Weird AI

[Dr. Strangelove]

I'm back to this game after a while and to brush up I wanted to play the Back to St Vith scenario. I want to send my infantry across the river to the right, to flank the defenders at Steinebrueck but the AI is doing a terrible job of pathfinding. I've tried it four times now, and every time at least one company will try to do the opposite of what I want it to do.

This is my order to the Bn leader:

These are the routes the AI keeps choosing:

Just one company was able to choose the route that covers my waypoints. Why is that so?

 

[Dr. Strangelove]

I finally managed to get them to move how I wanted them to move by making sure they moved in a column along the quickest route.

I'm comparing my playthrough to the one from the popular tutorial AAR. His troops arrived at Weppeler around 7:30. At the same time, my troops have barely finished crossing the river at Ihren. I'm using the exact same orders issued at the same time and getting vastly different results, why?

 

[john connor]

I believe the way to get them to follow specific waypoints is to select fastest and 'shortest', not 'unspecified', as you have here. Try that.

Also, what version are you using?

 

[Dr. Strangelove]

I believe the way to get them to follow specific waypoints is to select fastest and 'shortest', not 'unspecified', as you have here. Try that.

Also, what version are you using?

I'm using the current Steam version.

Yes, it seems that if I leave it to the AI, they will completely disregard waypoints.

The point is - is this intended? I specifically put multiple waypoints on the way, and the AI still can disregard them. Also, the route it chose makes no sense - why cross the stream only to immediately cross it back? It's complete nonsense.

 

[john connor]

Yes, I've also seen quite a few nonsensical kinks in the AI pathing. When I see them I do report them. That's the best thing to do. If you have the recording saved from this game you can send it to Dave, the developer. support@panthergames.com is the address, I think, but you MUST attach the recording, otherwise he can't do anything. The game saves a recording in the recordings folder and overwrites it each time you start again, so you have to go in there and rename it (to preserve it) before you start again if you want to send it to report a bug. Might be too late for this one? But it will happen again, probably...

Mostly, I just edit the paths (by dragging the silly kinks to where they should be). There's usually time.

Kinks aside, your other choices will affect the choices the AI makes in response. So here, for example, you have selected 'min' everything. That will affect how the AI responds in the light of the intel it has on enemy presence and los and the consequent likely casualties. All that said, the path it has come up with is certainly silly.

The way to get the AI not to think and to follow your precise pathing orders is as I said - 'shortest'. Try it.

 

[john connor]

To compare. Here's what I get with different settings. Would that be ok for you?

 

[Dr. Strangelove]

I set the waypoints because I want the unit to move on the other side of the stream, which is unguarded. I achieved what I wanted with the "quickest" setting. I guess you need to be more specific for the AI regarding what you want it to do. Initially I was under the impression that setting waypoints will make the AI cross them, but it seems that it can also mean for it to go next to them.

 

[john connor]

That was using the latest dev build. I tried it with the steam build and got this:



As you see, it replicates your senseless kinks. So maybe the latest build (which is about 3 builds on from the steam build) has improved things!! You shouldn't have to wait long for the patch now though. See Dave's latest sitrep post.

 

[john connor]

I set the waypoints because I want the unit to move on the other side of the stream, which is unguarded. I achieved what I wanted with the "quickest" setting. I guess you need to be more specific for the AI regarding what you want it to do. Initially I was under the impression that setting waypoints will make the AI cross them, but it seems that it can also mean for it to go next to them.

Well, if there are enough units then the AI will also select a formation when following your orders, if you don't set one, which could easily mean a certain vagueness with regards to your desired waypoints. I guess by selecting column you might get the AI to go through your waypoints with all units, one after the other. But that might not be desirable, from a combat/contact perspective.

 

[john connor]

If you select 'covered' or 'avoidance' you might get a different result again - one more in concordance with your intent - to avoid contact. I would never leave the AI to select this setting, myself.

 

[jimcarravallah]

Well, if there are enough units then the AI will also select a formation when following your orders, if you don't set one, which could easily mean a certain vagueness with regards to your desired waypoints. I guess by selecting column you might get the AI to go through your waypoints with all units, one after the other. But that might not be desirable, from a combat/contact perspective.

I agree with John.

Setting waypoints without defining a formation or desired attributes for selecting the route leaves the AI a significant amount of freedom when determining how to move to a specific point.

I noted that the routing tool was open. It's provided to identify the most likely route a group of units would take given the assigned movement attributes between two points (quickest, shortest, covered, avoidance, etc.) and current intel on enemy locations / ability to observe and / or interdict.

 

[Dr. Strangelove]

I see, I guess you're right. AI assumes that this is a "combat ready" situation and divides itself into flanks and centre. That's likely why I got the result. Thanks!