BloodStorm Final for multiplayer only

Razz1 · Post by **Razz1** » Tue Aug 30, 2011 2:18 am

It is good that you changed the title to Multi-player and the game to multi-player

EuroBoss · Post by **EuroBoss** » Tue Aug 30, 2011 6:53 pm

Razz1 wrote:It is good that you changed the title to Multi-player and the game to multi-player

Had no choice really don't mean to sound offensive but the AI is dumb when comes to air/sea transports.I have heard many silly excuses and none them wash
As far as i'm concerned it's a bug that needs fixing otherwise don't have the option of playing agaist the AI or campagin as that's 80% of game exculding the graphics/sound/multiplayer

EuroBoss · Post by **EuroBoss** » Tue Aug 30, 2011 8:25 pm

Anyways back on topic

Update

For this axis
Removed one battleship

Removed three he-177a

Added back five calvary units

Added four wurfrahman 40's

Added two bf109g's

Retained one battleship one carrier one he-177a

For the russians
Added three hurricane mk I'S
Added one il-2 shturmoviks

Changed for all axis and allied paras much fairer start postions

[AXIS]

Total units: 131 (cost=75048)

Core units: 101 (cost=56924)

Aux units: 30 (cost=18124)

[ALLIES]

Total units: 148 (cost=108737)

Core units: 101(cost=89828)

Aux units: 48 (cost=18909)

Primary objectives: 34 (axis=17, allied=17)no less then 34 Major Victory for both sides(long game)

Secondary objectives: 16 (axis=8, allied= 8,) no less then 16 Minor Victory for both sides(short game)

I now feel there is a good variety of units for each nation i'm not willing to added any more
Unless i see a major flaw or complaint i'm calling this the final version as i want to get on with my next map called Mud_Bath which will 20X20 or maybe less?
I'm willing to make changes in terms of unit swapping only not additional units.
Enjoy

If there's enough demand i will do a single player version but this will be just replacement of paras for both sides and a AI tweak.

El_Condoro · Post by **El_Condoro** » Tue Aug 30, 2011 9:28 pm

EuroBoss wrote:silly excuses

I haven't seen anyone trying to excuse the AI behaviour only explain it. Of course it should be fixed - I just assumed everyone would agree with that obvious point.

EuroBoss · Post by **EuroBoss** » Tue Aug 30, 2011 10:12 pm

El_Condoro wrote:
EuroBoss wrote:silly excuses
I haven't seen anyone trying to excuse the AI behaviour only explain it. Of course it should be fixed - I just assumed everyone would agree with that obvious point.

Ok fair point maybe i'm just pissed off and frustrated with the AI.In secanario design i feel very limted to what i can do for the AI it's like having your hands tied behind your back

El_Condoro · Post by **El_Condoro** » Tue Aug 30, 2011 10:19 pm

Totally agree. I have raised concerns about it from a campaign design perspective, too. In the campaign I'm doing the AI forces have to be beefed up to a ridiculous degree to compensate for the stupid things it does in attack. I take the point that the AI was designed more for defence (its reliance on uber units at Bagration for example where it's in attack shows it's a defensive AI) but it really hinders scenario and campaign design where the designer wants a good, fair fight for the defending player. I'm sure these things will be addressed as the game evolves. It's hard to remember that it's less than 2 months since release!

EuroBoss · Post by **EuroBoss** » Tue Aug 30, 2011 10:58 pm

El_Condoro wrote:Totally agree. I have raised concerns about it from a campaign design perspective, too. In the campaign I'm doing the AI forces have to be beefed up to a ridiculous degree to compensate for the stupid things it does in attack. I take the point that the AI was designed more for defence (its reliance on uber units at Bagration for example where it's in attack shows it's a defensive AI) but it really hinders scenario and campaign design where the designer wants a good, fair fight for the defending player. I'm sure these things will be addressed as the game evolves. It's hard to remember that it's less than 2 months since release!

