Jump to content

AI plans and a more responsive AI


Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, Freyberg said:

I just ran a very simple test 5 times. You're right.

Enemy trigger objectives are ignored, and the touch objective disappeared.

Such disappointed...

Thanks for confirming that. Yeah -- MAJOR bummer.

3 hours ago, RepsolCBR said:

I wounder why that is ? Afterall the AI plans for QBs are made by the designers...simular to scenarìos.

The AI doesn't do anything on its own...all the movements and what not are scripted just like in scenarios...If a terrain objective is a touch, occupy or terraintrigger shouldn't reallt be a problem. It's the designer that guides the AI in QBs as well as in scenarios.

Strange !

Thanks for testing though...

 

It is a head-scratcher. Maybe the loss of terrain trigger functionality moving from scenario to QB environment was accidental and it just never got highlighted and addressed? Or, maybe they decided that the random nature of QBs made terrain triggers too likely to break something else. Dunno.

Either way, I'd really, really like that functionality for QBs. The updated infantry behaviors that will come with CM:FR (already in the patches released for the other titles) will help, but not being able to have AI units hide and be terrain-triggered to unhide really puts AI units at a disadvantage vs. heavy opening artillery -- which will be very common in QBs using slices of the map I'm making.

QBs really need a combination of functioning terrain triggers and the ability of the QB map designer to link certain unit types to certain groups (ATG, armor, infantry, etc.). As things stand, the all-too-familiar time-triggered AI banzai charge to death really hurts the QB format.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Sgt.Squarehead said:

That could do it.....The AI doesn't know what's in each group and thus they might be given impossible orders (vehicles through heavy woods etc.).

Just a thought.

Yeah, that would be my guess for mostly likely reason. If so, it's almost certain not to change, unless unit type-to-group channeling functionality is added for the QB map designer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Macisle said:

QBs really need a combination of functioning terrain triggers and the ability of the QB map designer to link certain unit types to certain groups (ATG, armor, infantry, etc.). As things stand, the all-too-familiar time-triggered AI banzai charge to death really hurts the QB format.

Both of those features would make a big difference - agreed!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Sgt.Squarehead said:

That could do it.....The AI doesn't know what's in each group and thus they might be given impossible orders (vehicles through heavy woods etc.).

Just a thought.

That was my initial thought also and I still agree that that probably is the reason....

But its still kind of strange....

as that would imply that NO waypoint (AI-orders) should be placed on restricted terrain either. Not on any terraintype of map (including wooded ones) as the same things aply to orders (waypoints) as they do to objectives...

An AI group with randomely assigned armour CAN'T reach a waypoint in heavy Woods for example.

The manual makes no mention of this as far as I can find.

And also...If the OCCUPY objectives still remain (as stated in the manual on pg 119 )...why ?

Vehichles can't reach that either....

If the fact stated by sgt Squarehead above is indeed the reason for excluding some of the avaliable terrain options in QBs...it might be better to ADVICE designers as how they place their objectives on the map...taking in the considderation of eventual armour in the AI groups...and not remove those options completally.

.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, RepsolCBR said:

And also...If the OCCUPY objectives still remain (as stated in the manual on pg 119 )...why ?

Vehichles can't reach that either....

I don't think there are many qb-maps with an occupy objective on an island or piece of land surrounded by deep water or deep bog. And even if there was, the scenario designer of a qb-map is hopefully giving orders to more than one AI-group to reach that objective.

With quick battles there aren't only the occupy objectives to consider but also to wound and kill the opposing troops. So if the defender keeps most of the objectives but has lost almost all the troops, there might be an even result or maybe a minor defeat depending on the values of each objective and each soldier.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, BornGinger said:

I don't think there are many qb-maps with an occupy objective on an island or piece of land surrounded by deep water or deep bog.

Well, not QB maps, maybe:

9xAyOSE.jpg

2 hours ago, BornGinger said:

And even if there was, the scenario designer of a qb-map is hopefully giving orders to more than one AI-group to reach that objective.

Hope so.....But I've never scripted for boats before!  ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, BornGinger said:

Maybe in CM3 along with motorcycle, bicycle and skiing companies?

