Jump to content

Major Bone... AI Planning Tools


Recommended Posts

We've said over and over again how different CMx2 will be from CMx1 in terms of "storylines" for battles and campaigns (which are a series of battles). The importance of a storyline is intuitive for most, though not necessary obvious to all. I'll give a quick example to think of as I explain the new AI Tools:

Storyline - The US has a Stryker Rifle Company and is tasked with cleaning out a couple of city blocks of enemy units. The US forces are divided up into two Platoon sized groups with a Stryker MGS each. The balance of the force is held as a reserve. Force Able is to advance up to a Mosque and then hold its positions. Force Baker is to clear out a commercial zone and stop overlooking a park.

The Syrians have a platoon of Special Forces and some Unconventional (Uncon) fighters. Their task is to inflict as much damage on the US as possible. To do this they have set up a kill zone using ATGMs and heavy machineguns. Two IEDs are planted in the middle and far extreme of the zone. The plan is to wait until the US forces are near the middle IED, detonate both, then open up with everything at their disposal. A token force is located on each flank so as to stall anything potentially out maneuvering them.

Sounds like a pretty tense scenario, does it not? In CMx1 it would have been pretty tough to pull something like this off with any degree of certainty. Therefore, the storyline given to each player could mean absolutely nothing if the AI decided to not do certain things, like keeping the ambush forces in their positions, advancing the US forces into the kill zone as a group, etc. Sure, it MIGHT have worked out that way, but there never was any way to be sure it would. That's all changed now smile.gif

AI Planning Tools

The scenario designer has the ability to create the following:

Groups - a collection of units (up to 8 per side)

Orders - basic instruction sets

Map Zones - areas of the map to focus on

Plans - overall coordination of Groups, Orders, and Zones (up to 5 per side)

The primary concept is the Plan, which is a "script" from which the computer player operates. This is not a script in the traditional FPS/RTS sense in which tactical behavior is tied to trigger points, patrol routes, etc. Instead it is a set of behavioral instructions just like in a real military formation. For example, the "script" doesn't say "Tank 231 goes from this point to this point and then tries to shoot here", rather it says "Tank 231 will try to move through this area and shoot at any threats it sees". The actual tactical moves and decisions the unit makes are left up to the TacAI, which means they are context sensitive decisions just like in CMx1. The difference between CMx1 and CMx2 is you can actually instruct specific units to go in a certain way through a certain place instead of hoping that the StratAI does the same thing.

When the scenario is played, one Plan is chosen semi-randomly and used. This allows built-in unpredictability for the computer player, while still adhering to sensible planning from the scenario author. Or not if the scenario designer chooses to make only a single Plan for a particular side, thereby guaranteeing that it will always be enacted upon. The designer can assign weights to each Plan so it is more or less likely to be chosen.

A Group is a collection of squads, teams and vehicles, assigned by the scenario designer to be used in conjunction with each other. Each Group acts independently of other Groups and receives its own set of Orders in the Plan. A Plan supports between one and eight Groups.

In the Unit editor, you can assign units to different Groups by selecting the unit and pressing the 0-7 keys on the numpad. Any "unassigned" units are considered to be in Group 0, the default.

The designer selects a Plan, chooses a Group, and then assigns it up to 16 Orders. The Group will attempt to cary out each Order in succession. The designer repeats this process for each Group to be used with that particular Plan. He then repeats this for each Plan he wants to create.

Each Order is associated with a Map Zone that is "painted" on the map, much like a setup zone or a victory objective area. The designer selects the Order and then paints an area for the units of that Group to attempt to move toward and occupy (or set up in) as they carry out the Order. It can be any contiguous shape of any size. When creating an attack Plan the designer may paint a succession of Map Zones, one for each Order, directing the Group to move across the map to its final Objective. For a defensive Plan there may only be one Order and one Map Zone for the entire Plan, or there can be more complex instructions such as moving a flanking force while the bulk sits tight. It all depends on what the designer wants to have happen.

Each Order has some parameters associated with it. The first controls how the Group moves towards the assigned Map Zone, with options that vary the tradeoff between speed and firepower/protection. "Dash" should be used only rarely - it's basically an "everyone run for it" option that would only be appropriate for short distances where it is near certain that the Group won't want to engage the enemy in any way whatsoever until they reach the Map Zone (maybe crossing a dangerously open road between buildings).

The second parameter controls the level(s) on which infantry will occupy buildings within the Map Zone. This is extremely important for dense urban maps since it dictates the speed and caution a Group has while moving through the Map Zone..

The third parameter controls the combat posture of the units. "Active" means shoot early and often, while "Cautious" conserves ammo (and perhaps draws less attention from the enemy). Ambush options tell the computer player not to open fire beyond the indicated distance (it uses Target Arc/Radius orders during the game for this) however once someone in the group starts shooting, from that point on the Order will change to an "Active" posture. "Hide" means exactly that. Ambush and Hide are generally only appropriate for defensive Plans (usually in the "Setup" Order) but this is not enforced.

The fourth parameter controls whether passenger-carrying vehicles should dismount their passengers when arriving in the Map Zone.

