|
Skybird -> RE: Concerning the AI (11/18/2018 3:22:32 PM)
|
I must respectfully disagree in that I think the issue illustrated could be massively improved. Other games show that it can be done.
You probably know Steel Beasts, and that a whole mission could be played from the map screen alone pretty much like in your game. The scenario designer there can set conditions to wapyoints, and he can define in what behavioral mode the unit should travel the path to the next waypoint, and when it should embark, if at all, and how it should move if it does. Also, formation and spacing can be set separately.
Now, ignoring the mission design and focussing on the micro-managing of units' behavior/reaction by the AI in a given situation, a charging unit will get orders by the aI to stay on its ordered path, at maximum speed, racing to the objective, not seeking cover when under fire, seeking no hull down Battle position, only returnign fire. This unit will race on as long as it lives, no matter what.
Normally, the attacking unit will be less kamikaze-like, and have orders allowing it to react to a threat it is aware of. When it gets under fire, immediately it swings turret, often the whole hull, towards the threat, and then will try to find a battle position (hull down) in the vicinity, up to I think 300 or 400 meters around, or pop smoke and back up, trying to hide, or all of that.
So, with the scenario design approach and editor in SB, it can be done. The reaction results of the aI can be very impressive. I admit however that SB has one of the most economic, userfriendly and efficient editors I have ever seen in any such game. Its a brilliant design, even more so since the difference between the mission editor and the map interface used by the player during the mission to command his formations, are not that much different at all.
I do not know what your editor allows scenario designers to do, and we do not even talk about the quick mission editor for the player here. The problem is that the AI in the problematic situations I point at and that can be seen in the above video, does not react at all, no matter what, also, that it has the most unsuitable formation of all, apparently. When the whole force came under fire, it should have quick-jumped to a different formation, and seek battle posiiton as long as not having been given explicit orders by mission designer to not react at all and just race on.
I also recall, although it is a long time ago, Conquest of the Aegean. When the aI in that game , WWII-based and thus using different tactics, came under fire, it reacted. No matter how or what, but it reacted, it did something: changed position, pace or formation apparently, trying to alter its state to aquire a better position in reaction to the thread, returnign fire, calling reinfocrments - it did something. The AI continued to charge into killing zones however - when being ordered to do so by the scenario, like it indeed often happoened in WWII.
Operation Flashpoint, now that game I fear, maybe no other cosim has served me my defeat on a silver plate so often like this one due to the overwhelming firepower of Sowjet helicopters and artillery. Again, when under fire, the AI reacted. It changed pace or direction, it rushed for cover, or it hid behind a building and sat still, later staging a pop up and ambush kind of thing, for exmaple. It reacted to the thread. It still went for the objective, may even charge for a close-up fight. But not in a way to be seen in this video example. Also, the msisions are desiogned usually to allow the AI to attack in force, not in a piecemeal fashion. Result: I often ha da good plan, managed to keep suffieint units of mine alive, acted mobile all over thre place or hunkered down, picking Red units in masses: and still ended getting chewed up.
What the two reviews mention, and what the video illustrates, and what I describe is that your AI in certain circumstances, and apparently not rarely, simply does not react at all, just carries on its business as if nothing happened. Also, starting to move in probably inadequate formations may be an issue here.
The only coding of stuff I ever did, is thirty years ago, and did not go beyond getting a graphical interface for chess and having the computer moving pieces according to the rules. Further I did not get, and real life got in the way, and interest waned, and such is life and blabla... So I cannot tell you specifically how to code such stuff. I only point out that it obviosuyl can be done, somehow.
You have a great game there, with plenty of depth and detail,obviously, much time invested, years of your life. But I admit this deficit with the AI really is holding it back, if it is like it was years ago, the last time I made experiences with it. Back then I won battles by finding good psoitions for my units, and just waiting, if the other side not coming, trying to bait them with a fake attack of a small unit of mine that easily withdrew again. Most battles ended in this way, that I just waited for the Lemmings to pop up even if they were in defence positions. The longterm motivation sufferd very quickly for me, and I cannot imagine I am alone in that. After maybe a dozeh b attles done or so, I saw no point in doing another one. An AI making the gameplay suffering from always the same Lemming-event, is a really serious issue.
The AI needs to learn how to react more properly instead of just marching in street columns while ignoring all events around it.
I could imagine that the combination of if...-then... triggers with behavioral conditions that SB allows to set for both single waypoints and individual legs linking them, could be somethign giving good ideas. I know SB since its beginnings, although in recent years I have not played it that much anymore (Im 51, interests are changing a bit...). A well designed mission can work wonders with this editor's tools which are surprisingly easy to handle. See if you can find some ideas in that system! That is the only practical tip I can offer. Also, SB demonstrates that the micromanaging of the behavior of a unit coming under fire can lead to better reactions than in this video. Occasionally, of course the SB AI will mess it up. Every AI does so at times, nobody demands that it must always be fail safe in its performance. But the failings should be reduced to an utmost possible minimum.
Give it some thought, if you have time and interest left! ;) But just doing DLCs with additional units and missions, will not really improve the issue, for it then will still exist.
|
|
|
|
