How does AI fare in games vs mods (Dababes, RA) (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> Scenario Design and Modding



Message

medicff -> How does AI fare in games vs mods (Dababes, RA) (5/24/2012 9:33:24 PM)

Hi all,

Looking at such mods as Dababes and RA and wondering how an AI game would fare?

Probably Japan computer as read better AI.

Does it handle extended map, new locations, changes to economy, new units, new engineers setups?

BTW I usually jump sides to make minor adjustments currently to economy such as nates to oscars etc in stock AI already but not very much effort needed.

Thanks for all advice.

Looking for AI game while getting back into AE while taking full class load, but when finished hoping to have time for PBEM.

Pat



JWE -> RE: How does AI fare in games vs mods (Dababes, RA) (5/24/2012 10:44:06 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: medicff
Hi all,

Looking at such mods as Dababes and RA and wondering how an AI game would fare?

Honestly, it sucks. If you must play the AI try BabesLite. That's what it's there for.
quote:

Probably Japan computer as read better AI.

Only because we didn't tweak the Japan side as much as the Allied. It still sucks, but not as bad. We wanted to make it work, but see the next answer.
quote:

Does it handle extended map, new locations, changes to economy, new units, new engineers setups?

Nope. Not unless some whacko is willing to port over almost 90 AI files (7 to 9 months of work).
quote:

BTW I usually jump sides to make minor adjustments currently to economy such as nates to oscars etc in stock AI already but not very much effort needed.

A good way to do it.
quote:

Thanks for all advice.

Looking for AI game while getting back into AE while taking full class load, but when finished hoping to have time for PBEM.

Pat

Ciao. John; but don't give up hope.



pharmy -> RE: How does AI fare in games vs mods (Dababes, RA) (5/25/2012 9:43:18 PM)

Damn,that's a bummer but its useful info, I was just about to try RA 4.3 playing as Allies vs Jap AI for the first time. I'll guess I'll stick to the old map and RA 3.4.2 and stock scenarios.



rockmedic109 -> RE: How does AI fare in games vs mods (Dababes, RA) (5/26/2012 6:44:50 AM)

Actually I think da babes can be enjoyable. Yes, you are going to win. But with the allies, you should. Avoiding a non-historical approach helps the AI tremendously. I took an AI babes game into 43. The only problem was two attempts by the AI to send carriers past the guns at Singapore: Nasty Brits moved all their navigation aids inland so KB thought ther were farther out than they were...unsporting. But I think this would've occured in a vanilla game. And I think it is dependant on what AI set is "drawn" when the game starts.



dwg -> RE: How does AI fare in games vs mods (Dababes, RA) (5/28/2012 12:34:17 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: JWE

quote:

ORIGINAL: medicff
Does it handle extended map, new locations, changes to economy, new units, new engineers setups?

Nope. Not unless some whacko is willing to port over almost 90 AI files (7 to 9 months of work).



I'm not sure it would be so bad with vanilla AI, most locations haven't changed, and from what I can see mostly the AI works through the location IDs and HQ structures. It won't be efficient, and it will have blind-spots where it has no knowledge of new locations and units, but there should be some functionality there.

For that matter my own scenario is a hacked Da Babes and the AI is functioning without me having touched it, no matter I'm using extended map and have a host of new units and locations. I haven't played deeply enough into it as I'm still working on the set-up, but I must have played the first 5-10 days 20 times by now, and I seem to be seeing different behaviour from the AI in different run-throughs (particularly how long the Kido Butai hangs around off Pearl), which indicates it is choosing and executing from the range of available strategies, just as it is meant to.



JWE -> RE: How does AI fare in games vs mods (Dababes, RA) (5/28/2012 6:11:02 PM)

It’s really not bad when playing against a Japanese computer. And thank you all who play it and have nice things to say about it. We listen. Believe me.

But there are a lot of BigBabes things that the AI won’t recognize, and a lot of BigBabes things that were tweaked to specifically remove certain AI “advantages”.

The “moves” the AI makes (what it does) are still governed by the scripting, and will happen in an acceptable way, just like vanilla. But the “way” the AI functions (how it does it) is governed by the underlying implementation code that is found in literally every subroutine of the executable (hundreds of them). Many (if not most) of the BigBabes enhancements were created long after the implementation code, so the AI doesn’t even know they exist.

