Print

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

[NikolaiLev]

While this is arguably only an issue with mods, the AI refuses to advance on ships that have very long range weapons.  Naturally, any sensible designer will make long range weapons have poor DPS, so shorter range combatants would obviously want to charge an enemy ship at any cost to get within their own weapons range.

This is most evident with mod ships with a lot of extreme (2000+) range weapons, that would be balanced, if it weren't for the AI's tendency to just... sit there and get shot.  AI will repeatedly go between "approach" and "move away", and this is a death sentence with slow capital ships.

[Alex]

I know what you mean. Moving from bugs to suggestions because, well. Like you said, not much of an issue in the base game, and isn't a "bug" to boot.

It's the sort of thing that's very difficult for the AI to judge well, since it has to make a decision to rush and accept that it'll take some damage in the process. If it gets that decision wrong, and it's on the player's side, that's a big issue. I think it's better resolved by not putting the AI in that situation to begin with, though we'll have to see if the new beam stats make this more of an issue in vanilla.

[NikolaiLev]

I know what you mean. Moving from bugs to suggestions because, well. Like you said, not much of an issue in the base game, and isn't a "bug" to boot.

It's the sort of thing that's very difficult for the AI to judge well, since it has to make a decision to rush and accept that it'll take some damage in the process. If it gets that decision wrong, and it's on the player's side, that's a big issue. I think it's better resolved by not putting the AI in that situation to begin with, though we'll have to see if the new beam stats make this more of an issue in vanilla.

Unfortunately this puts a damper on creativity with modding.

[Alex]

Well, yeah, but that's hardly the only engine limitation modders have to work with. Even just looking at the AI, you could come up with an endless array of weapons the AI won't know how to deal with, either defensively or offensively.

[NikolaiLev]

Well, yeah, but that's hardly the only engine limitation modders have to work with. Even just looking at the AI, you could come up with an endless array of weapons the AI won't know how to deal with, either defensively or offensively.

After testing, I've found this occurs even with vanilla ships using the High Intensity Laser.  You can do it on slow ships like the Paragon, combined with an Integrated Targeting Unit.  The AI's just too scared of it, even if it's another Paragon.  This is especially gamebreaking when the AI's shields can't keep up with however many HILs you have.

Seriously.  Load up a Paragon with 4 HILs and go up against an Onslaught.

I think this is worth fixing.

[Histidine]

How hard would it be to make the ship AI (or the admiral AI, assuming it doesn't have problems with running out of CPs) be able to handle this problem? Specifically:

• If we're already engaged with the enemy, continue with whatever we were doing unless specifically ordered otherwise.
• If we can close and kill the enemy's long-range ship without getting into too much danger or getting diverted from our current orders (e.g. capturing a point), do so.
• If we can't, but the enemy can't get through our shields (low DPS soft flux), stay where we are.
• If the enemy can get through our shields, back off.

The reason I bring this up is because it would look really silly if the player could bait enemy ships to their deaths by poking them with a HIL/Tachyon Lance from afar and provoking them into rushing into close combat against three times their own firepower.

[NikolaiLev]

How hard would it be to make the ship AI (or the admiral AI, assuming it doesn't have problems with running out of CPs) be able to handle this problem? Specifically:

• If we're already engaged with the enemy, continue with whatever we were doing unless specifically ordered otherwise.
• If we can close and kill the enemy's long-range ship without getting into too much danger or getting diverted from our current orders (e.g. capturing a point), do so.
• If we can't, but the enemy can't get through our shields (low DPS soft flux), stay where we are.
• If the enemy can get through our shields, back off.

The reason I bring this up is because it would look really silly if the player could bait enemy ships to their deaths by poking them with a HIL/Tachyon Lance from afar and provoking them into rushing into close combat against three times their own firepower.

This is usually only really an issue with duels.  The AI handles actual fleet scenarios decently well.  If it's such an issue then just disable the charge behavior when other ships aren't around.

Ships should charge as a group against even or lesser foes, and they should have logic to determine the rough likelihood of winning an engagement based on their primary DPS values.

[Squigzilla]

Do ships behave more aggressively when carrying out an Engage/Intercept/Strike order? If so, maybe the Admiral AI could issue such an order when faced with a ship toting long-range weapons. This would help the AI deal with beam-heavy player ships while keeping the player's allies relatively safe.

