Spring:1944 dev and testing - Page 22

Spring:1944 dev and testing

Discuss game development here, from a distinct game project to an accessible third-party mutator, down to the interaction and design of individual units if you like.

Moderators: Moderators, Moderators

User avatar
yuritch
Spring 1944 Developer
Posts: 1018
Joined: 11 Oct 2005, 07:18

Post by yuritch »

FLOZi wrote:
Issues:

*Global
1) SMG and Rifle troops being able to build flags means that the AI's think they are construction units, meaning that an AI can never win a game because it cannot destroy enemy flags (fixed by removing the build ability of these units)
Unfortunatly, that's too key a gameplay concept to simply remove though.
I talked to submarine (AAI maker) about this, and he said it will be possible to specify units to NOT be seen as builders by AAI. This was some weeks ago, maybe he already implemented this, maybe not. Anyway, svn AAI crashes with svn Spring some minutes into the game last I checked, so unless that is fixed, AAI is not playable in new Spring.
0 x

User avatar
Pressure Line
Posts: 2283
Joined: 21 May 2007, 02:09

Post by Pressure Line »

Nemo wrote:Thanks for the report, but we're doing a complete rebuild with the next version, so bughunting in the current release isn't really needed. However, given that we're building everything from scratch, we'll need a LOT of help testing - Pressure_Line, would you be up for helping out with that when the time comes?
yes. oh. HELL. yes.

im basically testing for shits and giggles atm. and i have a bad connection, so internet play is out for me.
FLOZI wrote:I've never seen AAI use planes in S44
needless to say i died horribly :/ and when i was testing on Metal Isles, AAI basically did nothing. built a few flags, built a few stockpiles, then just stood there, even though when i checked the log, it had requested air scouts, and a fighter pit to be built, it never built the airforce/luftwaffe engineers to actually build the damn things :(
FLOZI wrote:Unfortunatly, that's too key a gameplay concept to simply remove though.
was only removed for testing purposes, same with the command bunker.
FLOZI wrote:Yeah, we need to overhaul move classes entirely imo.
in general they arent too bad. i changed the maxslope of infantry to be the same as towed guns, this stopped them from flying up cliffs (ie Castles, Graystone) without greatly affecting their mobility.
SpikedHelmet wrote:Well I wanted to include an Amphibious Sherman (with tall air intakes, could go in deep water) but some people wouldn't even consider it...
*crai* tbh i think that once naval warfare is added to the mod, the DD Shermans may be a bit unbalancing, in terms of setting up a beachhead in prep for storming an island. the snorkel Shermans were regular shermans with the ports sealed and the ducts bolted on (which were removed after the beacheads were secured) and imo seem to be a much more efficient (in terms of cost, design and effectiveness) option than the DD tanks were. Plus they were also used on the british tanks (and it wouldnt hurt to make amphib Panzers and T34s for the sake of game balance)

*edit* contact me on msn or something, details on my profile
0 x

User avatar
Pressure Line
Posts: 2283
Joined: 21 May 2007, 02:09

Post by Pressure Line »

Nemo wrote:Thanks for the report, but we're doing a complete rebuild with the next version, so bughunting in the current release isn't really needed. However, given that we're building everything from scratch, we'll need a LOT of help testing - Pressure_Line, would you be up for helping out with that when the time comes?
How far away is this time?

Even an infantry + guns version would be alright for initial testing (build the balance from the bottom up)
0 x

SpikedHelmet
MC: Legacy & Spring 1944 Developer
Posts: 1945
Joined: 21 Sep 2004, 08:25

Post by SpikedHelmet »

A few weeks, tbh.
0 x

User avatar
lale
Posts: 73
Joined: 29 Apr 2007, 08:36

Post by lale »

Regarding AI├óÔé¼┬ª

Currently NTAI, allows combination of builder and attacker without problem. (aka sending resurrectors into battle in TA mods)
- NTAI is also user configurable to disregard stall, both metal and energy, for EACH unittype (eg. bunkers)
- As NTAI allows full control over build order, you can force it to build planes.

However getting this to work within a few weeks is not realistic. :-(
Basically three problems remain:
  • The AI interface has been change in svn builds, so currently AAI might be the only AI to work with svn. (if 1944 works with 74b3, then this is a non issue)

    NTAI do not currently have a method of triggering a specific flag placement. E.g. one can not tell NTAI to go to a particularly forward placement and plant a flag. Telling a constructor to plant flags will make constructor (or riflemen) spam flags.

