GoodGuy
Posts: 1469
Joined: 5/17/2006
From: Cologne, Germany
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Arjuna
To achieve this we need to support multiple commands rather than the single command per side that we support now. This then requires more command and control measures like boundaries to define the different areas of operation. I would really like to do this as it would also enable team play but again this is something we will get to over time.
I see where you're coming from regarding the boundaries, as the friendly AI commander's troops or say divisions should not cross the paths/attack routes of the friendly player's troops, for example.
But wouldn't it be feasable, as "work-around" (which would allow for earlier adoption), for the friendly AI commander to act according to the TO&E and still provide plans for all divisions, but then add new routines which check for interfering (planned) paths and actual movements of the different divisions, which would avoid say divisional attacks taking place right next to the player unit (Division) (by employing a variable min. distance rule) and right in front of a friendly player division?
That would require something like a little analyzer that would ensure that friendly Div A could attack on the left or right wing of friendly player Div B to attack town Z, but would avoid that it could move in front of friendly player Div B or say cross Div B's path, in order to execute an attack on town X.
I think you could also still employ one map boss per side only, imho, by introducing something what i would call "BOSS AI advice", where the Side's Boss AI includes the player's unit in his plans, means where it plans and draws the player Division's route, FUP and path of attack, just like as if the player's Division would be controlled by a subordinated divisional AI commander, but as a proposal only, where then the player will still be free to pick his own routes, and where the Boss AI can be informed (say with a checkbox in the left-hand menu), whether the player wants to stick to the Boss AI's plan or develop his own attack plan. The Boss AI would then either have to leave a free slot (say if the player wants to attack on the left wing, as proposed by the AI), so the Boss AI would then leave room for the player's unit and not field any AI unit on that wing, or (2 more checkboxes: 1. "fill position , 2. "consolidate units") where the Boss AI would fill the empty position with spare/reserve units or move the remaining AI divisions closer together, in order to muster a Schwerpunkt attack, so that the player can roam freely or develop a supportive flanking attack, for example.
I hope the stuff above made sense.
I know that you use to head for the best (and often most time-consuming) solution, but sometimes even you employ some compromises along with abstractions, so I wonder if such a work-around would be feasable, and less time-consuming, programming-wise?
< Message edited by GoodGuy -- 7/26/2012 1:19:17 AM >
_____________________________
"Aw Nuts"
General Anthony McAuliffe
December 22nd, 1944
Bastogne
---
"I've always felt that the AA (Alied Assault engine) had the potential to be [....] big."
Tim Stone
8th of August, 2006
|
Printable Version
RE: Future Directions - Features - 
I haven't read all the post in this thread yet, so I'll probably be 
Maybe a "Mop 
All too often it is easy to recommend changes without considering 
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread