berto
Posts: 20708
Joined: 3/13/2002
From: metro Chicago, Illinois, USA
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: acwbuff63
First- It will never happen that HPS will hand paint the existing maps. But some enhancements are possible and are being worked on.
It will be good to have them. It will be great if they will be collated, sorted through, and posted here at the Matrix site.
quote:
Remember, the massive size of HPS maps versus the relatively small BG maps. Campaign Atlanta is over 1300 hexes N to S.
IMHO the HPS 2D maps are just fine "as is." And frankly, if you like minature solider detail, the HPS ACW 3D is better.
I think that the current HPS 2D standard is terrific. I very much dislike (IMO) the HPS 3D miniatures look.
Falling short of the hand-painted 3D maps of BG Chickamauga, as a compromise I personally would be satisfied with the 3D graphics standard of the c.1997 BG games like BG Bull Run and BG Napoleon in Russia. Not perfect, not as good as BG Chickamauga, but good enough. (In general, I'm satisfied with the 3D graphics standards that TalonSoft set c. 1997. The 3D graphics of Rising Sun, for example, are just fine by me. No need to take graphics beyond those general standards to today's taxing, real-time 3D grahics, IMO. I would rather have the game publishers devote more energy and resources to solving the AI problem. But it's not either/or, all or nothing, 100/0, more like 80/20 or whatever...)
Offhand, I can't say which ones I have merged with my HPS setups, but some of the existing replacement 3D graphics sets available at the ACW Campaign Design Center are also good enough (and maybe even better than the BG sets; I haven't done a definitive, side-by-side comparison).
Maybe the community (the subset who care about 3D graphics) could be polled on the issue and, among the existing already available options, a generally accepted 3D graphics standard could be agreed to.
Then, under HPS' guidance, a definitive set of replacement 3D graphics sets are compiled (from existing sources, or from new projects) and made available in the default game distributions or as special downloads.
quote:
Second- For small face to face battles, the A/I is the same. For 100+ turns games, no A/I will really matter. But for those who want to improve the A/I, the ability is for each owner is there. Just open the editor and create good detailed multiple scripts.
We know that there is/was an active graphics modder community. Was there ever a similarly sized and similarly active AI modder community? If so, where are their scenario files posted?
Not that I have the time soon, but I am tempted to pick a favorite (probably medium sized) battle and script an AI for it. Then, if I like the experience and it doesn't take too much time and effort, develop a 2nd AI script for that battle, and maybe a 3rd, and so forth.
Now, here is an enhancement to the game engine that maybe wouldn't take too much work on HPS' part: For each battle, having a pool of AI scripts to work with, the AI randomly selects among the pool.
That way, from game to game for that battle, you don't know (at least immediately) what AI script you are up against.
If HPS won't randomize the selection of available AI scripts, when selecting the scenario and at game's beginning, the player could just choose among the options. (Maybe keep the scenario titles and descriptions cryptic so that the player doesn't know what to expect, except in hindsight, if he/she is by now famililar with the scenario AIs. For example, a pool of scenario options: Gettysburg Day 2 AI 1, Gettysburg Day 2 AI 2, Gettysburg Day 2 AI 3, ..., without saying in the scenario description the difference between the AIs.)
Thoughts?
quote:
Third- Don't expect OOB or map editors to be made public for at least a couple years, but once the series is complete and all likely first time buyers have made their purchase, things may change. But it will be several years in the future, at least.
On this point, I can understand where HPS might be unwilling to make their games too moddable, because it cuts into future sales. OTOH, it helps to make their games more popular.
quote:
Fourth- What new features do you mean (except the CC you mentioned)? Every new release introduces new features.
I am personally inclined to "solve" the AI problem in part by playing Commander Control. By handicapping the human player with a sometimes inept, sometimes differently opinioned AI "assistant," the competitive experience is more equalized.
In my readings, I am stuck time and again by how difficult it was for the CIC to effect his battle plans. Murphy's Law usually ruled.
Above all, even more than the competitive aspects, I value game/simulation plausibility. I don't see the plausibility of having a player micromanaging the battlefield with God-like omnipotence (except for battle outcomes; there will always be the die roll), omniscience (of one's own side; of course FOW hides the enemy's side) and omnipresence. After Gettysburg, and using the excuse of failing eyesight, Lee lamented his growing inability to move around the battlefield and oversee every aspect of the battle. Throw in discretionary and/or ambiguous orders, differing opinions by subordinate commanders (think Longstreet; also think Sickles), and the usual battlefield chaos, accidents, and foulups, it's a wonder that battle plans ever get carried out (notable exceptions being Lee at Chancellorsville and 2nd Bull Run, but in the latter case Longstreet still took longer to attack than Lee would have liked).
I would like to see an expanded/upgraded CC with more options beyond the five standard options of Do Nothing, Attack, Attack Extreme, Defend, Defend Extreme, fixating on a single point. So, for example, add more options (like TOAW has): Tactical Reserve, Strategic Reserve, Defend Multiple Points (depending on how the attack is going), Move (without implying attacking or defending), Recon, Forced March, etc. In general, just expand on the CC experience and make more choices available. How about also the ability to backtrack in the CC sequence, and keep cycling through until one is finally satisfied with the turn orders and hits the OK button? And so on.
That's just my personal wish. I'm sure others have their own personal wish list of expansions/upgrades.
Sigh. I think that in general the HPS games are very, very good. But I'm still wishing for great.
< Message edited by berto -- 11/16/2007 11:18:30 PM >
_____________________________
|
Printable Version
RE: Any enhancements to the AI? - 
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread