Print

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

[ElPresidente]

The AI behavior when holding strategic point is driving me crazy. Even if I assign my ENTIRE fleet to hold a single point, even if it's several battleships, side-by-side, against weaker enemies - the stupid buggers keep puling back, which ends up me loosing that point.

If it's a command point, that means the enemy just got reinforcement and if I loose a ship I won't be able to re-inforce.

We need a new command that will make it clear to the AI that it must NOT let the enemy get that point, regardless of risks.

[JUDGE! slowpersun]

Seconded!  Some other posts have pointed this out, but it does seem the AI, while tactically well-coded, sometimes fails to grasp strategically necessary choices... but this to be expected, game isn't run by Skynet.  Still, now that DP is partially linked to tactical objectives, all the personality types in the middle of the bell curves shouldn't abandon them without an order to (the wimps and the reckless officers should get pushed around, just wimps back and the reckless forward).

Honestly, the game could use a few more possibilities in the command layer in general.  Be nice to be able to direct bombers and fighters separately again, instead of via clunky ass directives that a carrier attack something.

[ElPresidente]

Now that you mention it, fighter should use a bit more brains in their movements. Not attacking head on, but flanking.

[Burvjradzite]

Have you tried to use reckless or at least agressive officers? Almighty fearless ai prefer to die other than go back also. Ships tend to retreat then outnumbered btw, adding more frigates may improve situation.

[Sandor057]

Have you tried to use reckless or at least agressive officers? Almighty fearless ai prefer to die other than go back also. Ships tend to retreat then outnumbered btw, adding more frigates may improve situation.

I think that the problem mentioned here is, that even if your ships are not outnumbered, but the situation is the other way around, they just back off for no reason. This is something that I have also experienced from time to time, and while a Full Assault order fixes this behavior, it is not really an optimal solution, as another location may have an entirely different situation, where I don't want my fleet to go breserk.

Alternatively, I usually assign defensive points above objectives. It seems, that there's roughly a maximum range assigned ships retreat, and that usually keeps them where I need them.

[Thaago]

Are your ships using primarily long ranged weapons with cautious or steady officers? Ships try to "kite" with these builds, and its not the worst strategy a lot of the time, but it does result in losing ground and not holding points. Having mid range weapons will encourage the AI to close in to use them when they have the advantage.

My mantra for the AI is "aggressive is steady, steady is cautious, reckless is reckless". I see aggressive as a requirement for general purpose officers to behave like I want them to, with steady officers for ships that I want to be careful kiters, and I will never use a cautious or timid officer.

[Drazan]

My mantra for the AI is "aggressive is steady, steady is cautious, reckless is reckless".

100% this.
There needs to be a more detailed explanation in game about how officers behave.

Also, both officered and unofficered ships will leave  control points, no matter their personality.

[SCC]

This sounds less like an additional order and more as if AI was not working properly and acting too scared, when it shouldn't.

[robepriority]

Usually, it's an issue of weapon range, Large ships tend to have insane range on their non-pd weapons, so backing up doesn't technically reduce offensive output.

Compounding that is the fact that shield tanking up to high flux also cripples your entire weapons output, including PD, so tanking in general is a very temporary arrangement.

Ships are actually fairly good at sticking together once frigs/destroyer distractions are dealt with, so having officered/smodded variants of those is actually a decent investment when trying to do hammer and anvil tactics.

[Sandor057]

From some answers I see the justification for why the AI does what it does, nevertheless the issue here, I think, is between:

A, How the order currently works: "Hold your ground in the approximate vicinity of that point, while retaining maximum combat effectiveness, retreating and engaging as you deem fit."

B, The order wanted here: "HOLD THAT POINT AT ALL COST! GIVE NOT AN INCH!"

So basically a way to tell your ships to stay at a point and even take some hits if need be.