Broken tacAI

[Battlefront.com]

3 hours ago, General Jack Ripper said:

You forgot:

4) People who think CMx2 games are the same as CMx1 games, and behave in similar ways.

Well, until this thread I didn't know this was still an issue!  CM1 has about as much in common with CM2 as an Apple IIe has in common with the MacBook Pro I'm typing this message on.

1 hour ago, Josey Wales said:

The suppression meter is relative.

This can be seen in units with high and low leadership values (all other factors being equal). The higher leadership unit will reduce the suppression meter level quicker than the lower leadership one for the same amount of incoming Firepower.

Also sustaining a casualty will cause the suppression meter to spike to simulate the immediate shock of 'man down!'

Yes, this is correct.  The meter shows the degree a unit is Suppressed, which is a result of many factors and therefore relative.  It is not the result of just incoming firepower and unit exposure.  An excellent unit in poor positions might be less suppressed than a poor unit in good positions even if the incoming fire is identical.  Good units also recover from suppression faster than poorer units.

That said, the meter's rating itself is more-or-less absolute.  An Elite unit with the meter full lit up is effectively as suppressed as a Conscript with the meter fully lit.  The difference between the two units is how each got to that point and how each recovers from it.  An Elite unit is harder to get fully suppressed, easier to get unsuppressed than the Conscript unit.

As I think about it, there's very little behavior shown to the player that is "absolute".  Even things like when does a unit using HUNT stop can be variable depending on the unit. Variety is the spice of life

Steve

[Ivanov]

23 hours ago, Xorg_Xalargsky said:

About infantry using small arms against tanks : they will try to shoot at an exposed commander.

If a WW2 sniper is doing that, then it's fine. But In my current SF2 game, the two man Javelin team, fires first at the tank commander, instead of keeping it's position hidden and launching the missile. In this case, firing small arms will only piss off the tank, which may return the fire. Such a behaviour is suicidal, while self preservation should be the priority of every moving unit.

Edited February 25, 2019 by Ivanov

[Battlefront.com]

52 minutes ago, Ivanov said:

If a WW2 sniper is doing that, then it's fine. But In my current SF2 game, the two man Javelin team, fires first at the tank commander, instead of keeping it's position hidden and launching the missile. In this case, firing small arms will only piss off the tank, which may return the fire. Such a behaviour is suicidal, while self preservation should be the priority of every moving unit.

For the most part weapons teams will not engage with their small arms.  That's SOP and at one point, long ago, it was followed like a fanatical religion.  However, the battlefield laughs at straight forward logic and ridged rules, so pretty quickly the TacAI was modified to allow weapons teams to engage with their small arms in dire circumstances or if team weapon is not up to the task (damaged, range, reloading, no LOS, etc.).  The closer the weapons team is to the target, the more likely they will use their small arms.  I don't know what the circumstances were that prompted the Javelin team to use their small arms, but there must have been something that prompted that response.

Steve

[Ivanov]

14 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:

For the most part weapons teams will not engage with their small arms.  That's SOP and at one point, long ago, it was followed like a fanatical religion.  However, the battlefield laughs at straight forward logic and ridged rules, so pretty quickly the TacAI was modified to allow weapons teams to engage with their small arms in dire circumstances or if team weapon is not up to the task (damaged, range, reloading, no LOS, etc.).  The closer the weapons team is to the target, the more likely they will use their small arms.  I don't know what the circumstances were that prompted the Javelin team to use their small arms, but there must have been something that prompted that response.

Steve

Currently I'm playing the Al Hawl scenario. It's urban, where US forces have circa 6 Javelin teams. Within the span of 3 minutes, three different teams fired at the exposed tank commanders of three different tanks. In each case the Javelin team was safe and unspotted ( until their fired ). Now I realize, that I never noticed this behaviour in modern games, because due to the good optics, people tend to keep the crews buttoned up. In my current game, the guy I'm playing against is a vet tanker ( and a famous youtuber  ). He decided to apply some real life tactics while operating those not so modern Syrian tanks, so he keeps the tank commanders unbuttoned.

[Howler]

I trust the TacAI for most things... BUT I use the 'M' key (Armour Target Arc) for AT assets as the modern titles are too lethal for it to be left to chance.

I kind of surprised a few seem to forgo it's use. When I want me AT teams to use their Javelins against structures or other targets such as ATGMs - then I cancel the arc. I'm not sure the cases used by some point to a specific deficiency at least in regards to the modern titles.

Edited February 25, 2019 by Howler

[General Jack Ripper]

On ‎2‎/‎24‎/‎2019 at 3:30 PM, MikeyD said:

A number of player complaints remind me of that old Henny Youngman joke: I went to the doctor, raised my arm and said "Doc, it hurts when I do this." The doc replied "Then don't DO that!" Often your pixeltruppen have difficulty in certain situations because they shouldn't have gotten into such situations to begin with. Getting yourself spotted 30m away from a hidden mg nest is unlikely to end well no matter what you do. Crawling across open ground while the enemy rains fire down on you is not going to end well no matter what you do. You need to look several chess moves back to discover the source of the problem, not the automatic AI response to the crisis.

Perhaps if I was an eloquent individual I might have arrived at this.

