Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[AchlySnotra]

I know this "please obey me you morron of a ship" kind of suggestion has probably been made a lot, but there is just no battle strategy possible in this game. your ships just won't obey your commands. tell me: what are ion weapons and teleportating ships worth if they get distracted until their combat readiness is low? the only strategy is to have more and bigger ships than your opponent and that is all. even the "avoid" command is worthless: your ships keep attacking those and won't attack the one i'm telling them to eliminate (meaning they are supposed to attack at all costs!)
We need a command that changes a ship's behavior to "focus on assigned target and ignore every other enemy ship; of course try to avoid missiles and disengage when your flux is high, but your firepower is only dedicated to your target except for defensive weapons".
we also need a "stay behind the frontline!" or a "stay beside but never before bigger ships!" kind of command. Badly.

[TaLaR]

I think it's not so much about obeying - controlling a Hyperion with simple, directly executed commands would require about the same level of micromanagement as piloting it personally. This particular case just needs much better AI handling for ship system to be useful.

Rather I'd really like concept of acting as a group made more explicit. Not just 'stay here' or 'follow this', but 'stay within a group in a role of frontliner/skirmisher/backliner/escort/etc'. Exact roles are to be defined, of course.

[AchlySnotra]

yes! exactly! those suggestions I made were ways I thought of to do exactly that: group behavior!
and we agree on the AI.

[Locklave]

I gotta agree with the OP. Ships really *** me off when they get told to attack a certain target and 5 minutes later you check only to see it's still fighting the same ship ignoring your orders.

[Alex]

I wonder if some of this is a question of expectations. To my knowledge/in my experience, "Eliminate" works the way it's "supposed" to, but a ship can definitely get zoned out, especially if it starts out being far away and there are enemies in the way.

For example, if you tell a ship to "eliminate" something across the battlefield from it, chances are it'll get bogged down. The "right" behavior would probably be to disengage, then go behind its own lines to the other flank, and then engage the target, but that's outside of what the AI can really do - it doesn't work with concepts on that level, and can't really plan ahead in that way.

So, generally speaking, eliminate works for nearby ships that have a clear shot at the target. Setting defend/rally task force/etc orders can also definitely be used to spread ships out and generally maneuver them how you need to - though, yeah, there are some cases where e.g. a ship told to "Defend" a location will not be able to get there. Basically, enemy ships between the ship and its orders are trouble.

Rather I'd really like concept of acting as a group made more explicit. Not just 'stay here' or 'follow this', but 'stay within a group in a role of frontliner/skirmisher/backliner/escort/etc'. Exact roles are to be defined, of course.

I like the concept in general, but it's hard to picture how that would work implementation-wise. Something like a mobile, hidden "defend" order? But then you'd have to be able to give orders to "groups" rather than ships, etc. Chaining escort orders can kind of accomplish this already, actually... in a way, at any rate. "Ships stay in a group" just seems like one of those things that's appealing as a concept, but once you get into the details of what this actually means, it's pretty fraught.

[TaLaR]

Rather I'd really like concept of acting as a group made more explicit. Not just 'stay here' or 'follow this', but 'stay within a group in a role of frontliner/skirmisher/backliner/escort/etc'. Exact roles are to be defined, of course.

I like the concept in general, but it's hard to picture how that would work implementation-wise. Something like a mobile, hidden "defend" order? But then you'd have to be able to give orders to "groups" rather than ships, etc. Chaining escort orders can kind of accomplish this already, actually... in a way, at any rate. "Ships stay in a group" just seems like one of those things that's appealing as a concept, but once you get into the details of what this actually means, it's pretty fraught.

Yeah, doesn't sound easy to implement. It would need to be some sort of coordinated swarm behavior.

Escort chains are problematic exactly due to their rigidity, especially when you try to make them long. Ships start hampering each other too much. Same happens if there are to many escorting ships on same escorted.
Which is why I prefer to just move around Defend orders after my fleet grows large enough.

Hidden Defend order might actually work, at least for simply staying together part. Moved based on weighted vectors of ships from current group target position. Slower offensive ships (Onslaught) having most weight, fast frigates or carriers least.
... No need to really hide it though. Seeing current group target location would make whole thing more transparent.

[Alex]

I wonder if "Defend, but on a ship" would just straight up do the job.

