.com.unity Forums - Improvement proposal I

.com.unity Forums (http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/index.php)

- WinSPMBT (http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/forumdisplay.php?f=78)

- - Improvement proposal I - OP fire draining (http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/showthread.php?t=27185)

Re: Improvement proposal I - OP fire draining

Quote:

Mobhack said:
Loads of work involved to do such a thing. Needs to be designed in from the ground up, so really would require a completely new game engine. Also - if we give this wonderful advantage to the human player, what then do we do with the AI - if we want the AI to be more intelligent about opfire we then have to:

a) do a LOT of thinking about new AI algorithms
b) a LOT of AI code to implement them
c) A LOT of testing of these

then after c), return to a) and rinse and repeat till you have something that even halfway works. Then put out to playtesting, and find that they find out exactly how to exploit these new AI processes within 10 or so games... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/frown.gif

That process is difficult enough if designed into a brand new game, but kludging and bodging it on top of a complete and sclerotic bit of spaghetti 1990's "C" adds several orders of magnitude to the process, while adding the extra side effects of the new code's unforseen interactions

So - not going to happen in this game engine.

Cheers
Andy

And never mind the bollocks, OP filtering is here!!
I understand it�s an unfair advantage against the AI, but it would absolutely improve PBEMs in such a terrific way. Thanks again Camo Team!! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...es/biggrin.gif

Regards
Robert

Re: Improvement proposal I - OP fire draining

It doesn't give an overwhelming advantage, and scenario designers can filter ai opfire as well.

But yes, I was very suprised when this was announced a few weeks ago. I didn't think it would be possible.

Re: Improvement proposal I - OP fire draining

I also would like to support Artur's proposal - I have had the same problem with OP Fire as other posters and it has often killed the enjoyment of the game completly as I only have time for short AI-battles. I actually over the years have played TACOPs more given its ROE setting and the ability to target types. In game I always end up turning engament ranges down to a minumum so I can direct fire, which of course is meanigless when i have limited visibility and a great target scoots by in the AI movement phase.

I also have to say that the Camo teams willingness to look at the matter despite the coding complexity is laudable. It is certainly a difficult matter but also, IMO, a decisive gameplay issue.

OTOH some of the comments posted here have not been as sensible as those from the Camo team. While some points, such as "out of contact" units engaging on their own targets of opportunity is a truism, it is irrelevant as this, too, is a great failing of the game engine (which however applies to ALL comerical games that I am aware of)that can hardly be expected to be fixed. To suggest however that any armoured commander in a prepared and concealled position will fire on dismopunted infantry and such at long range b/c "they might have TOWs" while in a potential tank-heavy enemy enviornment is just silly and has nothing to do with RL or any actual SOP.

Re: Improvement proposal I - OP fire draining

you realize siddi, that for CD owners there is now bonus opfire filtering. you can turn opfiring at infantry to 100m or 50m.

Re: Improvement proposal I - OP fire draining

Quote:

Smersh said:
you realize siddi, that for CD owners there is now bonus opfire filtering. you can turn opfiring at infantry to 100m or 50m.

no, i didn't..thanks! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/smile.gif