[Alex]

Seriously.  Load up a Paragon with 4 HILs and go up against an Onslaught.

I get what you're saying, and I've seen the behavior before, but I can't actually reproduce it w/ this setup. I even bumped up the base range for the HIL to 1500 and added optics and ITU. What happens is the Onslaught stays around its maximum range, firing off TPC bursts and keeping up pressure w/ Annihilators. Occasionally it'll use burn drive to really close the gap and maul the Paragon. If anything, it seems to be playing this pretty well. Obviously, you're seeing something different - maybe your Onslaught loadout is different? I'm testing with the stock simulation Onslaught.

[NikolaiLev]

Seriously.  Load up a Paragon with 4 HILs and go up against an Onslaught.

I get what you're saying, and I've seen the behavior before, but I can't actually reproduce it w/ this setup. I even bumped up the base range for the HIL to 1500 and added optics and ITU. What happens is the Onslaught stays around its maximum range, firing off TPC bursts and keeping up pressure w/ Annihilators. Occasionally it'll use burn drive to really close the gap and maul the Paragon. If anything, it seems to be playing this pretty well. Obviously, you're seeing something different - maybe your Onslaught loadout is different? I'm testing with the stock simulation Onslaught.

That's really strange.  I could try making a video.  It's a Run Simulation against the default simulation Onslaught.

EDIT:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7_sZ4wD8yYw&feature=youtu.be

There you go.

This isn't even one of the more ideal tests.  The first time I tried recording the Onslaught scarcely fired a single shot.  I bet if I put hvel drivers on the Paragon it'd be even more hilarious.

Embarrassingly, I seem to also have stumbled upon the AI's predliction to think it's about to be hit by weapons even though they're out of range.  See: the heavy needlers.

[Alex]

Thanks for the video, always good to have that to make sure we're talking about the same things.

Hmm. What exactly is the Onslaught supposed to do at that point (~30 seconds in), though? Its flux is high, it can't back away to vent, and the Paragon's flux is low. Its choices are 1) burn in and die quickly or 2) maintain range and die slowly. I suppose a "vent then burn in" maneuver might be an option too, but given that the Paragon's flux is low and its got the fortress shield, an Onslaught is unlikely to break it with a charge, and it'll just end up at close range with high flux again. There are some points where the Paragon's flux is relatively high, but not high enough (compared to the Onslaught's) to give the Onslaught a real opportunity.

It's just a bad fight for the Onslaught IMO, doesn't seem to be many good options. Your thoughts?

[NikolaiLev]

Thanks for the video, always good to have that to make sure we're talking about the same things.

Hmm. What exactly is the Onslaught supposed to do at that point (~30 seconds in), though? Its flux is high, it can't back away to vent, and the Paragon's flux is low. Its choices are 1) burn in and die quickly or 2) maintain range and die slowly. I suppose a "vent then burn in" maneuver might be an option too, but given that the Paragon's flux is low and its got the fortress shield, an Onslaught is unlikely to break it with a charge, and it'll just end up at close range with high flux again. There are some points where the Paragon's flux is relatively high, but not high enough (compared to the Onslaught's) to give the Onslaught a real opportunity.

It's just a bad fight for the Onslaught IMO, doesn't seem to be many good options. Your thoughts?

Charging in to bring its full power to bear will ultimately win out over the Paragon's low DPS, long range weaponry.  The issue is largely that the AI let its flux get that high to begin with, but even so it can simply keep its shields down since the damage it takes will pale compared to the damage the Paragon is going to take at close range.

"Hold position and wait for support" might accidentally be a good idea in a fleet scenario, but one thing the AI should strive to be is unpredictable.  While it'd take a while and it lacks omni shielding, a good idea may be to turn around and full burn away.

That said, the best change here I can think of is to give the AI the tools necessary to observe what kind of weaponry a given ship has when it's within sight radius, and then draw conclusions about how to fight it.  If an enemy ship has a lot of long range beam weapons, it ought to charge in guns blazing.  If it's being fired at by kinetic weapons that aren't actually hitting it, it should keep shields up.