[TaLaR]

Would be good enough for cases with clearly defined leader, like Paragon and it's support group. Or player piloted capital in general.

But probably less optimal for a pack of equal rank AI ships, like 5 Eagles.

[braciszek]

The only command that I am satisfied with is the avoid command. Everything else the AI only does if it has nothing else to do. Getting carriers to target specific ships also takes some time as they'll typically target some other ships before they the fighters/bombers do what you told them to do.

[Ranakastrasz]

I wonder if "Defend, but on a ship" would just straight up do the job.

I thought that was what escort did.

Well, aside from not having equal number of ships to enemy ships be called to escort, but rather some number, or some specific ships, depending on your commands.

That said, having it be mutual-ish, where both sides support the other one, Except then there wouldn't be a host ship for the supporting ships to follow around.....

Yes, I can see why this is a complex problem.

My assumption is that Escort means a ship will try to keep close to its host. Past that, normal AI is involved. So the target is more bold because it has support, and the support is more bold, but is reluctant to get too far away from its host.


----

As for the original issue.
Ion and teleporting, well, The Hyperion doesn't do AI well at all, and has been extremely nerfed, presumably because too strong for Human and too weak for AI and issues. Ion, well, you need support to make best use of ion. And yes, the "Dance until CR drops below reasonable" is kinda annoying.

Avoid, well, it seems to work, mostly. That said, it isn't always 100% possible, and I imagine it only really makes the target be considered a lot scarier, so if it thinks its a good idea, it might ignore it.

Eliminate probably makes it way more attractive a target, so it overwelms a lot of it's self preservation, but presumably, not all of it. That said, tooltip saying "At all costs" is kinda wrong in that case.

"we also need a "stay behind the frontline!" or a "stay beside but never before bigger ships!" kind of command. Badly."

What is a frontline, and how do you define it? I agree, but honestly, I have no idea how to describe it.
As for beside, same deal. And yes, I want that behavior, but its hard to describe.

In both cases, it should be something like, Look where allies and enemies are, specifically the bigger ones. Try to keep big allies between, or semi-between, you and big enemies. I think.... But I don't write AI, and coding gets complex fast, so I have no idea how viable that actually is.

[Morrokain]

Eliminate probably makes it way more attractive a target, so it overwelms a lot of it's self preservation, but presumably, not all of it. That said, tooltip saying "At all costs" is kinda wrong in that case.

"we also need a "stay behind the frontline!" or a "stay beside but never before bigger ships!" kind of command. Badly."

What is a frontline, and how do you define it? I agree, but honestly, I have no idea how to describe it.
As for beside, same deal. And yes, I want that behavior, but its hard to describe.

In both cases, it should be something like, Look where allies and enemies are, specifically the bigger ones. Try to keep big allies between, or semi-between, you and big enemies. I think.... But I don't write AI, and coding gets complex fast, so I have no idea how viable that actually is.

The last point would probably get tricky but I think it is possible. There is a lot of opportunity cost evaluation to be done there.

I would say my philosophy on ship tactics and orders really clashes with the reality of the first point, though. What I mean is, when I want to eliminate a target, specifically something like a carrier, there is only one reason I would want to do so: That target becomes more detrimental to my chances of winning the battle the longer it stays alive. It really needs to die as soon as possible and I'm willing to make sacrifices for it. Time is the factor in this case, so anything that makes this order take more time is detrimental and counterproductive to my goals. That includes self preservation.

As an example, a carrier is all about force projection. It can strike far away targets with a lot of firepower. It is absolutely deadly to smaller ships that I need to provide control over the battlespace and provide distractions so my heavy hitting ships can do their job. The longer it is able to send its waves of fighters and bombers the more impact it has on the state of said battle.

That is why, when I give the eliminate command on said carrier, I want the ships given the command to literally not care about anything else but getting within full weapons range of the target and giving it hell with everything they've got. I want them to ignore fighters. I want them to ignore missiles. Let PD handle it. If it doesn't? Oh well orders are orders and the mission comes first. The behavior should resemble a phalanx of cavalry crashing into a line of heavy infantry. That is how I think it should feel.

Think of the assault on the Executor in Return of the Jedi. When Commander Calrissian questions Admiral Ackbar about the plan to get so close, Ackbar essentially just goes: Yup I mean't what I said no matter the danger. Losses are inevitable but if this enemy ship survives literally the whole fleet is doomed anyway... so what do we have to lose? That is an eliminate command.

