TacAI in the attack: what it can('t) do?

[Chelco]

[Following a suggestion by Phillip Culliton, I'm posting this from the scenario design forum]

I am having a hard time designing good AI plans for the red forces.

It's hard enough to make good AI plans without triggers. Without triggers, the AI plans look a bit like orders for a turn in a WEGO game, where the "turn" lasts the whole scenario. The absence of triggers that could provide the designer with some sort of control during the scenario is to be alleviated by the TacAI, because it can make decisions on the fly. That's the theory.

In reality, I can't get the red TacAI to avoid these behaviors:

-Sending more and more troops through paths which are obviously dangerous. More and more troops are sent right into paths where piles of dead red troops accumulate.

-Not pulling out until it is just too late. It looks like the TacAI waits until a team is down to two or three men to order them out of there. This maybe a result of the high lethality and pace of the modern battlefield, but it would be more reasonable to make the TacAI to re-consider the path if just one man was shot (if one man was shot, it is likely very bad things will happen to the whole squad).

Maybe I am expecting from the TacAI something it can't do. I am not asking for a super smart TacAI. I just want to make an scenario that is believable.

Maybe I'm missing something here. Your feedback is appreciated.

[Pandur]

Without triggers, the AI plans look a bit like orders for a turn in a WEGO game, where the "turn" lasts the whole scenario.

you got it. but i think it was said that triggers of some sort maybe included at some point.

[hoolaman]

Originally posted by Chelco:

[Following a suggestion by Phillip Culliton, I'm posting this from the scenario design forum]

I am having a hard time designing good AI plans for the red forces.

It's hard enough to make good AI plans without triggers. Without triggers, the AI plans look a bit like orders for a turn in a WEGO game, where the "turn" lasts the whole scenario. The absence of triggers that could provide the designer with some sort of control during the scenario is to be alleviated by the TacAI, because it can make decisions on the fly. That's the theory.

In reality, I can't get the red TacAI to avoid these behaviors:

-Sending more and more troops through paths which are obviously dangerous. More and more troops are sent right into paths where piles of dead red troops accumulate.

-Not pulling out until it is just too late. It looks like the TacAI waits until a team is down to two or three men to order them out of there. This maybe a result of the high lethality and pace of the modern battlefield, but it would be more reasonable to make the TacAI to re-consider the path if just one man was shot (if one man was shot, it is likely very bad things will happen to the whole squad).

Maybe I am expecting from the TacAI something it can't do. I am not asking for a super smart TacAI. I just want to make an scenario that is believable.

Maybe I'm missing something here. Your feedback is appreciated.

I have seen plenty of examples of red AI troops crawling one by one into the field of fire of my soldiers.

I agree it does make for a unsatisfying game experience.

Another complaint I have is the stop-start nature of a AI advance. I haven't really gotten into making AI plans so I can say if this can be done better, but many of the stock scenarios have AI that drives to a point then stops, then does the same again after awhile. It just doesn't seem fluid and real like you expect.

I've seen AI Strykers halt for two or three WEGO turns facing 90 degrees to the enemy. They should be more intelligent about their facing and disposition when they pause at a location.

[Paper Tiger]

Chelco:

In reality, I can't get the red TacAI to avoid these behaviors:

-Sending more and more troops through paths which are obviously dangerous. More and more troops are sent right into paths where piles of dead red troops accumulate.

-Not pulling out until it is just too late. It looks like the TacAI waits until a team is down to two or three men to order them out of there. This maybe a result of the high lethality and pace of the modern battlefield, but it would be more reasonable to make the TacAI to re-consider the path if just one man was shot (if one man was shot, it is likely very bad things will happen to the whole squad).

Good points, that pretty much sums up what the TAC AI can't do very well. However, I have found that the two most important things for a good AI attack plan are stance and the length of time they have to perform an order.

Stance is obvious, 'cautious', 'normal', 'active' and 'assault' all make a huge difference to how the AI group reacts while following your order. I rarely use 'max assault' as that usually means that after making contact with the enemy the group will never move again. Yeah, it will EVENTUALLY, but assault does it better.

IMO the length of time the group has to perform it's order is the more important of the two though. Tell group 1 to move from point A to point B with only 5 minutes to 'Exit before' and it will perform the action very differently than if you give them 20 minutes. The units will use any terrain they can find between the two points and won't necessarily approach it in a straight line. The longer you give them to perform the order, the better, and more unpredictable, the results will be.

Having said that, I really think that the TAC AI needs to be tweeked to prevent it's units from walking into an artillery barrage. That's not very good at all. I expect some of these things will get sorted a some point in the future.

[Chelco]

Thanks for the feedback.

Originally posted by Paper Tiger:

However, I have found that the two most important things for a good AI attack plan are stance and the length of time they have to perform an order.

Stance is obvious, 'cautious', 'normal', 'active' and 'assault' all make a huge difference to how the AI group reacts while following your order. I rarely use 'max assault' as that usually means that after making contact with the enemy the group will never move again. Yeah, it will EVENTUALLY, but assault does it better.

IMO the length of time the group has to perform it's order is the more important of the two though. Tell group 1 to move from point A to point B with only 5 minutes to 'Exit before' and it will perform the action very differently than if you give them 20 minutes. The units will use any terrain they can find between the two points and won't necessarily approach it in a straight line. The longer you give them to perform the order, the better, and more unpredictable, the results will be.

Paper Tiger,

That's very interesting! I never thought of that and I'm looking forward to try it.

Thanks million,

['Card]

Originally posted by Chelco:

-Sending more and more troops through paths which are obviously dangerous. More and more troops are sent right into paths where piles of dead red troops accumulate.

This is a particular favorite of mine.

"Hey, let's go see what happened to all those dead guys!"