Just for example, the AI has no clue that the “Shore Party” switch exists, so that whole section of the TOEs are just empty slots as far as the AI is concerned. The AI does not recognize the differential between and among the various engineering units, so BigBabes engineers will not function correctly.

BigBabes gets rid of most base force units, tagged as Base Force, and replaces them with HQs and airbase support units, tagged as Engineers. The AI uses BF units in accord with an algorithm that lets it populate bases with any and all BF units and then grows them in accord with the base size. This is good for the airgroup movement algorithm. But is bad because BF platoons, with AvSup of 2 will quickly grow to AvSup of 90, or even 250, whenever it is required. Every base an LAX.

AI handles all hex combat as a “blop”. It is not programmed to handle phased combat. It plays stack-to-stack. BigBabes pulls out arty from some units so arty can be used as it was without rendering “other” units vulnerable to counter-battery. BigBabes has much more robust and realistic combat system, but it must be implemented manually (H2H or PBEM); AI can’t do it, don’t know how.

AI does not recognize “barge” or “LCVP” movement. If the situation is perfectly set up for a coastal barge movement and assault, the AI will preferentially teleport a passenger ship (xAP) to do the lift. AI will immediately and always resurrect any “buy from supply” class there is. It doesn’t matter how many or few Midgets are physically in the database slots, they will always be resurrected and amount to thousands, if that’s what it takes. BigBabes fiddles with that, so manual play is reasonable, but assigning dates and ports for these vessels precludes their use by the AI. It’s an all-or-nothing kind of thing.

AI does some special “everyday” TFs for a port with certain kinds of Classes in the port. Everybody bitches about the uselessness of certain small Classes, but those are the very ones the AI uses unbeknownst to the inattentive player. BigBabes maximizes (redefines) the ships available for these unsung, but highly important, missions.

And this is just a surface gloss on how BigBabes is incompatible with the AI implementation code. It would be good to have a decent Allied AI too, but there’s too much in BigBabes to ever be righteous with the AI implementation code. Best we can hope for is a decent set of movement option scripts for both sides. BigBabes will always remain a manual (H2H or PBEM) learning tool.



dwg -> RE: How does AI fare in games vs mods (Dababes, RA) (5/28/2012 8:46:43 PM)

quote:

AI handles all hex combat as a “blop”. It is not programmed to handle phased combat. It plays stack-to-stack. BigBabes pulls out arty from some units so arty can be used as it was without rendering “other” units vulnerable to counter-battery. BigBabes has much more robust and realistic combat system, but it must be implemented manually (H2H or PBEM); AI can’t do it, don’t know how.


I take your general points, but can you elaborate on the one above? Are we talking about bombardment attacks, or something different? I don't think it's a change that's necessarily apparent to players - Shore Parties and the like are easy enough to understand the role changes, they're pretty much forced onto you, but this one may have been subtle enough to slip by most people.

I suspect a lot of us who aren't able to commit to PBEM or H2H play are willing to accept the limitations on playing Big Babes against the AI. It may not be ideal, but it's the only game in town if you want the extra levels of detail that Big Babes brought us.



DD696 -> RE: How does AI fare in games vs mods (Dababes, RA) (5/28/2012 11:15:24 PM)

What I have done (my latest attempt) to try and make the best AI game for me playing as the Allies, is to use BigBabes as the starting point, then make the modifications I choose to make, and then to replace the Japanese land units with the land units from BabesLite. This gives the AI the units it is expecting to see and hopefully will make for a better game. Not that far enough long in it to comment on how it works, but it should work "better" against the AI.

But, as I have found throughout the years, the name of the game is "Restart in the Pacific". Someday I hope to get a version that I find satisfactory.



JWE -> RE: How does AI fare in games vs mods (Dababes, RA) (5/29/2012 12:20:11 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: dwg
I take your general points, but can you elaborate on the one above? Are we talking about bombardment attacks, or something different? I don't think it's a change that's necessarily apparent to players - Shore Parties and the like are easy enough to understand the role changes, they're pretty much forced onto you, but this one may have been subtle enough to slip by most people.

