Post reply

Warning: this topic has not been posted in for at least 120 days.
Unless you're sure you want to reply, please consider starting a new topic.

Note: this post will not display until it's been approved by a moderator.

Name:
Email:
Subject:
Message icon:

shortcuts: hit alt+s to submit/post or alt+p to preview

Please read the rules before you post!


Topic Summary

Posted by: Beersatron
« on: March 15, 2010, 01:55:48 AM »

Noticed the following in v5.02

I have CLEs with 3 Missile FCs and 12 size 1 launchers plus 2 BFCs and 2 quad turrets. With automated firing, the launchers get divided evenly between the MFCs, which is good, but their range is not being set correctly and when they are used in offensive mode (against Star Swarm) only the first MFC is firing on the Swarm which is reducing my offensive power by 66%. The BFCs are not targeting the Swarm either, even at 0km.
Posted by: Steve Walmsley
« on: February 28, 2010, 09:49:28 AM »

I need to look at the autofire again. The problem is that I lifted the code from the NPR AI and simplified it. The NPRs are aware of incoming missiles and will setup different fire controls accordingly. I removed that from the player version to make it a simple offensive fire option. I was aware of that limitation so I didn't even think about it. After hearing some feedback, its clear that I need to make it more like the NPR model and possibly add further options as suggested. As with many new areas of functionality in Aurora, they require a few versions to evolve :)

Steve
Posted by: Charlie Beeler
« on: February 26, 2010, 02:51:32 PM »

Quote from: "Nabobalis"
Quote from: "Charlie Beeler"
Steve,

Just putting a few credits worth of opinion in here.  I think there should be an interface for the players to assign some basic threat analysis and targeting protocols for the autofire routines to use.  

It should have a means of assigning specific overrides. Something along the lines of tagging specific ships with a higher targeting priority.  

There functions should be influanced by the task force staff ratings (if available) and the ship commanders ratings.  At the vary least initiative and operations skill ratings should adjust effectiveness of overrides.  

This would lend some real tactical value to the presence, or lack there of, of flag bridges.

I'm sure one day auto-fire will get to be something like this. But I think for now its something that will have to wait. The whole system would need a massive overhaul. But I love the idea. Maybe even adding new tech for ship computers with AI? Like Mass Effect 2's EDI. They could maybe revolt/take over ships when advanced enough(low probability of it happening though otherwise none would bother with it)

You'd be surprised what Steve is willing to change...if he see's a benefit to his gaming.  :wink:   He's surprised me in the past with what aspects of my suggestions he runs with and makes even better.
Posted by: Nabobalis
« on: February 26, 2010, 02:02:05 PM »

Quote from: "Steve Walmsley"
Quote from: "Journier"
does this work with PD firing against missiles?

so say i have a bunch of railguns 10 maybe 2 per fire control, how will the AI handle this in combat? they are set up for short range PD firing.

will that work with the automated firing? or will it put all the guns to 1 fire control?
Automated fire is for offensive fire only. For automated point defence fire you will need to set the automated point defence modes.

Steve

Maybe for now to add a toggle box for certain fire/missile controls to be left alone while the rest are used by auto-fire?
Posted by: Nabobalis
« on: February 26, 2010, 01:59:59 PM »

Quote from: "Charlie Beeler"
Steve,

Just putting a few credits worth of opinion in here.  I think there should be an interface for the players to assign some basic threat analysis and targeting protocols for the autofire routines to use.  

It should have a means of assigning specific overrides. Something along the lines of tagging specific ships with a higher targeting priority.  

There functions should be influanced by the task force staff ratings (if available) and the ship commanders ratings.  At the vary least initiative and operations skill ratings should adjust effectiveness of overrides.  

This would lend some real tactical value to the presence, or lack there of, of flag bridges.

I'm sure one day auto-fire will get to be something like this. But I think for now its something that will have to wait. The whole system would need a massive overhaul. But I love the idea. Maybe even adding new tech for ship computers with AI? Like Mass Effect 2's EDI. They could maybe revolt/take over ships when advanced enough(low probability of it happening though otherwise none would bother with it)
Posted by: Charlie Beeler
« on: February 26, 2010, 12:44:31 PM »

Steve,

Just putting a few credits worth of opinion in here.  I think there should be an interface for the players to assign some basic threat analysis and targeting protocols for the autofire routines to use.  

It should have a means of assigning specific overrides. Something along the lines of tagging specific ships with a higher targeting priority.  

There functions should be influanced by the task force staff ratings (if available) and the ship commanders ratings.  At the vary least initiative and operations skill ratings should adjust effectiveness of overrides.  

This would lend some real tactical value to the presence, or lack there of, of flag bridges.
Posted by: georgiaboy1966
« on: February 26, 2010, 08:25:11 AM »

Quote from: "Steve Walmsley"
Quote from: "Journier"
does this work with PD firing against missiles?

so say i have a bunch of railguns 10 maybe 2 per fire control, how will the AI handle this in combat? they are set up for short range PD firing.

will that work with the automated firing? or will it put all the guns to 1 fire control?
Automated fire is for offensive fire only. For automated point defence fire you will need to set the automated point defence modes.

Steve

In my first battle with auto-fire. The auto setting would reset my pd weapons to offensive fire and shut-off the pd fire. Even weapons that did not even have a chance of targeting the other's ships.

