Scenario Design and A.I.

[Franko]

I spent a great deal of time designing and publicly distributing scenarios both independently and through Boots and Tracks. Many of them were well-received. I've been studying the AI capabilities over the last few days and have actually read the manual. It looks as though there is tremendous potential here, even for designing scenarios where the AI may actually WIN. I have a sense that there will be no bad scenarios going forward: only bad designers. Question: is there some sort of AI guide out there, other than the manual, that can give us more insight? Or, is it fair to say that the manual is complete onto itself, and there is nothing further to add? Battlefront, what say you?

Also, I'd like to point out that this "game" (I'd prefer to call it a hobby) is truly a magnum opus, and the folks at Battlefront should be lauded. It is truly an astonishing achievement. Well done, gents. I hope you're making enough on this to buy a few toys and to take care of those you value. Great product.

[Vanir Ausf B]

Not really a guide, but a few tips:

http://www.battlefront.com/community/showpost.php?p=1268647&postcount=22

[MikeyD]

The closest thing that I can think of for a 'guide' is to crack open one of the scenarios you though did an especially good job and give the AI orders sets a thorough looking over, try to figure out what the designer was attempting to do. Maybe play "scenario designer mode" so you can watch the attacker in action. Just remember an attacker's AI orders set are bound to be more 'interesting' than a defender's. Just the nature of the beast.

[Mord]

I am not sure how familiar you are with the CMSF game or forum, but there's almost four years worth of lessons buried in there...that may help a bit if you have the time. Lots of hard won lessons that could still apply at least in some small measure.

Then again, most of the guys that posted there are here as well and can impart some scenario making wisdom, Normal Dude, George MC, LLF (who spent god knows how long on a single map), Paper Tiger, etc. to name a VERY few (and no disrespect to anybody I forgot...just rattling names off the top of my head.)

Mord.

[Cull]

I've been working on a QB map and have been thoroughly flummoxed by the AI Plan design process---can't get anything to work right for an AI attacker---so I'm finally going to have a look at some "stock" stuff and see if I can figure out what I'm missing (which I should've done from the get-go).

But yeah, just from playing some of the stock scenarios it's clear the potential is tremendous; I just have to figure out how to tap into it. Learning curve for designers is considerably higher than CMx1 but obviously the payoff is there.

[Rokko]

I personally would like to be able to open the Fauville map from the Task Force Raff campaign, that had really great AI imho, that almost overrun my positions with its smart use of smoke.

BTW, it seems that Assault and Max Assault don't work, is that right? Also in every scenario I've opened only Advance was used.

[WineCape]

Boots & Track still alive? The last address I had showed nada. Care to enlighten me if they still exist at another address?

I remembered some very good designers designing for previous Rumblings of War tourneys, by names of

Richie

Scott B

WWB.

[Cull]

I personally would like to be able to open the Fauville map from the Task Force Raff campaign, that had really great AI imho, that almost overrun my positions with its smart use of smoke.

Planning proper use of arty by the AI has been the one of my bigger confusions. I'd be very interested to figure out how they got the smoke to be used/timed properly.

Currently, the editor allows you to designate a mission intensity and the area it will strike, but that's all---no ability to set a "time" for it. The manual simply says that as soon as an FO has eyes on the mission's strike area, the mission will run.

So, in my current map, I have three missions for the AI...two HE and one smoke...on a village. They are targeted fairly close together so inevitably the AI gets an FO in position and sees all three mission targets, and all three fire basically simultaneously.

I'm starting to think you just have to "game" the system by figuring out how to keep LOS blocked from the AI observers until the appropriate time in the scenario.

I wish we could add a time setting to arty missions, kind of like you assign the time on orders. "Available after 10:00", "Available after 15:00" or something like that; that way you could time the arrival of AI troops to have eyes on a strike area when you wanted it to happen.

Anyway, just thinking out loud here. Carry on.

More testing ahead...

[mjkerner]

I agree, Cull, a timer is needed for pre-planned AI arty.

[MikeyD]

You can't time AI artillery. You can set up high quality FOs in good positions, place TRPs and that's about it. The AI then does the deciding. Initial bombarment is another matter, painted AI "support target' zones with give the AI a rough idea what you want to be hit at game start.

[Cull]

You can't time AI artillery.

I know I wish you could. Seems like it wouldn't be a big deal to add a time feature, no?

You can set up high quality FOs in good positions, place TRPs and that's about it. The AI then does the deciding. Initial bombarment is another matter, painted AI "support target' zones with give the AI a rough idea what you want to be hit at game start.

OH, ok. That cleared part of my problem up. I didn't realize that the painted target zones were all intended to fire at game start.

And I hadn't considered TRPs for the AI attacker. Is that possible? Doesn't seem like it would/should be, but that would help attacking AI strikes work much better.

Still baffled on how to get AI attacker to use smoke screens; maybe it's just not very doable, except at game start.

[mjkerner]

MikeyD, TRPs can be set up on a QB map? FO's too? I had assumed that they were ignored by the game like normal troops that are inadvertantly left on the map are.

[SteveP]

I am probably being premature on this, since my experience with CMBN is so limited, but I've noticed something about a couple of the scenarios that reminded me of a big debate in the past. What I noticed is a tendency for the design and setup to "dictate" an overall tactical plan for the player (e.g., this platoon is intended to head in that direction, this one in that direction, etc.). Some CM1 players (including me, I think ) objected to this type of design. But I am wondering if the AI plan function in CMBN might be leading to this same type of scenario, especially those scenarios designed to be played by either side.

Keep in mind I haven't even studied any of this in the manual: Just commenting here because this thread is here.

[BornGinger]

On 5/24/2011 at 5:21 AM, Vanir Ausf B said:

Not really a guide, but a few tips:

 

http://www.battlefront.com/community/showpost.php?p=1268647&postcount=22

Unfortunately this link doesn't work anymore due to the new Battlefront website. Any chance that someone knows anything about how to search for this one?