[Sgt.Squarehead]

IMHO a big part of the 'Art of CM' is working out your own personal techniques to get around the crazy s**t the TacAI sometimes does.....Even more so when you are trying to do it via the editor. 

[A Canadian Cat]

I would put it differently: IMHO a big part of the 'Art of CM' is working out how to give your troops the best chance to perform well. Regardless of the actual outcome consider that many things are possible and what just happened *is* one of those out comes in fact it is the one that *did* happen. If it was a good outcome follow up and exploit your advantage. If it was a bad outcome roll with it and figure out a new way forward, commanders have to do that IRL all the time - real life doesn't have do-overs.

[Battlefront.com]

On 2/25/2019 at 12:01 PM, Ivanov said:

Currently I'm playing the Al Hawl scenario. It's urban, where US forces have circa 6 Javelin teams. Within the span of 3 minutes, three different teams fired at the exposed tank commanders of three different tanks. In each case the Javelin team was safe and unspotted ( until their fired ). Now I realize, that I never noticed this behaviour in modern games, because due to the good optics, people tend to keep the crews buttoned up. In my current game, the guy I'm playing against is a vet tanker ( and a famous youtuber  ). He decided to apply some real life tactics while operating those not so modern Syrian tanks, so he keeps the tank commanders unbuttoned.

I'm still not sure about this one.  What was the range?  And if someone in the Jav team could see the exposed commander, why didn't the Javelin fire?  It only takes one man so both shooting at the tank with their own weapons should be possible.

Steve

[Battlefront.com]

On 2/25/2019 at 1:31 PM, Howler said:

I trust the TacAI for most things... BUT I use the 'M' key (Armour Target Arc) for AT assets as the modern titles are too lethal for it to be left to chance.

I kind of surprised a few seem to forgo it's use. When I want me AT teams to use their Javelins against structures or other targets such as ATGMs - then I cancel the arc. I'm not sure the cases used by some point to a specific deficiency at least in regards to the modern titles.

It is good practice to have weapons teams, of any sort, use some sort of method for restricting fire until you (the player) are ready for it to be used.  There's tons of totally legitimate circumstances that can cause a weapons team to engage in a way that doesn't fit in with your (the palyer's) master plan.  HIDE, tight Target Arcs, keeping them out of LOS, etc. each have their pros/cons, but for the most part they are complimentary when used wisely.

Steve

[MikeyD]

About the Javelin. Jav needs a few tens of seconds to 'spool-up' before firing, under certain circumstances that can feel like a lifetime to the Jav operator. In that time they're particularly vulnerable. A TC popping his head out of the hatch is a 'high priority' target across all the titles, from CMFI '43 to CMBS '17. In modern war titles with everyone sporting scoped rifles unbuttoning in close proximity to the enemy is a particularly foolhardy move.

[A Canadian Cat]

8 hours ago, MikeyD said:

In modern war titles with everyone sporting scoped rifles unbuttoning in close proximity to the enemy is a particularly foolhardy move.

And if the negative feedback gets applied (i.e. dead TC and then moments later brewed up tank form the ATGM) then that's awesome. We just need to watch out for if we have a case of foolhardy moves repeatedly resulting in positive feedback (in this case running tank, happy TC and dead ATGM team).

Remember that statistics matter. Some fool might open the hatch and get lucky so as long as the game favours sad TCs in these situations that's what we are looking for. In other words just because you found one example of an outcome that is not the optimal outcome does not mean there is a bug. Like Steve was asking we need to know the ranges and other situational information as well as what variety of outcomes are possible.

[Ivanov]

On 2/28/2019 at 5:41 AM, Battlefront.com said:

I'm still not sure about this one.  What was the range?  And if someone in the Jav team could see the exposed commander, why didn't the Javelin fire?  It only takes one man so both shooting at the tank with their own weapons should be possible.

Steve

The ranges were about 390 and 320 meters. In the first case the tank returned fire and wounded one member of the Javelin team. In the second case the tank didn't spot the shooter and the team fired the missile during the subsequent turn. 

[Macisle]

On 2/26/2019 at 3:31 AM, Howler said:

I trust the TacAI for most things... BUT I use the 'M' key (Armour Target Arc) for AT assets as the modern titles are too lethal for it to be left to chance.

I kind of surprised a few seem to forgo it's use. When I want me AT teams to use their Javelins against structures or other targets such as ATGMs - then I cancel the arc. I'm not sure the cases used by some point to a specific deficiency at least in regards to the modern titles.

I can't imagine playing the game now without extensive use of target arcs (mainly circular to limit engagement range). It hurts when I see a video where players have their HQs running around without arcs to limit their exposure. Sometimes, I even see experienced players leave their ATGs unhidden at start. In a fairly recent video series (WWII title), the presenter made  use of Target Armor arcs for his ATGs but left them unhidden at start, thinking that low bocage in winter would be enough cover. They were spotted and knocked out, causing comments about regretting their purchase and "ATGs in CM." If he had hidden them and waited a bit to unhide, he probably would have scored at least one kill per gun.

These days, I tend to start with all infantry having 50 m TA (ArTA and different ranges for AT teams) and then let them off the leash as needed. HQs seldom come off the leash unless something dramatic is called for. ATGs nearly always start hidden with ArTA (I play WWII titles almost exclusively).