Slitherine

Congrats - these are excellent. With the addition of the tag conditions modders should be able to get the AI to do pretty much whatever they want. Means a few existing scenarios will need to be revisited, though.

What role do objectives play in 'Patrol' (Patrol and Random Patrol) AI unit stances?

The reason I ask is that in my mock-up scenario with 4 dispersed Zone 1 hexes, the AI units acted as expected but when the zone hex that was nearest an objective (6 hexes apart) was moved to by a unit it then went off to take the objective. It then seemed to stay around the objective but didn't move on to the next Zone 1 hex.

El_Condoro wrote:The reason I ask is that in my mock-up scenario with 4 dispersed Zone 1 hexes, the AI units acted as expected but when the zone hex that was nearest an objective (6 hexes apart) was moved to by a unit it then went off to take the objective. It then seemed to stay around the objective but didn't move on to the next Zone 1 hex.

Unlike "Move To" orders, which treat their target hex with high priority, patrolling happens only if the unit does not have more important things to do. This could be attacking enemy units (that's the point of patrolling after all), taking objectives and also - I admit this is a controversial case - protecting own VH which is not defended by any other friendly units. In real scenarios (not test ones) this should not be a big issue, but let me know what you think.

Rudankort wrote:protecting own VH which is not defended by any other friendly units

This seems logical to me.

Disembark is great - now the German player can fight against a serious AI at D-Day! (Perhaps the future western front campaign was in mind )

One thing I can't get the AI to do is to embark. It's not going to happen very often but it could happen that the AI needs to cross sea hexes to get to an objective. In the DLC Sedan the player has to do this so the AI might needs to, too. I set up ports on one side of the sea where the AI units were and Zones to disembark at on the other side. They went to the ports but wouldn't get in their barges! (I had a limit of 4 set for the scenario).

I have created a document for these. The red text is because I have a query.

Please add or comment.

El_Condoro wrote:I have created a document for these. The red text is because I have a query.

Please add or comment.

Good document.

With Africa, game version jumps to 1.10, as can be seen in current beta already.

"Defender" behavior is generic, it means that the unit behaves as if the AI was set to "Defender" stance. I. e. moves towards the nearest VH and remains there to protect it. Of course, if the AI is set to "Defender" this is equivalent to "Default", but if the AI is attacker, this behavior has a different meaning. It is a symmetrical setting to "Attacker", which is used to assign generic attacking behavior to units when the AI is on defense. Which means, "Attacker" behavior description does not look right. Attacker units will move to the nearest enemy VH and attack it. If it is taken successfully, they will proceed to the next enemy VH etc.

About "Hold Position (Active)" - yes, the unit can be distracted by a wave of targets. It does not remember its original position and will not attempt to return to it. What this behavior means is that the unit will remain in place, unless it has a target to attack. It is used to create ambushes near the enemy's line of advance.

To answer your previous question, there is no direct way to embark AI unit - at least none yet. Indirect way might be to mark embarkation location as exit zone, and as soon as "embarking" unit appears in reserve - generate a new unit on the map nearby, which is embarked to appropriate transport. If the unit is killed en route, it will never appear in reserve, and so will never trigger embarkation. But of course, exit zone will affect other units, so it is not a clean solution. An action to remove unit from the map might be a useful mechanics to handle cases like this in an easy way.

In beta 2, I've added a small tooltip to the heroes shown in the unit list. What do you guys think about it? Does it help?

Rudankort wrote:In beta 2, I've added a small tooltip to the heroes shown in the unit list. What do you guys think about it? Does it help?

It's perfect, all we need to do is educate people about it now.
There seems to be a bug with heroes in this version, heroes assigned through the editor don't have their portraits showing up in game in the 'battle history' tab.

The tooltip is good but there is still no way to know that a specific unit has a leader just by looking at it on the map. In PG2 there was a simple, small icon to let the player know - I think that, coupled with the tooltip, would be great. This is certainly a big step forward.