Even in most basic of maps designs for example my new map Mud_Bath yet again i have had to declare as multiplayer only.
Bcause left to it's own even with the resoruces of landing craft transopt the AI will not use them unless i hold his hand and place them for him

The only way the AI is ever gonna change is if we moan like crazy about it otherwise i can see myself losing lots of motivation even picking up the game let alone scenario design

EuroBoss · Post by **EuroBoss** » Wed Aug 31, 2011 6:18 pm

Inportant bug fix secondary objectives 17 now fixed to correct 16

Primary objectives: 34 (axis=17, allied=17)no less then 34 Major Victory for both sides(long game)

Secondary objectives: 16 (axis=8, allied= 8,) no less then 16 Minor Victory for both sides(short game)

Fixed three missing units

grabbysnatch · Post by **grabbysnatch** » Thu Sep 01, 2011 5:53 pm

what has happened to this scenario. I have an early version and was gonna download the latest but the links seem to have gone

grabbysnatch · Post by **grabbysnatch** » Thu Sep 01, 2011 5:56 pm

ignore me, i must be having a bad day as I have just seen it.lol

EuroBoss · Post by **EuroBoss** » Thu Sep 01, 2011 6:06 pm

grabbysnatch wrote:ignore me, i must be having a bad day as I have just seen it.lol

lol ok.

EuroBoss · Post by **EuroBoss** » Fri Sep 09, 2011 11:01 am

Just a minor fix

Replaced 3 incorrect russian tank types

Added two missing russian units for two secondary objectives

Version Final

http://www.sendspace.com/file/w3vhrt

Molve · Post by **Molve** » Fri Oct 07, 2011 10:04 am

There are several things going on here.

As the scenario designer, you need to read up on the limitations of the game engine as well as scenario designer if you want to create excellent scenarios. There are several useful work-arounds which lessen the risk of the player noticing the flaws in the programming.

1. Yes, the AI isn't (yet) programmed to use the "para" in paratroopers. On the ground, they act like any other infantry, however. So you need to use this to your advantage.
2. In fact, don't expect the AI to use any transport (air, sea or train) effectively. Creating scenarios featuring units in transports are best reserved for the human player.
The AI does use sea transports, though not very efficiently (since it doesn't prioritize landing units, you won't get good results from amphibious assault unless you really help the AI. And by that I mean "have half the landing force already on the ground, and make any coastal defenders very weak and very isolated. The reason is because the AI currently doesn't activate units in the "correct" order, much like the artillery issue discussed below).
The AI does not know to use air transports. At all.
I haven't even tested train transport but I'm not hopeful. Remember train transports are difficult to use even for a human, since you can only unload at stations (rail-connected flagged cities you own), your unloading capacity near the front lines are usually extremely limited. If you want to test if the AI unloads at all, try having one (1) train-embarked unit.
Land transports work as well as can be expected. The attacking AI still runs these blindly into enemy territory as if they were IS-2's though.
3. The AI currently activates (moves/attacks with) units in an inflexible order. Artillery really needs to activate before infantry - when attacking. When moving it's okay for today's more cautious move order. Sea transports adjacent to the beach they are to invade really needs to activate (unload) before other units in sea transports, since that's the only way to clear the beach for more reinforcements.

Remember, I'm not listing this to bug the programming team. I'm listing this so you scenario designers know how to make the most of what you've been given.

1. Attacking AI paratroopers simply must start already landed. Simple, no whats no buts.
2. Attacking AI amphibious assaults are best avoided. At best, start the scenario half-way through the landings. Don't start AI units in air or train transports at all.
3. The only way the AI will use artillery in a way that's even close to satisfactory is when it is the defender, and the artillery is protecting a victory hex, and you have placed it correctly ("behind" the front line).
For an attacking AI, the most important consideration is that front lines needs to be established already. If infantry and tanks are already going toe to toe, the risk of the AI moving up artillery directly for your units to eat it for lunch is much smaller. You could experiment with towed artys which you give no transports. This way they at least can't run directly into their deaths. But the reality is that the current AI does a much poorer job as the attacker than the defender, and that you really can't expect much of anything regarding attacking AI artillery.

