Poor path finding? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945



Message

MadDawg -> Poor path finding? (7/30/2004 8:32:35 AM)

Or is there a reason this is happening that Im not aware of? Im trying to order a task force to go from Rabaul to Buin and this is the course they have been given. Ive tried it a couple of times with th same result.


[image]local://upfiles/12417/Da834619123.jpg[/image]



von Murrin -> RE: Poor path finding? (7/30/2004 8:37:20 AM)

Yeah, that's a bit bizarre. I'd think they would take the strait and then north of Buka.



carnifex -> RE: Poor path finding? (7/30/2004 8:56:37 AM)

hmm wonder whats the problem my tf's move right there

what scenario you playing and what type of tf are you trying to move?

[image]local://upfiles/6992/Jh171456891.jpg[/image]



bradfordkay -> RE: Poor path finding? (7/30/2004 8:56:41 AM)

I wonder if there's an american sub in that strait?



carnifex -> RE: Poor path finding? (7/30/2004 8:59:44 AM)

i just tried it and had 2 subs and 2 american dd's wandering all around the straits

no problems

maybe certain tf types are prone to being cowardly? not sure - tried it with bombard escort and transport


ooooh, here's another question, are you able to set a DH to the hex south of Rabaul? the one south of that? whithout going around?



esteban -> RE: Poor path finding? (7/30/2004 9:18:06 AM)

This will take a little longer than just going straight to Buin, but you could try setting your TF on retirement allowed, going to the hex just southeast of Rabaul, with your home port set for Buin. So when the TF enters the destination hex, on the next pulse it should "retire" straigh to Buin. Once you are in the open water, heading towards Bouganville, you should be able to reset the destination and home port correctly.

Not quite what you want, but shorter than going all the way around New Ireland.

I have noticed this same issue with TFs around the Phillipines/Borneo. They don't want to move between islands for some reason, and go around the long way.

It's nice to know we have stuff to push for in the next patch, though.



MadDawg -> RE: Poor path finding? (7/30/2004 10:20:07 AM)

Thanks esteban, thats actually what I did to get around this [:)]. There does seem to be something a little odd here. It was the carrier task force if I recall correctly, and it would do this if I set it to any hex over in that area (I didnt actually want it to go to buin).

I guess its another one to stick in the bug report forum unless any of the beta testers or others have any ideas?

Dawg



siRkid -> RE: Poor path finding? (7/30/2004 2:18:27 PM)

My bet would be that the first TF has a Carrier in it and the second one does not. Due to the disadvantage carriers receive during combat in SW hexes, the AI tries to avoid them. We've tried to get this to work better. It’s a dang if you do and dang you don't problem. We would get blasted if the AI keeps leaving your carriers in shallow water.



MadDawg -> RE: Poor path finding? (7/30/2004 2:34:38 PM)

Thanks for the info Kid!

Out of interest though, wouldnt it take the path between Rabaul and Buka if need be, as that is open water? As I often sent my carriers out from Rabaul to areas east of buin to wait for incoming task forces, this is actully posing a bit of a problem as is.

Dawg



goodwood -> RE: Poor path finding? (7/30/2004 3:03:50 PM)

I betya waypoints would solve this prob[:)]



siRkid -> RE: Poor path finding? (7/30/2004 7:29:49 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: goodwood

I betya waypoints would solve this prob[:)]



waypoints ain't never go'na to happen.



esteban -> RE: Poor path finding? (7/30/2004 7:35:05 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kid

quote:

ORIGINAL: goodwood

I betya waypoints would solve this prob[:)]



waypoints ain't never go'na to happen.


But we can dream, can't we?? [:)]



siRkid -> RE: Poor path finding? (7/30/2004 7:35:45 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: MadDawg

Thanks for the info Kid!

Out of interest though, wouldnt it take the path between Rabaul and Buka if need be, as that is open water? As I often sent my carriers out from Rabaul to areas east of buin to wait for incoming task forces, this is actully posing a bit of a problem as is.

Dawg


Gary is back to working on the AI so if you send me a save with step-by-step instructions on how to repeat/see the problem I'll get it to him. I would like to see the AI do a better job of this.

sirkid@cfl.rr.com



mark24 -> RE: Poor path finding? (7/30/2004 7:38:03 PM)

Hi Kid,

I would've thought carriers would be at an advantage in shallow hexes, submarines being at a disadvantage... Why are they at a disadvantage?

Mark



von Murrin -> RE: Poor path finding? (7/30/2004 7:51:31 PM)

No maneuver room for flight ops.



tsimmonds -> RE: Poor path finding? (7/30/2004 7:54:25 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: mark24

Hi Kid,

I would've thought carriers would be at an advantage in shallow hexes, submarines being at a disadvantage... Why are they at a disadvantage?

Mark

It's not so much shallow water hexes as it is coastal hexes. Less sea room to conduct flight ops.



MadDawg -> RE: Poor path finding? (7/30/2004 11:57:50 PM)

Thanks for your time Kid - I will see if I can replicate the problem!



ZOOMIE1980 -> RE: Poor path finding? (7/31/2004 12:39:52 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: goodwood

I betya waypoints would solve this prob[:)]



Well in a game with 12 bases (end points) yea, waypoints could solve a lot of these types of issues. What are there in this game? 450+ bases of which 80% have sea access? Now imagine all the combinations and permutations possible to get all possible base to base paths (basically 400!, ...that's factorial for those who know what that is...). Don't have a scientifc calculator handy but that's probably hundreds of MILLIONS of possible combinations! To apply fixed or even dyanamic/intelligent waypoints to that is undoable.

But if the system is smart enough to detect enemy air power build ups and dynamically route around them as the TF's approach, why can't it just create its zigzag/dogleg path from the get-go if the computer knows airpower is concentrated on the direct route path?

But pathing is only part of this problem. The AI/Computer player system really needs two separate base supply algorithms. A "safe" base supply routine, and an "unsafe" base supply routine. It still needs to avoid en-route enemy zones of control on the way to a safe endpoint, but if going to an unsafe endpoint, it needs to send AK's and TK's with heafty escorts or even a CV escort TF. Such a TF would probably plow right through enemy ZOC's as well, as the idea of supplying forward bases in conflict is to "supply at all costs and will all posible speed", anyway....



kaleun -> RE: Poor path finding? (7/31/2004 1:10:22 AM)

Zoomie, your post just gave me a headache; and I do know what 400! mean. It's worse than handling the japanese economy!.
I think I'll stick to the retirement allowed and rebasing system. It works most of the time.[;)]



gunnergoz -> RE: Poor path finding? (7/31/2004 2:41:58 AM)

Was it by chance a cargo TF? I seem to recall reading that they will not be routed into harms way or somesuch.



siRkid -> RE: Poor path finding? (7/31/2004 3:07:06 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: mark24

Hi Kid,

I would've thought carriers would be at an advantage in shallow hexes, submarines being at a disadvantage... Why are they at a disadvantage?

Mark



Irrelevant is correct I should have said coastal hexes. Either I've been at this for too long or I'm getting old.



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
8.75