I suspect a lot of us who aren't able to commit to PBEM or H2H play are willing to accept the limitations on playing Big Babes against the AI. It may not be ideal, but it's the only game in town if you want the extra levels of detail that Big Babes brought us.

Damn. I can't answer that question, in so far as I understand it. Would you be so kind as to send me a pm, with a bit more description as to what you are talking about. [8D]

Ciao. John



Mac Linehan -> RE: How does AI fare in games vs mods (Dababes, RA) (5/29/2012 4:26:59 AM)

JWE -

Good information - a glimpse under the hood.

I am currently alternating between two Babes games - DaIronBabes 30v2 (Japanese AI) and DBB Scn28C v10 (H2H). I believe that my focus will change to DBB Scn28C; as I very much enjoy playing both sides. Over time, it has become apparent, that AE H2H can work - there is that which a player controls; but so much more (i.e. Combat Resolution!) that is out of a Player's hands. And when you throw in "advanced weather" - lots of bad weather, and thus even more uncertainty, it is really quite enjoyable. I am gradually putting together notes on how to balance solitaire play - giving the Japanese better radio intell, for instance. I also attempt to stick with historical goals; and try to always apply the "rule of reason" - would a historical commander / leadership do this"?

dwg -

please know that the AI does a good job, my DaIronBabes game has been very enjoyable, the Japanese AI has given me a hard time. Obviously even the most thoroughly scripted AI - equating to many months of work by Andy Mac or the Henderson Group (and the AE AI does very well!) can not match the flexibility and planning in a human player. In my modded IronBabes game, I gave the Japanese more of just about everything - in large quantities - to allow room for error and losses. I have not yet switched sides to tweak; but may do so just to help the AI out.

So - there are many ways to work around various limitations. I choose Babes because of what you have already mentioned - all the changes, tweaks and different approaches that makes Babes AE a new game. Please stick with it, it will be well worth the effort.

Just some thoughts -

Mac



JWE -> RE: How does AI fare in games vs mods (Dababes, RA) (6/1/2012 5:47:37 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: dwg
quote:

AI handles all hex combat as a “blop”. It is not programmed to handle phased combat. It plays stack-to-stack. BigBabes pulls out arty from some units so arty can be used as it was without rendering “other” units vulnerable to counter-battery. BigBabes has much more robust and realistic combat system, but it must be implemented manually (H2H or PBEM); AI can’t do it, don’t know how.

I take your general points, but can you elaborate on the one above? Are we talking about bombardment attacks, or something different? I don't think it's a change that's necessarily apparent to players - Shore Parties and the like are easy enough to understand the role changes, they're pretty much forced onto you, but this one may have been subtle enough to slip by most people.

I suspect a lot of us who aren't able to commit to PBEM or H2H play are willing to accept the limitations on playing Big Babes against the AI. It may not be ideal, but it's the only game in town if you want the extra levels of detail that Big Babes brought us.

Finally figured out what you were asking; must be getting old.

Phased combat includes bombardment, but it also includes the other stuff. Couple caveats, we mostly configure for the Pacific part of War in the Pacific. Don't pay much attention to collision of mass armys on a land mass like China. Engine is not at it's best for that scale. Also, we've been tweaking heavily for our small map scenarios (DEI, PI, Guad, OP FS). The BigBabes TO&Es are more "stock-like" than the stuff for our CPX games. Having said that:

Our division is an HQ unit. It has 3 Rgts (duh) and the arty split out as Bns; no recombine. Japan is the same except where it has a Cav or Recce unit; that is also split out as a separate Bn. This works well for Pacific island, DEI, PI type operations. In a game stack, of division scale, you might have 1 Rgt set to attack, 1 Rgt set to pursue, 1 Rgt resting, 2x 105 and 1x 155 Bns bombarding, and the last 105 Bn either set to pursue or rest.

Bombardment comes first, and counter-battery is limited; it doesn't whack the whole stack and cause those wierd imbalances. Attack comes next, but the Rgts still have their TOE regimental arty, so they get the firepower push. Resolve the attack, see wha'hoppen, if ya win, a kinda-sorta reserve (the pursuit) unit takes over, and the process repeats (think self-sharpening chain saw) [:D]

AI isn't programmed to think in these terms. If ya think on it, the engine works according to GG's original concept. In that, divisions are broken into 3 equal pieces (A, B, C) each with a proportional allocation of DivArty. So bombardment is by whole divisions or regiments ('cause that's where the guns are), not by arty units. So counter-battery effects whole divisions or regiments. The AI is not a separate implementation routine. The different bits of it are embedded in every single one of the hundreds of sub-routines and algorithms. That's what makes code tweaking so heartbreaking; try to spray for a couple dandelions and you end up killing the azaleas too.

