Question on the AI

[Natman]

I'm waiting to get the game, and I heard that the AI sucks. What I mean is a review said that there is no computer player for custom maps, and you can only change the AI a bit on pre-maid maps. Is this true, or can someone explain?

Thanks

[jrcar]

See my reply on the general forum.

Cheers

Rob

[Redwolf]

"The AI in TacOps sucks" is not detailed enough. Yes, it can only play one side of prepared scenarios and you can only slightly change its forces.

On the other hand, the TacOps AI is the only AI I know that does a decent attack and doesn't cheat (like TOAW).

[Stoffel]

The AI sucks isnt a very good way of saying what you dont like.

Please tell us what in general is wrong in your opinion aboutthe AI.

Statements like these can harm a good game more than it does any good.

[MajorH TacOps Developer]

> I'm waiting to get the game, and I heard that the AI sucks.

The AI does what it does.

Download the demo. If you don't like it then don't buy it.

[Covert Sniper]

Natman,

IMO, the AI on Tacops is pretty darn good. It can't be fooled by massing forces away from an objective to draw off opposing forces, nor does it seem to cheat like other AIs appear to do. I have a lot of fun with solitaire games.

Mr. Stoffel and Major H.,

If I had to use the vernacular that the AI 'sucks' my only complaint would be the lack of new scenarios with imbedded AI. I would really like to play some of the new maps, but the current solitaire games have only added a handful of new games since version 1.0 and most, if not all, use the old maps. I would like to play some CPXs to see the new maps but RL issues make a six or eight hour stint on the computer on a Saturday or Sunday very difficult. Hence, I might be able to observe for an hour or so, but that is about it.

I understand that most of the enhancements for TacOps favor the multiplayer CPX and LAN world, but us solitaire users would like to see at least a couple more solitaire games in the upcoming releases, hopefully before v5. I also understand that the Major's military contracts must come as the number one priority, this means LAN and CPX.

Is there any way to take successful CPXs and easily hard code the human controlled movements of forces, or portions thereof, that took place during the CPX into the AI to create solitaire games and place the scenarios on a download page? I heard that the November CPX was enjoyed by players of both sides.

Even a hard to use scenario editor would be a great imnprovement and well appreciated.

Happy TacOpting,

Randy

[pzgndr]

Anyone who has studied Soviet tactical doctrine would say the TacOps AI is nearly perfect. If you don't understand what the AI is doing, then you've got no idea how the Soviets were trained to fight. Being able to play against a doctrinally correct computer opponent has always been a primary reason for playing TacOps.

However, it's been almost a decade since the Soviets went away. And today's OPFOR threats don't necessarily adhere to the old Soviet doctrine. So it's probably time to update the AI with at least a modified Soviet doctrine as one option, and something more US/NATO-ish as another option so we can play either side.

Soviet/Warsaw Pact units had limited command and control ability compared with US/NATO units. So simple company/battalion battle drills and formations were used instead of more complex plans and orders. The AI simulates this well. But C2 is one aspect missing from TacOps, and it allows human players of Soviet-style units to do things freestyle that probably wouldn't have happened in real life.

So while I'd like to see some more flexibility with alternative AIs, I'd also like to see some modest C2 restrictions introduced like the old GDW Assault series had. Just another wishlist item for TacOps5 ...

[Redwolf]

The Major stated several times that he would really have liked to have this problem solved. But he decided to release 4.x with the multiplayer aspect and no universal AI after the players kinda voted they want 4.x with multiplayer now and are willing to $25 again for 5.x.

I am still serious to write an AI on my own. But if that means I also have to write a full remote-control system with mouse/keyboard events sent and full vision capablity including scrolling the map, then the interface is more work than the AI.

[tar]

Actually, you should be able to get all of the situation information from the various reports: Spot Report, Sitrep, Ammo status. The map information is in a defined format, so that shouldn't be too hard to get at, although you woudn't have the LOS tool.

What I don't recall for sure is whether there is any way other than the dialog boxes to get the artillery and air support information. Also, TRP locations? But that can be remembered.

The real sticking point is not knowing what the orders format is. Almost everything for an external AI seems to be present except for knowing how to issue orders and SOPs to units. This information is present in the EMails exchanged by players, but the format hasn't been published.

[Redwolf]

One problem is unit selection. It is incredibly hard to have remote-controlled mouse select one specific unit on a TacOS map, especially if that map needs scrolling. I may be able to use the "go to unit" menu entry.

Obviously I need the values of visibility and movement for the terrain tiles, an external AI needs to compute LOS in its own, it cannot use the LOS tool in the game. Movement speed maybe estimated, I could live without hard data here.

Then, I would really like to actually get a peek at the action phase. It may be possible to do a halfway decent AI just jumping from one orders phase to the next. But for sure it will be much better when I can assemble the combat data, who shot on whom where, who get killed by whom, where did enemy artillery fall. The last item (enemy artillery) is actually critical. Same for friendly artillery, if I shoot somewhere with less than 1 precision I need to know where it landed. If a vehicle exploded under a burst I need to know that, but I cannot tell by any means if I don't follow the movie.

For this I would need is a "last action phase activity report" with a bunch of one-line entries like the text lines printed in TacOps, and in addition the result, like "target exploded", or "burst landed at 012345 and 57 vehicles exploded".

[tar]

Actually, I don't think unit selection should be a problem. You wouldn't want an external AI to use the graphical interface to give orders. Instead, you would want to be able to generate something like the orders that are exchanged in a PBEM setup.

Concur on the information from the combat phase.

[Redwolf]

Originally posted by tar:

Actually, I don't think unit selection should be a problem. You wouldn't want an external AI to use the graphical interface to give orders. Instead, you would want to be able to generate something like the orders that are exchanged in a PBEM setup.

Concur on the information from the combat phase.

I want to make this AI usable in multiplayer as the opponent or as one player in a team with humans. Or as a commander directing human players

And this is biting the snake in the tail anyway: I would prefer to give my orders directly, but then I would have to have some kind of software interface to do so. Either way that would require coding effort by the Major.

[Jeff Gilbert]

At the risk of sounding like a sales guy or a schill for TacOps, I feel the need to reply on the "AI Sucks" train of thought.

The AI does as it is advertised ... it mimics the former Soviet doctrine very well.

What I seem to be reading is the desire for a million dollar AI on a $25 budget.

I am sure if you offer the Major a certified check for the FULL million, he will give you a verbos AI and throw in a scenario editor to boot.

[Stoffel]

hi Randal,

Indeed you are right on your comment about the AI.

I would like to see an AI which is capable of playing blue or an editor to create my own battles.

But like redwolf said we were more willing to have a (good)multiplayer version.

Its better to play another human anyway than the AI.

But what i meant to say was that its better to ask normal questions instead of using words as The AI Sucks.

Language like that can scare new players off.

Our community isnt as huge as the CM community but we are sure just as good and nice,and aswers asked here always get a reply fast.

So be friendly and ask,and remember even critical questions will receive an answer.

Henk