Fractal Softworks Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

Starsector 0.97a is out! (02/02/24); New blog post: Anubis-class Cruiser (12/20/24)

Author Topic: A.I. engagement issues  (Read 819 times)

eert5rty7u8i9i7u6yrewqdef

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 546
    • View Profile
A.I. engagement issues
« on: May 12, 2023, 02:27:59 PM »

I think I figured out why some ships with reckless officers won't engage. If the difference in firepower is too heavily in favor of the enemy, reckless ships won't engage.
I noticed this when testing Hyperion builds. Lighter weapon builds refuse to engage multiple enemies, whereas heavier weapon builds will engage.

In the simulator the enemy fleet I used was 1 dominator, one medusa, two sunders, two hammerheads, and one mule. The loadouts are the following. The first is Heavy needler, pulse laser, and mining blaster with armored weapon mounts built in. It will not engage the enemy even with a reckless officer.  The second loadout is Mining blaster, thumper, and ion pulser, with expanded mags built in. It will engage the enemy with a reckless officer.

While the second loadout has more officer skills, I don't think that is the issue as neither will properly engage a lone onslaught. When engaging an onslaught, both teleport onto it, and then immediately start retreating regardless of flux level. The onslaught of course has a significantly higher firepower than any lone ship in the above fleet, which is why I suspect it's an issue of the A.I. overcompensating when going against overwhelming firepower.

It should be noted this wasn't an issue last patch, and while it could be an artifact of removing safety overrides, I doubt it because other people are reporting similar issues.
Logged

Alex

  • Administrator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 24947
    • View Profile
Re: A.I. engagement issues
« Reply #1 on: May 12, 2023, 02:31:02 PM »

Hmm. As far as the AI is concerned, the only difference between those loadouts might be range. It's not going to evaluate the second one as having "more firepower" and it doesn't really think in those terms, not on that fine-grained a level. All of these are medium non-PD weapons so they all look the same firepower-wise. It also, iirc, does not decide to engage or not based on relative firepower of individual ships; that decision is generally based on flux.

Edit: if you've got a vanilla save with these, would you mind sending it to me? It'd be interesting to take a look! fractalsoftworks [at] gmail [dot] com.
« Last Edit: May 12, 2023, 02:33:46 PM by Alex »
Logged

eert5rty7u8i9i7u6yrewqdef

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 546
    • View Profile
Re: A.I. engagement issues
« Reply #2 on: May 12, 2023, 04:29:48 PM »

Hmm. As far as the AI is concerned, the only difference between those loadouts might be range. It's not going to evaluate the second one as having "more firepower" and it doesn't really think in those terms, not on that fine-grained a level. All of these are medium non-PD weapons so they all look the same firepower-wise. It also, iirc, does not decide to engage or not based on relative firepower of individual ships; that decision is generally based on flux.

Edit: if you've got a vanilla save with these, would you mind sending it to me? It'd be interesting to take a look! fractalsoftworks [at] gmail [dot] com.
Thanks for the information. I just double checked to see if there was another issue, and it turns out officered ships are affected by fleet doctrine in the simulation.
Even though I was testing the first loadout using a reckless officer, because my fleet doctrine was cautious it was behaving as a cautious officer.
Switching fleet doctrine to reckless made it engage the enemy fleet (which it died to), and allowed it to kill the lone onslaught.

The reason the second loadout would engage the enemy is because I'm "piloting" it. After testing the first loadout and seeing it fail to engage, I switched fleet doctrine from cautious to reckless as that determines the player characters A.I. behavior, and tested the second loadout. Which is where the confusion stemmed from.

The second loadout still has issues with engaging the lone onslaught, but it appears that it's due to the extreme soft flux burst of the build. The second loadout isn't meant for A.I. use so that's not an issue.

I assume the reason fleet doctrine effects officer behavior in the simulation is because the player is piloting the ship.

Sorry for taking up your time. You can either delete the thread or leave it for when someone makes the same mistake.
Logged

kenwth81

  • Commander
  • ***
  • Posts: 143
    • View Profile
Re: A.I. engagement issues
« Reply #3 on: May 12, 2023, 11:10:30 PM »

The dominator is outmatched. Having shorter range and having less firepower result in it reaching high flux without it being able to doing much damage. This force the dominator to back off to vent. Giving the illusion that the dominator is not engaging.

Using reckless officer and fearless AI tolerate fighting at higher flux level and also more often fighting to the bitter end with larger ships. They often really shouldn't. Maybe that is your intention.
Logged

eert5rty7u8i9i7u6yrewqdef

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 546
    • View Profile
Re: A.I. engagement issues
« Reply #4 on: May 13, 2023, 02:29:49 PM »

The dominator is outmatched. Having shorter range and having less firepower result in it reaching high flux without it being able to doing much damage. This force the dominator to back off to vent. Giving the illusion that the dominator is not engaging.

Using reckless officer and fearless AI tolerate fighting at higher flux level and also more often fighting to the bitter end with larger ships. They often really shouldn't. Maybe that is your intention.
I was testing Hyperion builds. The dominator was part of the enemy test fleet. The issue was a bug in the simulator that caused fleet doctrine aggressiveness settings to override officer behavior. The issue was just fixed in the latest hotfix.

Fun fact, all min maxed Hyperion A.I. builds fail to even kill half the enemy fleet before running out of CR or hull, with the exception of safety overrides with double heavy blaster and a heavy machine gun.
Logged