Think so far as BigBabes is concerned the AI, doing stack attacks, is kinda ok. I mean, it has to be ok, 'cause that's all it knows. But whatever manual side you play, you might want to try phasing.



Sardaukar -> RE: How does AI fare in games vs mods (Dababes, RA) (6/1/2012 9:15:03 PM)

I am getting quite decent game as Allies vs. IJ AI, DaBigBabes A. I am limiting myself to mostly defensive fights until 1/1/1943 and go to offensive only after that. AI gives quite decent game for first year, if you limit yourself to playing mostly historically first. But, for example, I reinforced Port Moresby quite heavily and was really surprised that I almost lost it to AI. Was very close thing and I have to rush reinforcements in quickly.

AI can still give you some surprises.



moonraker65 -> RE: How does AI fare in games vs mods (Dababes, RA) (6/2/2012 10:32:36 AM)

I've just started a BigBabes RA 4.3 game against the Japanese AI and you certainly notice a difference in the speed at which he can make his moves. Not nearly as quick as a stock game. Although as mentioned above he can still throw some nasty surprises your way as I lost all but one of the ships evacuated from Hong Kong near Borneo after a surprise encounter with one of his Surface TF's [8|]



JWE -> RE: How does AI fare in games vs mods (Dababes, RA) (6/2/2012 3:53:59 PM)

@ Sardaukar
@ moonraker

Yes, the AI can give you a host of surprises. It's important to understand that there's 2 parts to the AI, though; "what" it does and "how" it does it.

The "how" is governed by the code and affects the combat methodology and its results (among many other things).

The "what" is governed by the scripts. Those are pretty much defined by an apocalyptically evil, blue-painted, Caledonian barbarian, who wears skirts with nothing underneath for gosh sakes. Grendel has nothing on this guy.

Always wondered what kind of people could produce a prince of darkness like Andy McPhie and a queen of love like Christine McVie, till I got to the skirt with no underwear part [:D]

(Andy, if this is offensive in any way, I will stop at once. Just say so. No offense is meant, it's all in jest. Sometimes humor pushes limits. If so, profound apologies. Have too much respect for you to do otherwise. J)



Don Bowen -> RE: How does AI fare in games vs mods (Dababes, RA) (6/2/2012 4:01:11 PM)

quote:

who wears skirts with nothing underneath for gosh sakes


Watch that, you lowlander.



[image]local://upfiles/757/BD4034AA89D04313BCB80734A8BA09A0.jpg[/image]



JWE -> RE: How does AI fare in games vs mods (Dababes, RA) (6/2/2012 6:50:59 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen
Watch that, you lowlander.

Ahh, but what's behind the Sporan, Brother Bowen. Are ya willing to lift that little kiltie up and show us what's beneath??

Aaagrrhh [sm=mad-1003.gif] Fruit of the Loom ??? [8D] Dude !! [:D]



Don Bowen -> RE: How does AI fare in games vs mods (Dababes, RA) (6/2/2012 7:00:25 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: JWE


quote:

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen
Watch that, you lowlander.

Ahh, but what's behind the Sporan, Brother Bowen. Are ya willing to lift that little kiltie up and show us what's beneath??

Aaagrrhh [sm=mad-1003.gif] Fruit of the Loom ??? [8D] Dude !! [:D]


Nae laddie, my wife is the only one allowed up under the kilt.



Falken -> RE: How does AI fare in games vs mods (Dababes, RA) (6/2/2012 8:07:18 PM)

Mac,

Is your version of DaIronBabes-B available anywhere? Due to work schedule, I have to stick to AI (as I would seriously upset my opponent in not producing turns every day) and I'm still debating between DBB, DIB, and RA 4.3 for solo play, but I am interested in your comments on your version of DIB.