At that point, if the player loses more ships than he/she is comfortable with that is his/her own fault.  The impetus is on the player and the outcome is far more predictable once you start to get a real feel of what different combinations of ships can take on.

The most frustrating element of Starsector combat for me at this time is when I give an eliminate command on a carrier and the AI gets so concerned with missiles or fighters or flanking frigates that the carrier has time to retreat behind a better protected screen.

I want eliminate to mean:

https://youtu.be/ZkZvyfLC-LU?t=191

[Goumindong]

I thought that was what escort did.

Escort is more complicated. Defend is just a high priority on a specific spot. Escort checks the relative size/HP and determines whether or not the ship should be in front or behind the escorted ship. It attempts to prevent flanking and body block to prevent the ship from dying if necessary.

Defend on a ship would effectively group ships around the center ship but not add specific escort AI to protect that ship.

Best option would probably to run two commands as special for units of a group

1) defend on the slowest/largest ship (this enhances group cohesion)
2) target/order priority on slowest/largest ship

In effect a group would follow the lead of the slowest/largest ship

[Ranakastrasz]

Do you mean getting in the way of a retreat, or the earlier, ramming the enemy tactic?

But either way, I do agree. That is what Eliminate SHOULD mean. Kill the target or die trying. Because that is actually useful in some situations.

[AchlySnotra]

I get it is hard.
but first, about obedience, look at this:

A                                                                    B C D

put any ship in position A, put a hyperion in B (it is really obvious with this one) and put two enemy ships in the battlefield. make it so they would attack the hyperion.
when they do, order the hyperion to go to point A, with any order you can.
you will see that even when the enemy ships are in position C, meaning that there is litterally nothing that stands in the way of the hyperion to get to point A, the hyperion will teleport behind an enemy ship attacking it, getting in point D by doing so; litterally the opposite way it is supposed to go.
I order my ship to go in a direction, it keeps attacking the ship attacking them, even though it could teleport away from it.

I don't want my ships to ignore other ships while rallying somewhere, I want them to go where they are ordered to, while keeping firing at enemies if they must, And/or by circling around enemy ships. That way I can have fast and efficient tactic possibilities. such as "save the capital ship that will get destroyed in thirty seconds if nothing is done".


now about the escort, I have something specific and practical too:
the group command would mean "stay near the ship you are in group with", "attack the same ship as the ship you are in group with" and "when attacking a ship, move so you are not in the way of the ship you are in group with; so that they can attack the same target as you" (this last one actually seems complicated and is not essential)
this command would not override other commands and can be given at the same time as those.
that way, I can give the escort command to a group of ships that would stay together. I can have groups that attack and groups that defend the attackers.
I know I am not a coder, but aside for the "move so you are not in the way of another ship" part, which seem compicated and is not essential, I hope these suggestions would not be too hard to implement and really improve group behaviors.

What do you think?

[Alex]

Honestly, I wouldn't bring the Hyperion into this - it's a problem, for sure, but it's a unique case so it's not all that useful to look at as far as drawing any general conclusions. Whatever problems it's got are most likely caused by the teleporter AI, you know? All other ships will behave differently. Not ideally, necessarily!

I don't want my ships to ignore other ships while rallying somewhere, I want them to go where they are ordered to, while keeping firing at enemies if they must, And/or by circling around enemy ships. That way I can have fast and efficient tactic possibilities. such as "save the capital ship that will get destroyed in thirty seconds if nothing is done".

That's actually what they try to do! Sometimes they do get zoned out more than they should but still, that's the overall behavior. Faster ships naturally have more luck.

now about the escort, I have something specific and practical too:
the group command would mean "stay near the ship you are in group with", "attack the same ship as the ship you are in group with" and "when attacking a ship, move so you are not in the way of the ship you are in group with; so that they can attack the same target as you" (this last one actually seems complicated and is not essential)
this command would not override other commands and can be given at the same time as those.
that way, I can give the escort command to a group of ships that would stay together. I can have groups that attack and groups that defend the attackers.
I know I am not a coder, but aside for the "move so you are not in the way of another ship" part, which seem compicated and is not essential, I hope these suggestions would not be too hard to implement and really improve group behaviors.

What do you think?

It's... still complicated I do think that being able to order a "defend" on a ship would accomplish most of these goals and could be handy, though.