Had to turnoff the auto-fire and manually do the battle, so that pd would work. Everytime I tried to use auto-fire, it set all weapons to offensive fire.
Posted by: Steve Walmsley
« on: February 25, 2010, 06:01:46 AM »

Quote from: "Journier"
does this work with PD firing against missiles?

so say i have a bunch of railguns 10 maybe 2 per fire control, how will the AI handle this in combat? they are set up for short range PD firing.

will that work with the automated firing? or will it put all the guns to 1 fire control?
Automated fire is for offensive fire only. For automated point defence fire you will need to set the automated point defence modes.

Steve
Posted by: Journier
« on: February 25, 2010, 05:59:36 AM »

does this work with PD firing against missiles?

so say i have a bunch of railguns 10 maybe 2 per fire control, how will the AI handle this in combat? they are set up for short range PD firing.

will that work with the automated firing? or will it put all the guns to 1 fire control?
Posted by: Toloran
« on: February 19, 2010, 03:25:46 PM »

Quote from: "Paul"
Hey, great idea.

Fighting large groups of small ships could get a bit tedious, this should make things way better.

It should also make fighting WITH large groups of small ships easier too. I haven't used fighters in quite a while simply because I hate assigning them all the time.
Posted by: Steve Walmsley
« on: February 09, 2010, 11:57:29 AM »

Quote from: "welchbloke"
Quote from: "Steve Walmsley"
It uses the NPR code for selecting targets. That code is changing a lot at the moment as I am trying to improve it. One problem I found when using the auto-targeting against the star swarm is that the Colonial destroyers tried to target the crippled, immobile star swarm as they were easier to hit. I have now improved the decision making so that missile-armed warships are more likely to prioritise enemy ships that can catch them. With beams, the trick is concentration but not overkill. Originally this was a simple case of best chance to hit with larger targets preferred but that can lead to overkill. Then I tried a strategy of randomly dispersing fire against all targets with an equal chance for all possible targets that were equally easy to hit. That leads to not enough fire against each target. I am now looking at maintaining a running tally of likely damage against each target as each ship is assigned a target. Once a target has enough potential damage assigned, it is excluded from the potential target list for ships that have not yet been assigned. It's performance intensive but I don't think that is a major problem in a battle. I haven't got it working properly yet but I am persevering :)

Steve
Sounds like a good solution.  When you say 'performance intensive' how intensive are we talking? If the NPRs are using the same code will the game slow down significantly during NPRvsNPR battles?
Possibly, although it would only affect beam to beam battles.. I am working on keeping the idea but making it as fast as possible

Steve
Posted by: welchbloke
« on: February 09, 2010, 05:04:27 AM »

Quote from: "Steve Walmsley"
It uses the NPR code for selecting targets. That code is changing a lot at the moment as I am trying to improve it. One problem I found when using the auto-targeting against the star swarm is that the Colonial destroyers tried to target the crippled, immobile star swarm as they were easier to hit. I have now improved the decision making so that missile-armed warships are more likely to prioritise enemy ships that can catch them. With beams, the trick is concentration but not overkill. Originally this was a simple case of best chance to hit with larger targets preferred but that can lead to overkill. Then I tried a strategy of randomly dispersing fire against all targets with an equal chance for all possible targets that were equally easy to hit. That leads to not enough fire against each target. I am now looking at maintaining a running tally of likely damage against each target as each ship is assigned a target. Once a target has enough potential damage assigned, it is excluded from the potential target list for ships that have not yet been assigned. It's performance intensive but I don't think that is a major problem in a battle. I haven't got it working properly yet but I am persevering :)

Steve
Sounds like a good solution.  When you say 'performance intensive' how intensive are we talking? If the NPRs are using the same code will the game slow down significantly during NPRvsNPR battles?
Posted by: Paul
« on: February 09, 2010, 02:44:28 AM »

Hey, great idea.

Fighting large groups of small ships could get a bit tedious, this should make things way better.
Posted by: Steve Walmsley
« on: February 08, 2010, 11:34:14 PM »

It uses the NPR code for selecting targets. That code is changing a lot at the moment as I am trying to improve it. One problem I found when using the auto-targeting against the star swarm is that the Colonial destroyers tried to target the crippled, immobile star swarm as they were easier to hit. I have now improved the decision making so that missile-armed warships are more likely to prioritise enemy ships that can catch them. With beams, the trick is concentration but not overkill. Originally this was a simple case of best chance to hit with larger targets preferred but that can lead to overkill. Then I tried a strategy of randomly dispersing fire against all targets with an equal chance for all possible targets that were equally easy to hit. That leads to not enough fire against each target. I am now looking at maintaining a running tally of likely damage against each target as each ship is assigned a target. Once a target has enough potential damage assigned, it is excluded from the potential target list for ships that have not yet been assigned. It's performance intensive but I don't think that is a major problem in a battle. I haven't got it working properly yet but I am persevering :)

Steve
Posted by: sloanjh
« on: February 08, 2010, 08:39:48 PM »

Different form of same question (I think):  is this using the same AI code as the various NPR use?  I expect an answer of "yes" and see this as a good thing, since people are more likely to notice "stupid NPR targeting tricks" and report them, making the next-generation NPR even tougher  :twisted:

John