Leaving the F6 unit list panel open does exact what you are asking for.

No, you must misunderstand me. I have say 6 tanks all in a cluster - I can't tell, without clicking on each one of them, which has a leader and which doesn't. A small icon (next to the strength counter) would show at a glance.

I just wonder if this version of the scenario editor is the live version for v1.06? I'm anxious to make new maps

AK is version 1.10. AFAIK it is the next-to-live version, pending any changes that occur between now and release.

nikivdd wrote:I just wonder if this version of the scenario editor is the live version for v1.06? I'm anxious to make new maps

You can start using new editor, but people will be able to play your new maps only when the patch 1.10 is out. There were big changes in internal file formats between what is currently available to public and 1.10, so game versions out there in the wild cannot play content created for 1.10.

Rudankort wrote:

nikivdd wrote:I just wonder if this version of the scenario editor is the live version for v1.06? I'm anxious to make new maps

You can start using new editor, but people will be able to play your new maps only when the patch 1.10 is out. There were big changes in internal file formats between what is currently available to public and 1.10, so game versions out there in the wild cannot play content created for 1.10.

Even with scenario's created with vanilla units/terrain from v1.05? Because i loaded a couple of scenario's of mine in the new editor and found no errors.

nikivdd wrote:Even with scenario's created with vanilla units/terrain from v1.05? Because i loaded a couple of scenario's of mine in the new editor and found no errors.

1.10 is backwards compatible with previous versions which means it can load scenario files of any previous version (yes, there is an internal parameter in scenario files which contains format version). But the other way around it is not true. Old versions of game EXE have no idea how to load and use all the new parameters added in 1.10. For example, every unit now has a "max strength" setting set on an individual basis. Old EXEs have no idea about it, so they cannot correctly load data block associated with the units. This is just one example, but there are many many more new parameters added in 1.10.

Rudankort wrote:

nikivdd wrote:Even with scenario's created with vanilla units/terrain from v1.05? Because i loaded a couple of scenario's of mine in the new editor and found no errors.

1.10 is backwards compatible with previous versions which means it can load scenario files of any previous version (yes, there is an internal parameter in scenario files which contains format version). But the other way around it is not true. Old versions of game EXE have no idea how to load and use all the new parameters added in 1.10. For example, every unit now has a "max strength" setting set on an individual basis. Old EXEs have no idea about it, so they cannot correctly load data block associated with the units. This is just one example, but there are many many more new parameters added in 1.10.

Thanks for the info Rudankort, much appreciated. I guess there is one important question left, for all the modders surely. Does the v1.10 has the feature you made for v1.05b? You know, reloading the equipment file between scenario's?

Edit: My mode uses Massi's tilesets, methinks this may be the problem.
With Massi activated I can load my custom scenarios, but the AK fails.

I have copied and activated a personal Mod (that works fine in PzC) in the AK beta folder.
When I try to open one of my scenarios that use the mod I get a Visual C++ error:

Debug Assertion Failed
Program:C:\matrix Games\Panzer Corps Beta\Scenario Editor.exe
File:d:\projects\panzercorps\panzercorps_svn\trunk\sources\common\tileset.h
Line:451
Expression:0

I have tried reinstalling beta-2.
There is no D:\ disk on this PC (ref File path).

Erik wrote:I have copied and activated a personal Mod (that works fine in PzC) in the AK beta folder.
When I try to open one of my scenarios that use the mod I get a Visual C++ error:

How many tile layers do you have in your mode?

Erik wrote:There is no D:\ disk on this PC (ref File path).

That path is on my PC.

Rudankort wrote:

Erik wrote:I have copied and activated a personal Mod (that works fine in PzC) in the AK beta folder.
When I try to open one of my scenarios that use the mod I get a Visual C++ error:

How many tile layers do you have in your mode?
I don't know, how do I check?
Massi's tiles are, well massive. Lots of stations, especially.

Erik wrote:There is no D:\ disk on this PC (ref File path).

That path is on my PC.

That was my guess.