Um.....Nope, in CM:SF2 right now!  ;)

TBH, they are actually amphibious APCs dressed up as boats, the map I showed is custom made for their use, in such a way that the player can't have his Pibbers crawl out of the water & up a hill!  ;)

It's one of a few custom 'Riverine' maps that I will make for the pack in due course.

Edited by Sgt.Squarehead
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As I've already said - I am no expert on QBs but it is probably worth taking a step back from leaping into the 'something must have been forgotten theories.'  I've also chatted with Mark Ezra about converting maps and the process from the perspective of 'here's the map mate ... over to you.'  The first question was always - 'what is your concept and what do the plans look like?'  From there he knocked up the objectives and plans.

Think about it from the player and not designer perspective ... as a player ... 'I want to play a QB'

You choose the side, the map, the type of battle and the forces.  Remember those triggers .... how do they work again?  If you put an armour only trigger on a QB map then any player who decides to buy an infantry only force is going to render the trigger irrelevant.  With the current construct which, based on this discussion and my occasional rummaging around the margins of QBS, revolves around terrain objectives only, it does at least provide for a battle for those crazy people who don't buy armour.  For sure it isn't perfect but it seems to be the safest way to cater for the complete randomness of the force that a player can pick.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Vergeltungswaffe said:

Forget WW1, the vaaaaast majority of fighting in WW2 was infantry v infantry.

Total German Tank production just shy of fifty thousand vehicles total. 13.6 Million people served that makes over 13 million German armed forces personnel never saw the inside of a tank. Just did a quick Google search.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I seem to recall that BFC changed the tankcomander behavior a few years back. Previously the used to start the scenarios unbuttoned but that was not all that well liked by the community back then...

And no....i don't think the designer has any way of controlling this button up/unbutton when designing a scenario.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Lille Fiskerby said:

Does any of you guys know how to make AI tank crews not button up at the start of a mission, they does despite I have told them not to, disobedient pixeltruppen 😉

 

There must be a way, because when I play scenarios, the enemy tanks always start unbuttoned.

Maybe it's related to the "stance" you select? Cautious/active.

Edited by Bulletpoint
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, RepsolCBR said:

And no....i don't think the designer has any way of controlling this button up/unbutton when designing a scenario.

Not that I know of either.  :(

2 hours ago, Bulletpoint said:

There must be a way, because when I play scenarios, the enemy tanks always start unbuttoned.

Could you send me a save and a copy of any scenario where this is the case.....Not a challenge to your statement of any kind, purely a request.

It should only take me about ten minutes in the editior to check the starting conditions of the units.  I can then replicate them in a test scenaro and see what happens.

 

Edited by Sgt.Squarehead
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Sgt.Squarehead said:
20 hours ago, Bulletpoint said:

There must be a way, because when I play scenarios, the enemy tanks always start unbuttoned.

Could you send me a save and a copy of any scenario where this is the case.....Not a challenge to your statement of any kind, purely a request.

I just opened up a random scenario for CMFB, let the first turn pass, then clicked cease fire. Reviewing the map, I see all enemy tanks are unbuttoned. Scenario is A Muddy Affair, but I guess you could choose any of them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Bulletpoint said:

I just opened up a random scenario for CMFB, let the first turn pass, then clicked cease fire. Reviewing the map, I see all enemy tanks are unbuttoned. Scenario is A Muddy Affair, but I guess you could choose any of them.

Just looked in the editor and (assuming you are talking aout the Germans) their tanks are all indeed opened up.....This appears to have been done manually, in Preview Mode by using the Open Up order.  There is nothing notable about their AI posture or plans.

I've done exactly this in the past and I could have sworn the AI units always buttoned when you started the scenario.....I could be totally wrong, or perhaps something changed in a patch.  Maybe I'm thinking of something that appiles to CM:SF1 or CM:A (I still mess with both, particularly the latter).....Will experiment in a couple of the games and see what happens.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not in CM:SF2 for sure.....I created a scenario a couple of days ago to test this, but forgot to post the result, two T-55s opened up in the editor, but firmly closed when the scenaro starts.

I should note that this scenario was built on my old CM:SF1 'Hornets' Nest' map which was ported from CM:SF1.....There seem to have been some odd occurences with those. 

I'll make another very quick test on a fresh map, just to be sure.

Edited by Sgt.Squarehead
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...