4. Try to give the AI units instead of prestige. You the designer will always do a better job of buying stuff than the AI.
5. You must micromanage the AI when it comes to entrenched infantry. The AI does not properly appreciate staying in entrenched positions, and so you need to command such units individually ("Hold Position Passive")..

In short, the absolute best way to design a scenario where the human is supposed to be playing either side is to design two scenarios on identical maps.
When the human is playing, put units in transports, have paratroopers in the air, delete half the force (and provide prestige instead) etc etc.
When that same side is played by the AI, hand out little to no prestige, and sprinkle the map liberally with units. Specifically: place units already up close to the human-run defenders. (The AI really needs recon to avoid running its units into ambushes, but the secret answer is that starting with an established front prevents the AI from filling the front with artillery and infantry still in trucks...)

Feel free to give the AI the handicap of double the unit prestige total, compared to what you give that same side when played by a human. The only exception, I guess, would be a scenario set on a wide grassy plains, where Tiger tanks and IS-2's duke it out. That really is the only case where I'd say the AI works as well as a human...

Either that or wait for an AI patch. Thus far I haven't heard anything though (there are no promises a better AI is coming).

EuroBoss · Post by **EuroBoss** » Sat Oct 08, 2011 10:26 am

I have lost all motivation for creating another scenario.The AI is about 80% of the game without the AI fixes why should i even bother.

El_Condoro · Post by **El_Condoro** » Sat Oct 08, 2011 12:08 pm

Like the title of the post, make MP scenarios. They don't rely on an AI and it's up to the players to make the scenario that the designer gives them work well. I find it more rewarding than a campaign, but that's just me! Cheers.

EuroBoss · Post by **EuroBoss** » Wed Oct 12, 2011 5:15 pm

El_Condoro wrote:Like the title of the post, make MP scenarios. They don't rely on an AI and it's up to the players to make the scenario that the designer gives them work well. I find it more rewarding than a campaign, but that's just me! Cheers.

That's just it i don't have any real intrest in designing for mp.Originally i was going to cut up SeaBattle into three parts but it's a waste of my time.When the devs are more focused on more dl content and expasion packs for more money.Remember this game was allready $40 so another two dl content packs and a expansion pack later and this game is some where near quality of Panzer General at roughly $70 something.

VPaulus · Post by **VPaulus** » Wed Oct 12, 2011 5:41 pm

I don't think they are only working in the Big Campaign per si.

EuroBoss · Post by **EuroBoss** » Wed Oct 12, 2011 5:51 pm

VPaulus wrote:I don't think they are only working in the Big Campaign per si.

pm me we have a meaningful AI update for free and not AI update as something that's going to cost more.

VPaulus · Post by **VPaulus** » Wed Oct 12, 2011 6:37 pm

Kerensky said:

As a side note though, there will be tweaks to experience, awards, and heroes to accommodate the increased campaign size, but these changes should not cripple or damage the current campaign in any way.

In other words, DLCs have their own sets of rules and it is our hope that modders will also be able to utilize these tools to further strengthen and customize their own work.
Not to mention the rather basic bonus of being able to play custom campaigns without taking the troublesome step of overwriting existing ones to make them playable. Very Happy

If all goes to plan, these sorts of functionality and improvements will actually be patched to the main game completely freely too.

viewtopic.php?t=28189&start=0

EuroBoss · Post by **EuroBoss** » Thu Oct 13, 2011 6:42 am

VPaulus wrote:Kerensky said:
As a side note though, there will be tweaks to experience, awards, and heroes to accommodate the increased campaign size, but these changes should not cripple or damage the current campaign in any way.

In other words, DLCs have their own sets of rules and it is our hope that modders will also be able to utilize these tools to further strengthen and customize their own work.
Not to mention the rather basic bonus of being able to play custom campaigns without taking the troublesome step of overwriting existing ones to make them playable. Very Happy

If all goes to plan, these sorts of functionality and improvements will actually be patched to the main game completely freely too.
viewtopic.php?t=28189&start=0

Belive it when i see it just like the fix for windowed mode that should of worked and a patch that doesn't break things then a needed a hot fix.