Once a computer-player Group reaches an Order's Map Zone, it begins to look at the next Order (and associated Map Zone) if one exists. The computer player decides when to "move on" to the next Order by looking at two time points (set by the designer) and the condition of its troops. One of the time points, "Exit After", prevents Groups from moving on to the next Order until the specified time is reached. The other time point, "Exit Before", makes the Group try very hard to move on to the next Order before the specified time is reached. Sometimes this will not be possible, especially if the troops are in a bad state or there are a lot of stragglers. These two time points control how long the Group spends in a given Map Zone so as to offer the designer the ability to coordinate actions of different Groups. It will take some skill and play testing to estimate these times correctly since combat factors, distance, terrain, Condition, etc. have such an influence on how quickly a Group can progress from one Map Zone to another.

Well, that's it for now. This new AI Planning interface has such a profound effect on how battles play out and that means the designer has so much more control over the storyline than in CMx1. We feel this is one of the most fundamental improvements on the game side (as opposed to the simulation side) of things over CMx1. Hopefully my description of the features makes you as excited as it does us.

Steve

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 76
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Originally posted by Battlefront.com:

I wanted to wait until it was actually coded and working before telling you. I hate making empty promises, I love making statements of actual fact :D

Steve

That and you probably didn't want to reveal detailed specs for the competition to find out.

If I were you I'd keep it secred right up to game release smile.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Victory Conditions are seperate from the stuff I talked about above. The designer sets up the Victory Conditions first (well, that is the logical way to do it) then sets about making Plans that will take or hold Objectives. Objectives are a subset of Victory Conditions, BTW, not two terms to describe the same thing. Victory Conditions are the overarching things that need to be satisfied, Objectives are very speicific conditions that need to be acheived.

So, from a story point you could say that the US forces are coming into town from three different routes to secure a government building and establish a security perimeter around it. The main Objective could be government building with minor Objectives sprinkled around it. Oh, and there are Phase Lines, Advance Routes, and other things that can be created as well, but I don't want to complicate things too much :D Then the AI Plans can be developed to advance through the map and attempt to secure the Objectives and then sit around for a counter attack or what not. Whatever the designer wants.

A side is either AI controlled or Player controlled, never a combination. This means that the designer can make Plans for both sides and then let the player decided which side to play from. The designer can also not make Plans for one side and tell people to only play from that particular side. Again, it is up to the designer.

Steve

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is the AI smart enough to come up with its own plan if needed? By that I mean, can the scenario designer not fill in a plan OR use 1 or more of the slots for 'AI plan'?

I ask because this system sounds similar in someways to the scripting in Steel Beasts PE, which I am not a fan of (the game rocks, but I don't like the scripting system, as the variation in a few 'plans' doesn't really give the AI opponent the more fluid, if sometimes braindead, feel of a more dynamic AI).

[ February 13, 2007, 04:50 PM: Message edited by: sage2 ]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

from the morale thread

posted February 13, 2007 02:31 PM

Yes, you can tag individual units with various degrees of value towards an overall score. Such things are called Objectives of a type Unit. The main reason we added it was for the Syrian forces. An entire battle might be fought by the Syrians in order to destroy a single Abrams tank. That's it... that's all they want to be happy. Doesn't matter if there is one Syrian left standing at the end, if they get that tank they'll consider it a victory. Now, if the US forces on the other side are tasked with total elimination of all Syrian opposition as their main Objective, they'll be pretty happy with their result as well. Who would be declared the victor? Depends on how important force protection is for each side. I'd say that in the example I'm talking about the Syrians would likely win, but the details are up to the scenario designer.

Steve

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Madmatt:

Hehehe, competition? There hasn't been a game yet that was any serious competition to CMBO, let alone what we are doing in CMSF. We aren't worried about that.

Madmatt

Bah, that is like Coke thinking that their competition is just other brown fizzy liquids, rather than any refreshments!

Your competition isn't other computer wargames, it is what else I could be doing with my leisure time... CM series rocked, not because they were better than other computer wargames, but because they were so good that it was better than or on par with, say, watching a DVD, playing round of golf, surfing net etc!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That all sounds marvelous!

I was wondering if it would make any sense to adapt these AI planning tools (groups, boxes, phase lines, etc) to be used by a human player to capture his own plan as a planning and plan execution aid? The thought is that the human player could build a plan before the start of a game in a similar way that the scenario designer constructs the AI plan when building a scenario. The human could then view his plan during game play in a manner simmilar to the way the scenario designer views his plans when building the scenario. Thus the idea is to leverage off the code developed for AI planning to build a human player planning aid.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Midnight Warrior:

That all sounds marvelous!

I was wondering if it would make any sense to adapt these AI planning tools (groups, boxes, phase lines, etc) to be used by a human player to capture his own plan as a planning and plan execution aid? The thought is that the human player could build a plan before the start of a game in a similar way that the scenario designer constructs the AI plan when building a scenario. The human could then view his plan during game play in a manner simmilar to the way the scenario designer views his plans when building the scenario. Thus the idea is to leverage off the code developed for AI planning to build a human player planning aid.

I was wondering the same thing. I think these tools could be used to help pre-battle planning, but also C&C simulation and also help with co-play in the future if they are given to the human controlled side.
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...