I'm having a hard time committing to a version for long term as i'm still undecided between the 3, but I do like the fact that RA has reduced supplies on the West Coast.



drw61 -> RE: How does AI fare in games vs mods (Dababes, RA) (6/3/2012 4:17:24 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Falken

Mac,

Is your version of DaIronBabes-B available anywhere? Due to work schedule, I have to stick to AI (as I would seriously upset my opponent in not producing turns every day) and I'm still debating between DBB, DIB, and RA 4.3 for solo play, but I am interested in your comments on your version of DIB.

I'm having a hard time committing to a version for long term as i'm still undecided between the 3, but I do like the fact that RA has reduced supplies on the West Coast.


Here are the links

DaBigBabes - Scenario 2 Hakko Ichiu
https://sites.google.com/site/dababeswitpae/ (DaIronBabes)
or
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=3075475

DaBigBabes - Scenario 10 Ironman
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=3062873

Reluctant Admiral - by John 3rd
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/
or
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=3071237



Mac Linehan -> RE: How does AI fare in games vs mods (Dababes, RA) (6/3/2012 11:39:39 PM)

Falken -

drw61 has kindly linked the IronBabes website. He is also responsible for converting stock Ironman to DaIronBabes - and did an outstanding job; it is good.

As for modding - I am at a very basic level; and still make mistakes - but that doesn't affect my enjoyment of the game at all. It is a constant learning process.

In my personal IronBabes Mod, I added more Japanese aircraft to the AC pools; gave the Home Islands more Oil, Fuel and Supply. Supply was also added to key bases - Truk and Kwaj, for example.

The AI (to the best of my knowledge) does not do conversions; so I added about 60 or so Patrol Boats - divided between the mighty To'sus and his bigger brothers - the Ansyu's and Kiso's.

I also gave the IJN additional Destroyers - repeats of the last three modern classes.

Please know that all of this is strictly non historical, and way beyond real life Japanese Industrial capability. I wanted to allow room for wastage in aircraft and ships while under AI control - and to enhance the AI's staying power.

All of this is just my amateur effort to make it a tougher game - in addition to Andy Mac's devilish AI and additional Japanese units. I am not deriding my own experience or effort; there is so much to learn in AE - perhaps one of the most detailed and complicated games on the market.

Very recently I received excellent guidance on the Babes shore party concept; greatly enhancing my understanding of how it is was really supposed to work. Thus I spent most of last night reworking my personal mod to align with the intended concept. And this is only one small part of the puzzle; I am sure that this process will be ongoing.

I would like to emphasize that the Babes mods are not "what if" scenarios - quite the opposite, and are meant for players who want max realism.

And: If I can (at least) begin to grasp how Babes works, any one can.

Go for it, Sir!

Mac



dwg -> RE: How does AI fare in games vs mods (Dababes, RA) (6/4/2012 12:01:13 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: JWE
In a game stack, of division scale, you might have 1 Rgt set to attack, 1 Rgt set to pursue, 1 Rgt resting, 2x 105 and 1x 155 Bns bombarding, and the last 105 Bn either set to pursue or rest.

Bombardment comes first, and counter-battery is limited; it doesn't whack the whole stack and cause those wierd imbalances. Attack comes next, but the Rgts still have their TOE regimental arty, so they get the firepower push. Resolve the attack, see wha'hoppen, if ya win, a kinda-sorta reserve (the pursuit) unit takes over, and the process repeats


Thanks, that pretty much answers my question, there's a level of complexity in the use of the combat roles I hadn't appreciated.



Yaab -> RE: How does AI fare in games vs mods (Dababes, RA) (6/4/2012 8:02:36 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: JWE

quote:

ORIGINAL: medicff
Hi all,

Looking at such mods as Dababes and RA and wondering how an AI game would fare?

Honestly, it sucks. If you must play the AI try BabesLite. That's what it's there for.



Wow, is it really that bad? I like the amount of detail that went into DaBigBabes A and wouldn't like to go back to BabesLite. However, I noticed some strange things in the A scenario, noticeably lack of air war over the Philippines - Japanese AI attacks come piecemal and Zeros are not flying escort missions. No Japanese sweeps either. Land and sea war seem OK though. I switched to BabesLite to play for some time but the lack of MAG HQs almost made me cry. I don't know if I should continue with my DaBigBabes A campaign against Japenese AI.



