quote:

ORIGINAL: Woos

quote:

ORIGINAL: Buck Beach

I'm not sure I truly understand the full concept of AI scripting? What does it include? I am only looking for a very brief explanation.

To give a more simple explanation than Joe: In general AI scripting is if the designers of a game (or of the AI scripts) fix certain behaviour of the AI. The alternative is a free-planning AI which only decides based on its general algorithms and on what it sees the opponent do. A well-known example for AI-scripting (and "human-scripting" BTW) are the opening libraries of chess. For several moves there is a huge 'script' telling the AI how to react on each move of the opponent. Once out of the book, the AI has to switch to free planning.

Basic problem of AI scripting is that if you know what the script prescribes (either because you wrote it or due to several games against it) you can normally easily beat the AI since you can either make moves throwing it out of script or use the script against the AI (just expand quickly as IJ in WitP and watch the Allies AI try to attack base it is not scripted to give up already with insufficient forces; I think in TOAW it was landing some unit in the back of the enemy and see all units assigned to that city suddenly leave the front leaving gaps).


BTW I'm not an expert in AIs at all but is event scripting still state of the art for AIs? It seems to lack quite some flexibility. E.g. a script for the invasion of the Philipines would have to recognize and act upon several possible moves of the opponent (defend the beaches, fall back immediatly, sent reinforcements by ship (OK not that probable for the philipines) or plane, ....). Doing that all in an event driven script seems to be quite complicated to me.
Maybe for WitP-II one should look at the Robotics people (which I also am not an expert in) which seem to use task- and goal-oriented approaches to solve AI issues in 'games' like Robocup and Robocup@home.

quote:

making sure that the AI doesn't sail around until its tanks are empty and it's a thousand miles away from base...

quote:

ORIGINAL: Wild

Hi all, I have been lurking around for a long time now, but have only recently taken up the daunting task of playing the game. I am however a long time player of Gary Grigsby's Pacwar. It is one of my all time favorite games. (Along with War in Russia) That being said  i am greatly looking forward to the AE, and will buy it no matter what the cost, but i was wondering if it would be possible to have different colors for the various allied land units just as in Pacwar. (Green for american,blue for british,yellow for new zeland etc.) I know you are all working on much more important things and that this falls into the realm of eye candy but i am so used to the different colors from Pacwar i find it hard to get used to just one uniform color.
Thank you all for the time and effort you have put into this great game.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BigJ62

quote:

ORIGINAL: Wild

Hi all, I have been lurking around for a long time now, but have only recently taken up the daunting task of playing the game. I am however a long time player of Gary Grigsby's Pacwar. It is one of my all time favorite games. (Along with War in Russia) That being said i am greatly looking forward to the AE, and will buy it no matter what the cost, but i was wondering if it would be possible to have different colors for the various allied land units just as in Pacwar. (Green for american,blue for british,yellow for new zeland etc.) I know you are all working on much more important things and that this falls into the realm of eye candy but i am so used to the different colors from Pacwar i find it hard to get used to just one uniform color.
Thank you all for the time and effort you have put into this great game.

Each country has its own bmp icon panel even in Witp1 so you can change it to any color you like. Look in the art folder.

• Will hot seat function still work?  I have found this to be an important modding tool.
  
• Corregidor as a base?
  
• Any chance for some screen shots of each editor screens? (Drool.)
  

quote:

ORIGINAL: Norm3

Just wanted to thank the Matrix team for over 2 years of wargaming bliss. Have a few questions reguarding AE.

• Will hot seat function still work? I have found this to be an important modding tool.
  
• Corregidor as a base?
  
• Any chance for some screen shots of each editor screens? (Drool.)
  

quote:

ORIGINAL: Norm3
Corregidor as a base?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Andrew Brown

quote:

ORIGINAL: Norm3
Corregidor as a base?

No.

quote:

ORIGINAL: el cid again

There is a problem with fortifications under siege. Fort Drum is the classic case - because it cannot go the way it did - or could have - IRL. When Gen Waynewright surrendered, the Commander Fort Drum called his staff together. They reported ALL systems were functional. The only problem - one they could not resolve - was there was no significant amount of food - so they honored the order to surrender. Had they had food, they would have continued to close Manila Bay - for a long time. [See The Concrete Battleship where this was first disclosed]

In the game, by the time of the surrender, Fort Drum assets are badly or even totally attritted. Enemy action took of 26 feet of concrete - without taking down any system or weapon at all. But the game will take down all the big guns quite soon - and the smaller ones (there are fewer) even sooner. It would be better if there was a mechanism to designate a fortification - and then to protect heavy assets in particular inside it. Also if there was a way to keep supplies in the fort. Right now - I can put 90000 supplies in Fort Drum as a unit - and they will be used to feed the neighbors within about 3 days.

quote:

ORIGINAL: spence

I might add that as an Allied Player I see the locations of my convoys all the time in my SIGINT Report. Since that file is generated by the Japanese Player during his turn it would seem that he has access to it. That seems wrong for a couple of reasons:
1) I don't need the SIGINT Report to tell me where my convoys are
2) it lends itself to abuse (peeking) by the IJ Player

quote:


Perhaps access to the appropriate SIGINT REPORT could be password protected by the Player 1/Player 2 passwords in AE.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shark7
Another question concerning graphics, that being will our current still work with AE? I know there are several out there people have used to 'dress up' the game, and I've gotten quite used to the way it looks now.

quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs

Actually, all of the reports are combined Allied & IJ reports, including SigInt. That's why you see your own ships in there too.

quote:

ORIGINAL: JWE

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shark7
Another question concerning graphics, that being will our current still work with AE? I know there are several out there people have used to 'dress up' the game, and I've gotten quite used to the way it looks now.

Speaking only for the naval art portion, we are doing everything possible to accommodate existing art and existing ‘after market’ artists. Too many people have invested too much talent in enhancing the visual impression of this game to let it go to waste by a radical change of numerology.

There will be hundreds of upgrade and conversion models included, but the baseline models of the vessels will conform (as much as humanly possible) to the WiTP stock enumerations. The ideal is that the AE naval art pak will be suitable for all Matrix WiTP games. That means your ‘eye candy’ will continue to taste sweet.

quote:

ORIGINAL: TheElf

Not for aircraft. It will be a completely new file with several hundred new Aircraft needing their own art.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dixie

quote:

ORIGINAL: TheElf

Not for aircraft. It will be a completely new file with several hundred new Aircraft needing their own art.

I'm assuming that it's still the same format? One big file with all the art in the same 'picture' for each side.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Drakken

I have two questions about leaders and rank :

1- Will something be done to make rank something to take into account? I always found weird that it is possible to replace a highly ranked General by a Colonel or a junior officer in total impunity, without penalty in political points. In real life, if a commander-in-chief would choose to place a Colonel to command a Corps HQ, he would logically have to expend a lot of political clout to have that person breveted to the rank of General AND pay the political price of passing over senior officers. No way this lucky officer would remain a Colonel, and no way senior officers wouldn't make a rack about it. Could it be possible to implement a system more a kind to the "seniority" rating in AGEOD's AACW, for instance?

2- Will leaders be forcefully restricted to command in their respective branch in AE? By that I mean, that Army officers will be restricted to LCU command, Air Force commanders to air units, and Navy commanders to TFs and ships?. Each time I wish to change leaders, officers from other branches are available to me whatever the branch is, which isn't right and is a little annoying.