aka_tom_w Posted March 7, 2002 Share Posted March 7, 2002 OK I know its WAY too late for anything this "big" to make its way into CMBB but........ With CMBB expected this summer I am keen to see how they model the AI game on the tactic level with poor tactics and communication and coordination on the part of the Russians. Would it be possible to program a specific AI sub routine or program to handle the Russians on defense (early on) and a different Smarter more aggresive AI sub routine to handle the Germans (when they are the AI) again in the early campaign. One very interesting suggestion made some time ago was the the current AI in CMBO could be VERY Russian like if there were played with green troops involved and you set it in defensive posture and you dumbed it down a bit. I say this because the best way to simulate the Russians at the tactical level in CMBB may to play against the AI. I say that because those military historians amongst us who know all the things the Russians did wrong in the early going will do everything they can, while playing the Russians, to overcome all the limitations that BTS will surely program into the command and control of the Russian units. I will post more on this when I can get a clearer picture of what I am trying to say... your comments? -tom w [ March 07, 2002, 01:21 PM: Message edited by: aka_tom_w ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ligur Posted March 7, 2002 Share Posted March 7, 2002 Tee hee, somehow the CM:BO AI might be a good simulation of the early Russian like it is. HQ's always get toasted first, maybe that is the fanatic Ltn. with a comissar pointing a Tokarev or Makarov or whatever the handgun was at his neck to encourage his national spirit. The troops wander around aimlessly without much other purpose then to move towards some vague target, with the HQ, naturally, gone or long dead. Artillery shoots here and there without much effect. Sounds about right, yep. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commissar Posted March 7, 2002 Share Posted March 7, 2002 BTS has stated very early on that they are against the idea of national modifiers. The whole concept of giving any side a modifier simply because of their nationality is unrealitic in BTS's view. You can do a search and find what they've said on the issue. They've said it many times before. Nationality-specific AI would certainly fall under this catagory. Plus, BTS has stated that the AI will not be greatly improved as their is a limit with what you can do with AI and their time is limited. Better to use that time putting in features like real weather effects, DOODADS, etc than spending a mountain of time trying to improve the AI and only getting an ant hill worth of "improvement." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JPS Posted March 7, 2002 Share Posted March 7, 2002 I certainly hope BTS's "official" priorities are the other way around. First, if there are documented, verifiable differences in standard operating procedures and training of different combatants, that should be taken into account in AI behavior. I doubt much is included for CMBB, but who knows what wonders Charles has time to do. Neither I am sure that good examples in SOPs warranting AI changes have been presented, let alone backed up by some kind of empirical evidence. Second, the quest for more eye-candy etc is neverending. I sure hope the _hard_ task of good AI development remains a top priority for time being. Best regards, JPS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aka_tom_w Posted March 7, 2002 Author Share Posted March 7, 2002 Originally posted by Commissar: BTS has stated very early on that they are against the idea of national modifiers. The whole concept of giving any side a modifier simply because of their nationality is unrealitic in BTS's view. You can do a search and find what they've said on the issue. They've said it many times before. Nationality-specific AI would certainly fall under this catagory. Plus, BTS has stated that the AI will not be greatly improved as their is a limit with what you can do with AI and their time is limited. Better to use that time putting in features like real weather effects, DOODADS, etc than spending a mountain of time trying to improve the AI and only getting an ant hill worth of "improvement."I'm not requesting a nationality modifier. (Really) I know they have a VERY clear policy about no nationality modifiers. I understand that there are 3 levels of Artificial Intelligence programed into the game. Off hand its something like a strategic layer, an operational layer and a tactical layer. EACH one has an AI sub routine (I think.) Given that the Russian defensive doctrine was well known and actually (for lack of a better word) not all that complicated, it may not be that difficult (But I am not a programmers so I have no idea) to model the rather "static" russian defensive doctrine in the Strategic AI. I was just suggesting that those layers of AI be "tweaked" for each nation to historically reflect their doctrines and practices and policies on offense and defense, for historical authenticity of course. I am REALLY hoping they have already thought of this and will surprise us with it, other wise this suggestion is really the stuff of fantasy and likely will not be seen (if we are lucky) until the CM II engine rewrite. Just food for thought. And again a reminder, give the Tac AI green troops set up on Defense and attack them with Vet units and with superior numbers and tell me that the response of the green tac AI defender's units is NOT like the Russians on the Eastern Front in the early days of the campaign?? :cool: -tom w [ March 07, 2002, 01:23 PM: Message edited by: aka_tom_w ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott B Posted March 7, 2002 Share Posted March 7, 2002 I think that in the long term it might be interesting to see a TAC AI that could mimic the tactical doctrine of a specific army in a wargame, but I don't see this as a priority in working on the AI for any near-term version of CM. Rather, I'd like to see the AI use the resources it has available more intelligently before it goes and starts getting fancy with some specifically German or British or Soviet fighting technique. When the AI can adjust its tactics to better handle what resources it has available, then I'll be more interested in seeing whether it can be "more Soviet," so to speak. I sorta see it like this: if you have a chess program that can play at a grandmaster level, it makes sense that you can later teach it to mimic the styles of specific players, even other grand masters. I have a chess program that does just this - I can choose to play a computer that attempts to play like Capablanca or Alekhine or Zimbu the monkey, for example. But if the program doesn't have the ability to play at a high level, no matter who it pretends to be you're always playing against Zimbu. Scott Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted March 7, 2002 Share Posted March 7, 2002 Originally posted by aka_tom_w: Actually, the Soviet defensive doctrine on the strategic and operational level was early and vigorous counter-attack to be driven deeply into the enemy's logistic zone. Sounds sorta like Blitzkrieg to me. This was the plan in place at the start of Barbarossa, which has led some commentators to the mistaken belief that Stalin et al planned a spoiling attack against the Germans but got beaten to the punch. However, having a doctrine and being able to implement it are two different things. The Sovs were simply unprepared to receive the violence of the German attack and do anything other than what they did: fall back on the strategic level. Early in the campaign, however they did launch many counter thrusts, usually featuring armor. They just weren't very good at this point in the war at pulling it off. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts