While I was playing my last game, I've found some issues that could help in the next development:
* Go to Reserve Order could be better if give an option such as Reserve at Nearest (the unit is sent to the nearest city / base). This option could be added to the Filter View (or so) if finally implemented, so a player can send groups of units to reserve in one step.
* In Diplomatic treaties and only for Allies, a treaty such as Send me Military Help could be a great improvement if AI doesn't send help in wartime or if the help sent isn't enough.
* When build units an option such as Rally Point, which enable a unit to deploy in a preselected location. If the Unit Hierarchy is finally implemented this really could help to deploy entire formations together without the need of micromanagement.
* If Unit Hierarchy is finally implemented a filter such Filter by Formation (or so) so player can see entire formations without the need of see at unit basis.
I hope this "details" help to get a better game.
Regards. blackraider.
Some minor details
Moderators: Balthagor, Legend, Moderators
-
blackraider
- Sergeant
- Posts: 12
- Joined: Nov 20 2005
- Location: Getafe (Spain). Geodesic center of the Iberic Peninsule
-
Legend
- General
- Posts: 2531
- Joined: Sep 08 2002
- Human: Yes
- Location: Ancaster, Ontario - BattleGoat Studios
- Contact:
Re: Some minor details
there is a base deploy rally point already. In the base popup down near the base controls to the left - Set Rally Point - I believe. Do you want to predefine deploy points for each unit - or is one per base ok?blackraider wrote:* When build units an option such as Rally Point, which enable a unit to deploy in a preselected location. If the Unit Hierarchy is finally implemented this really could help to deploy entire formations together without the need of micromanagement.
-
blackraider
- Sergeant
- Posts: 12
- Joined: Nov 20 2005
- Location: Getafe (Spain). Geodesic center of the Iberic Peninsule
Better if could be per formation 
.
But per unit basis could help players to deploy related forces together in different locations in a automated way.
This could really help to make some pre-planning of defenses. Active units sits in borders awaiting an incoming attack and, when this happens and the player gives the order, reserves are mobilized to predefined locations to fill holes in the defenses.
One variant of this could be a Planning option, in wich player could predefine strategic locations to fill with forces when an event occured (If I play as Germany I could give a predefined set of orders to units [active or in reserve] for the case of Poland attacking me). This could include Combat Air Support (this and this and this air units will make CAS to incoming hostiles to this unit/formation), Air Supply (the same case as before) and so on. And other use of this option could be the automatic filling of eliminated units in hierarchies/formations.
Yes, I know this could be far of the original idea of the game, but you'd ask
me
Regards. blackraider.
.But per unit basis could help players to deploy related forces together in different locations in a automated way.
This could really help to make some pre-planning of defenses. Active units sits in borders awaiting an incoming attack and, when this happens and the player gives the order, reserves are mobilized to predefined locations to fill holes in the defenses.
One variant of this could be a Planning option, in wich player could predefine strategic locations to fill with forces when an event occured (If I play as Germany I could give a predefined set of orders to units [active or in reserve] for the case of Poland attacking me). This could include Combat Air Support (this and this and this air units will make CAS to incoming hostiles to this unit/formation), Air Supply (the same case as before) and so on. And other use of this option could be the automatic filling of eliminated units in hierarchies/formations.
Yes, I know this could be far of the original idea of the game, but you'd ask
me
Regards. blackraider.
-
Il Duce
- Brigadier Gen.
- Posts: 577
- Joined: Aug 10 2005
- Location: Venice - the Doge's palace on the Pacific.
just an observation...
So far, automation of unit initiative and operations initiative have proven to be, er, mediocre in effect at best. Be careful what you ask for. Threat assesment on the part of the military ops AI is certainly an area that requires some work, and it is an extremely difficult problem [contrast your own efforts at doing threat assessment - can you write a formula that would achieve results equal to your own intuitive-instinctive-observational efforts?]. I'm pretty wary of handing unit control over to automation.
So far, automation of unit initiative and operations initiative have proven to be, er, mediocre in effect at best. Be careful what you ask for. Threat assesment on the part of the military ops AI is certainly an area that requires some work, and it is an extremely difficult problem [contrast your own efforts at doing threat assessment - can you write a formula that would achieve results equal to your own intuitive-instinctive-observational efforts?]. I'm pretty wary of handing unit control over to automation.
Colorless green ideas sleep furiously [but otherwise, they do not worry and are happy].
-
blackraider
- Sergeant
- Posts: 12
- Joined: Nov 20 2005
- Location: Getafe (Spain). Geodesic center of the Iberic Peninsule
Yeah, I know what do you mean. ATM I'm writing an standalone version of a opensource version of BattleTech based game involving military campaigns and some ecomomics and I am in some trouble for this reason (the AI isn't smart yet 
).
My idea is to get a panel in wich you can define in wich hexes will be deployed some forces (similar to base rally points). The units will be active at player's discrection as until now. Then, when activated, the units travel to their predefined locations and await further orders (by player or by AI if military initiative is set high enough). In the case of base based units (such an air units) the orders could be extended for give support to ground units if this units are engaged in combat (and providing escorts if enough units available). And in the case of ground units could be posible to implement a trigger for activate them in case of war, and sending them to their defense locations. This could help in cases of multiple war fronts.
By this way is posible to fine tune AI initiative, giving full control (until the player reclaims it) to some units and leaving others to the player's direct control.
But one question still remains without answer: in a case of a massive combat, wich units will be supported first?
Regards. blackraider.
).My idea is to get a panel in wich you can define in wich hexes will be deployed some forces (similar to base rally points). The units will be active at player's discrection as until now. Then, when activated, the units travel to their predefined locations and await further orders (by player or by AI if military initiative is set high enough). In the case of base based units (such an air units) the orders could be extended for give support to ground units if this units are engaged in combat (and providing escorts if enough units available). And in the case of ground units could be posible to implement a trigger for activate them in case of war, and sending them to their defense locations. This could help in cases of multiple war fronts.
By this way is posible to fine tune AI initiative, giving full control (until the player reclaims it) to some units and leaving others to the player's direct control.
But one question still remains without answer: in a case of a massive combat, wich units will be supported first?
Regards. blackraider.
-
Il Duce
- Brigadier Gen.
- Posts: 577
- Joined: Aug 10 2005
- Location: Venice - the Doge's palace on the Pacific.
2010 supports the general initiative of the ops minister, and unit-level initiative, which I believe has a base inheritance from the global ROE setting, as well as a few other qualifying checkoffs, also inheritable from te base ROE (such as a general target eligiblity and vertain opportunity qualifiers, and then there is unit level ROE. However, setting unit level inheritance on each unit is pretty inconvenient - As a rule, I set uint characteristics on certain classes of units the first time I activate them, but i never change them again - for instance, helos that drop special forces get 'stealth movement' set, and I will never want to change that later. Arty units and air units, especially missile units, also get specific settings, which I will rarely if ever change. Thus as I am playing, it is safe for me to 'assume' certain behaviors from certain unit types on sight. For the rest, if unit initiative is set to zero on the base ROE [which is how I play], it really doesn't matter much.
The discussion regarding organization hierarchy and formation, whcih appears in many threads I'm afraid, has proponents of various kinds of automation, including none at all, and I am one of the latter.
I suppose that IF there were consensus on an org/formation model, then at that point one could consider operational templates, such as which regiment in a division is the point, which artys are offensive fire, which are counterbattery, and which air units are assigned to cover which ground units... Overall this sounds, to me, more complicated than simply managing the units themselves, as all of these group commands would have to be reviewed quite frequently, the same as manual unit moves, BUT not only do you have to remember to update orders, you have to remember to cancel automation orders, which means a thorough review of all units, which is what you were trying to avoid by having automation in the first place.
Your last question points up another inherent issue with automated tactics. The AI managing them for you is not (unless George gets a flash of brilliance greater than he has already had) a real smart or adaptive entity, and it is not capable of reacting to changing threat profiles. Overall it's just easier to pause the game and re-issue orders to all units involved when the environment changes.
This of course has correspondence with the difficulty a game creator faces when writing the manager for AI regions. If you can't provide the player with a tactical/unit move AI to carry out an operation designed by a human, how can you automate the development of strategy and operational level plans that an AI region would give to that same tactical and unit move processor?
The discussion regarding organization hierarchy and formation, whcih appears in many threads I'm afraid, has proponents of various kinds of automation, including none at all, and I am one of the latter.
I suppose that IF there were consensus on an org/formation model, then at that point one could consider operational templates, such as which regiment in a division is the point, which artys are offensive fire, which are counterbattery, and which air units are assigned to cover which ground units... Overall this sounds, to me, more complicated than simply managing the units themselves, as all of these group commands would have to be reviewed quite frequently, the same as manual unit moves, BUT not only do you have to remember to update orders, you have to remember to cancel automation orders, which means a thorough review of all units, which is what you were trying to avoid by having automation in the first place.
Your last question points up another inherent issue with automated tactics. The AI managing them for you is not (unless George gets a flash of brilliance greater than he has already had) a real smart or adaptive entity, and it is not capable of reacting to changing threat profiles. Overall it's just easier to pause the game and re-issue orders to all units involved when the environment changes.
This of course has correspondence with the difficulty a game creator faces when writing the manager for AI regions. If you can't provide the player with a tactical/unit move AI to carry out an operation designed by a human, how can you automate the development of strategy and operational level plans that an AI region would give to that same tactical and unit move processor?
Colorless green ideas sleep furiously [but otherwise, they do not worry and are happy].
-
moondrift
- Captain
- Posts: 140
- Joined: May 30 2004
well as far as unit behaviour i'd like to have a unit option that you could set in ROE to automatically repair when they get to say 25% strength. In a large battle i'd like to be able to get my troops to repair without having to turn on military initiative. I know what people will say.............pause the game regularly to remove them from combat, but if you do that what is the point of a real time strategy game you might as well play turn based.