are.

 

The point I'm struggling to make is that you're making attacker plans and defender plans, not German plans and Russian plans, and the pTruppen, once they're deployed (and, I'd contend, most players in QB situations) don't care whether they're facing the rising or setting sun, only which cheek the wind is blowing on. The designation of which nation is the attacker is solely so that the executive AI can tie setup zones to the appropriate plans. A different approach might have been to call the setup zone "attacker" and "defender", and have the association with nation occur at a different stage, but since the engine was originally set up, back in SF days, to cater primarily for Scenarios where the attacker was always specified (the impression I get from latter-day discussions is that BFC weren't even keen on the idea of QBs at all in the intial stages of development of that product), the current architecture is the more logical.

[Sublime]

Why does the RT AI ALWAYS seem to do turn 1 Artillery bombardments. I remember if you had a unit in obvious view in BN and FI this was likely, but this seems to happen EVERY game against the AI with me.

[MarkEzra]

Why does the RT AI ALWAYS seem to do turn 1 Artillery bombardments. I remember if you had a unit in obvious view in BN and FI this was likely, but this seems to happen EVERY game against the AI with me.

Why does the RT AI ALWAYS seem to do turn 1 Artillery bombardments. I remember if you had a unit in obvious view in BN and FI this was likely, but this seems to happen EVERY game against the AI with me.

all qb maps I have made since cmsf have first turn arty (when AI has arty). My thinking is that Human players cheat. They "know" about setup areas, they "know" time limits, they "know" its a game board. The AI doesn't. The first turn arty mitigates the Human from rushing ahead. I set the arty to suppress. I place the strike zones along possible attack paths but not too close to the Human setup zone. My plan is to delay, not demolish, the human player and allow the AI sufficient store of arty for use later in the game.