Nikademus -> RE: How does AI fare in games vs mods (Dababes, RA) (6/4/2012 8:05:10 PM)

the AI in the May 1942 Grand Campaign scenario is SO bad as to be virtually NON EXISTENT. [:'(]



Falken -> RE: How does AI fare in games vs mods (Dababes, RA) (6/4/2012 11:41:16 PM)

You know what. I love this forum. Just as I am discussing about the fact that I can only play AI due to work schedules, and the fact that I would only play PBEM if my opponent had the same problem as I do (i.e. not being able to play every day), along comes fate, who decides to provide me with something I didn't think would ever be possible: an opponent.

For the first time since I've been playing this game (since the early years of the original WITP), i'm about to find out what it means to have my A(** kicked in a real PBEM game. Our game will be RA 4.3, and it should be a lot of fun. Thanks to all that have provided us this opportunity. The WITP team, obviously, but also the DBB guys, and the RA team, as well as all on the board you keep showing us that "THIS" is the game to play.



drw61 -> RE: How does AI fare in games vs mods (Dababes, RA) (6/5/2012 1:44:12 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Yaab

quote:

ORIGINAL: JWE

quote:

ORIGINAL: medicff
Hi all,

Looking at such mods as Dababes and RA and wondering how an AI game would fare?

Honestly, it sucks. If you must play the AI try BabesLite. That's what it's there for.



Wow, is it really that bad? I like the amount of detail that went into DaBigBabes A and wouldn't like to go back to BabesLite. However, I noticed some strange things in the A scenario, noticeably lack of air war over the Philippines - Japanese AI attacks come piecemal and Zeros are not flying escort missions. No Japanese sweeps either. Land and sea war seem OK though. I switched to BabesLite to play for some time but the lack of MAG HQs almost made me cry. I don't know if I should continue with my DaBigBabes A campaign against Japenese AI.



Yabb,

When I set up DaBigBabes Scenario 2 Hakko Ichiu and Scenario 10 Ironman I changed the IJN Fleet, Air Fleet and Air Army HQ aviation support from 36 (DBBB-A version) back to the original 144. I am no expert in how the AI works but my intent was that this would help the Japanese AI in the air war.

Daryl



Yaab -> RE: How does AI fare in games vs mods (Dababes, RA) (6/5/2012 2:16:47 PM)

Drw61, I don't think aviation support is the issue. In DaBigBabes A, Japanese in Takao have ample 250 AV. I think the problem may be coordination. Too many Air HQ at once in Takao, perhaps?

Does AI have to coordinate airstrikes the same way a human player does? Does it suffer the same penalties?



PaxMondo -> RE: How does AI fare in games vs mods (Dababes, RA) (6/5/2012 2:22:06 PM)

I think we have to assume the AI abides by all rules until we are told otherwise. And Andy (and other dev's) have already said they are not prepared to reveal much. As an AI player-contestant, I am quite happy with that.

Since the multiple HQ's don't impact me as a human player (at least I don't think they do, do they?), I don't think there is any issue with the AI.



drw61 -> RE: How does AI fare in games vs mods (Dababes, RA) (6/5/2012 6:24:10 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Yaab

Drw61, I don't think aviation support is the issue. In DaBigBabes A, Japanese in Takao have ample 250 AV. I think the problem may be coordination. Too many Air HQ at once in Takao, perhaps?

Does AI have to coordinate airstrikes the same way a human player does? Does it suffer the same penalties?


I don't know... these are questions that that Andy will have to answer
Daryl



JWE -> RE: How does AI fare in games vs mods (Dababes, RA) (6/7/2012 10:20:01 PM)

I really think you guys need to understand the difference between ‘What; and ‘How’.

‘What” is the script. It pulls up some LCUs and uses them to do ‘stuff’. It ain’t got jack to do with anything else.

‘How’ is what’s in the code. And what’s in the code has been there since forever.

Babes plays with ‘what’, on a mod basis. That’s it.



Andy Mac -> RE: How does AI fare in games vs mods (Dababes, RA) (6/7/2012 11:51:54 PM)

:) and after all the crap I got on release I dont talk about thehow any more .....

[:D][:D][:D]



Page: [1] 2   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.421875