    NTAI does have a method to place flags at an adjustable spacing on maps. E.g. NTAI has a method to plant flags with 500 pixels (500 is user configurable) between them. Unfortunately this method to space flags, is currently not working.
Also setting and riflemen to construct flags, while being an attack will make some riflemen an attacker, while other will dedicate to building flags. (this is random by NTAI)

btw: if you do not use geo spots, but instead use these as flag spots, then NTAI will be very efficient in hunting and placing flags on geospots. Unfortunately its not possible to define a specific unit as attack group leader (rifleman on his way to geospot), and thereby have other units support/defend this unit.
0 x

User avatar
Pressure Line
Posts: 2283
Joined: 21 May 2007, 02:09

Post by Pressure Line »

for the purposes of balance testing its easy enough to disable the build options for the riflemen and smgers.

i think the main issues that AAI is having is with the buildcosts of units (the lack of a real energy storage building hurts too, 400 storage is simply not enough) because it spams infantry like theres no tomorrow. a game on Small Divide for example will end in roughly 15 minutes, and the b3h version is fairly well balanced, its a tossup which side wins.

i feel making NTAI configs will be pointless until there is a fairly well balanced beta out.

looking at the wip list, just throw the infantry at me once the scripting is done (assuming that the basic buildings [hq, barracks, flags, log stockpiles] are done) and i can get started on them. because, arguably, infantry balance is going to be one of the most important things to balance out.
0 x

User avatar
Nemo
Spring 1944 Developer
Posts: 1376
Joined: 30 Jan 2005, 19:44

Post by Nemo »

Absolutely agree. Infantry are the core of the game. Infantry-infantry balance shouldn't be *too* hard since we already have a fairly good template in the alpha, but it will be quite tricky striking a good balance between armor and infantry.

However, with somewhat unfortunate timing, I'm heading out with the family for about two weeks. Will send you a test version with completed german infantry when I get back.

Oh, and, make an account on https://1944.bountysource.com/ . It'll be the place where we put up the various test versions (click on the dev button once you've gotten someone to approve you), and hammer our various balance issues.

The same goes for anyone interested in helping out - just sign up there and throw something in "notes and chatter" as to what you'd like to do.
0 x

User avatar
1v0ry_k1ng
Posts: 4656
Joined: 10 Mar 2006, 10:24

Post by 1v0ry_k1ng »

Ill whack out a decent NTAI profile on the day of release for this, it should play 1944 pretty well
0 x

User avatar
Pressure Line
Posts: 2283
Joined: 21 May 2007, 02:09

Post by Pressure Line »

lale wrote:Regarding AI├óÔé¼┬ª

Currently NTAI, allows combination of builder and attacker without problem. (aka sending resurrectors into battle in TA mods)
- NTAI is also user configurable to disregard stall, both metal and energy, for EACH unittype (eg. bunkers)
- As NTAI allows full control over build order, you can force it to build planes.

However getting this to work within a few weeks is not realistic. :-(
Basically three problems remain:
  • The AI interface has been change in svn builds, so currently AAI might be the only AI to work with svn. (if 1944 works with 74b3, then this is a non issue)

    NTAI do not currently have a method of triggering a specific flag placement. E.g. one can not tell NTAI to go to a particularly forward placement and plant a flag. Telling a constructor to plant flags will make constructor (or riflemen) spam flags.

    NTAI does have a method to place flags at an adjustable spacing on maps. E.g. NTAI has a method to plant flags with 500 pixels (500 is user configurable) between them. Unfortunately this method to space flags, is currently not working.
Also setting and riflemen to construct flags, while being an attack will make some riflemen an attacker, while other will dedicate to building flags. (this is random by NTAI)

btw: if you do not use geo spots, but instead use these as flag spots, then NTAI will be very efficient in hunting and placing flags on geospots. Unfortunately its not possible to define a specific unit as attack group leader (rifleman on his way to geospot), and thereby have other units support/defend this unit.
dont see any of that as a problem tbh, flags = mexxes. placement is on metal spots, most of the ai's seem to have appropriate ways of finding places to put mexxes...
0 x

User avatar
Pressure Line
Posts: 2283
Joined: 21 May 2007, 02:09

Post by Pressure Line »

had an idea while i was bored at work...

could there also be a 'moho' metal extractor for the allies? im thinking "Company Command Post" an earth/log structure with 4 or 5 riflemen inside for defense or something like that.

doesnt need to be that much better than a flag, say 10x more (compared to the planned 50-100x of the command bunker)
0 x

User avatar
Neddie
Community Lead
Posts: 9406
Joined: 10 Apr 2006, 05:05

Post by Neddie »

Guys, I haven't been around to test or brainstorm for a while, and I apologize. I'm not a part of the team, but I do follow the project, and I will continue to try to help out as needed. I've been rather busy off the web, but I'll try to touch base with you lads in lobby when I may.
0 x

Jason
Posts: 12
Joined: 15 Oct 2006, 03:10

Post by Jason »

Hey, when I'm playing the latest spring release, I get error messages about a missing cfg file, but i don't know where to add one or what to name it either.

I'm using the AAI ai...

thanks in advance
0 x

User avatar
Pressure Line
Posts: 2283
Joined: 21 May 2007, 02:09

Post by Pressure Line »

Jason wrote:Hey, when I'm playing the latest spring release, I get error messages about a missing cfg file, but i don't know where to add one or what to name it either.

I'm using the AAI ai...

thanks in advance
in the C:/...spring/ai/aai/cfg/mods folder you will need to add a config file called "1944publicalphab3h.cfg" or something like that, there is a file in the aai/logs folder which will tell you the exact name of the config file.

there should be a config file for an earlier release of 1944, copy and rename that.

to get it to play properly you will need to change the max_arty_distance or whatever the tag is to a value of over 6000 if you want AAI to use artillery.

but the best thing to do will be give me your email or add me to MSN or something, and i can send you my custom modfile for playing against AAI and the AAI config (i made some changes to the modfile to alleviate some problems AAI was having with certain units/buildings) and i will give you more detailed instructions on how to set it up, and some little quirks ive found with AAI (mainly issues with USA start positions)

*edit* I have also found that RAI plays quite well, but i have found it still needs the custom modfile to work properly.
0 x

Jason
Posts: 12
Joined: 15 Oct 2006, 03:10

Post by Jason »

Hey thanks, I got it to working with your help!

Now, I hate to bother, but how does one build aircraft with those Air Wing engineers? I can't seem to make that work at all....

Thanks again!
0 x

User avatar
Pressure Line
Posts: 2283
Joined: 21 May 2007, 02:09

Post by Pressure Line »

you build the aircraft factories on geothermal vents.

planes are incredibly powerful (one bombload from a B25/JU88 is about the same destruction as an OTA nuke)
0 x

User avatar
Pressure Line
Posts: 2283
Joined: 21 May 2007, 02:09

Post by Pressure Line »

Ok, for anyone interested, i have my modified copy of the v0.01b3h sd7 file, and my AAI config for S:1944 available for download:

Modified .sd7
http://tinmanfunkymonkey.orcon.net.nz/s ... 1b3hPL.sd7

AAI Config
http://tinmanfunkymonkey.orcon.net.nz/s ... 1b3hPL.cfg

Using these files will enable you to play S:1944 against AI opponent(s)

Code: Select all

1944puplicalpha_b3h.sd7 to 1944puplicalpha_b3hPL.sd7 Changelog

These changes have been made purely for gameplay compatibilty with my current version of AAI.

*Global
-Riflemen and SMG Troopers can no longer build flags.
-maxslope of Infantry moveclass changed to 35, to prevent infantry from climbing up almost vertical walls.

*Germany
-R117 Obercommando Bunker can no longer be built.
*edit* thought i might mention that unless an AAI bot playing as teh us starts in the top of the map, it will have problems with units getting stuck in the barracks.
0 x

User avatar
1v0ry_k1ng
Posts: 4656
Joined: 10 Mar 2006, 10:24

Post by 1v0ry_k1ng »

why you would do this when yhou could just write an NTAI config that would play it much better..
0 x

User avatar
Neddie
Community Lead
Posts: 9406
Joined: 10 Apr 2006, 05:05

Post by Neddie »

Because RAI would still be the superior choice.
0 x

User avatar
1v0ry_k1ng
Posts: 4656
Joined: 10 Mar 2006, 10:24

Post by 1v0ry_k1ng »

NTAI with a good config is much better than RAI, as RAIs build is basicly randomated. i could knock up a config for the alpha in about 10 minutes but its about to replaced so not much point
0 x

User avatar
FLOZi
MC: Legacy & Spring 1944 Developer
Posts: 6112
Joined: 29 Apr 2005, 01:14

Post by FLOZi »

Daimler Armoured Car MkII, WIP:

Image

Last british vehicle model needed for the next release. :-)
0 x

Post Reply

Return to “Game Development”