AE Land and AI Issues [OUTDATED]

[Kull]

ORIGINAL: Andy Mac

.....but for now I am staying with what we have as I don't really want to redo the AI.....

Just curious, but are you referring to the fact that renaming/replacing/changing units would affect the scripting portion of the AI? i.e. you'd have to edit the scripts to include the new unit names AND test them to make sure they work?

Assuming the answer is "yes", this should sound a cautionary note to modders. Your mods not only have to include your new/changed units, but you guys will have to incorporate your new units in the AI scripts. Obviously this isn't a new issue in WitP (as anyone who's ever played CHS against the AI can testify), and actually should be a lot better in AE since now the AI scripts are editable.

[Andy Mac]

Renaming/Replacing/Changing no
 
The AI will still use them but the AI is slot specific so if you add any units to unused slots you need to add them to an AI script or the AI will ignore them
 
So basically any LCU and Air Group you add over and above those we put into the new stock scenarios need to be added to an AI routine if its just strengthening and existing routine then its easy just add em onto the bottom of the list if its to do a new thing you will need to write a new AI script

[Dili]

So if we want to make a scenario on our own do we need to take out those units from fixed slots? Would there be enough slots for that? Or can we edit or delete the existing? script.

[Andy Mac]

You can rewrite delete or leave existing scripts

[Dili]

Okay thanks.

[Kull]

ORIGINAL: Andy Mac

The AI will still use them but the AI is slot specific so if you add any units to unused slots you need to add them to an AI script or the AI will ignore them

Interesting. Is there a single listing for all units, or do land, air, and naval have there own lists? Since name changing has no impact, presumably an AI script will look something like this:

1) Event (If something happens)
2) Action (Send unit slots 3, 8, 12, and 203)
3) Location (destination)

So basically any LCU and Air Group you add over and above those we put into the new stock scenarios need to be added to an AI routine if its just strengthening and existing routine then its easy just add em onto the bottom of the list if its to do a new thing you will need to write a new AI script

You didn't mention "Naval units". Are those included in the scripting too? Because now that I think about it, naval units are definitely more complicated than Land and Air units. They have to be grouped into a task force in order to be effective, whereas land or air units can just be sent off as individuals. Can the AI scripts group NCUs into a TF and then send it off to do battle?

[Andy Mac]

Pretty much its more complicated as its lists of objectives chaining together and air and ground LCU's together but basically thats how it works - you also need to designate garrisons and move them around if you want multiple bases built up.
 
Re naval units it operates slightly differently you don't specify specific ships you specify the type of TF you want (or the AI decides if its a non combat TF) and the AI will attempt to form it from available ship in port.
 
So more ships means in general stronger TF's so you can add more ships without having to rewrite the AI I specifiy a lot of surface TF's as being small TF's and the acceptable force strength being minimum - if you add 30 extra DD's to the Japanese ORBAT its likely they will ens up in use lifting those TF's closer to normal or max strength.
 
An exception would be if you add lots of extra carriers to the Japanese early on - I have been carefull to only to tell KB to be in one place or when I split it to only be doing so for a specific period of time in support of specific operations.
 
So the AI will assume it only needs X x CV's if you add one or 2 that wont be an issue because the AI will use them to beef up some of its light CV TF's - add another 6 and its likely the AI will keep 2 - 4 sitting in Osaka until it loses one which is probably just as well as fuel would become an issue otherwise.
 
p.s. one of the enhanced Japan scenario's adjustments is to increase slightly the number of available escorts early on which does make some of these TF's stronger.
 
Andy

[Dutch_slith]

Hi Andy,

will there be new suffixes for the LCUs, like Territorial Command, Detachment or Company?

Harald

[Kull]

ORIGINAL: Andy Mac

Re naval units it operates slightly differently you don't specify specific ships you specify the type of TF you want (or the AI decides if its a non combat TF) and the AI will attempt to form it from available ship in port.

So more ships means in general stronger TF's so you can add more ships without having to rewrite the AI I specifiy a lot of surface TF's as being small TF's and the acceptable force strength being minimum - if you add 30 extra DD's to the Japanese ORBAT its likely they will ens up in use lifting those TF's closer to normal or max strength.

An exception would be if you add lots of extra carriers to the Japanese early on - I have been carefull to only to tell KB to be in one place or when I split it to only be doing so for a specific period of time in support of specific operations.

So the AI will assume it only needs X x CV's if you add one or 2 that wont be an issue because the AI will use them to beef up some of its light CV TF's - add another 6 and its likely the AI will keep 2 - 4 sitting in Osaka until it loses one which is probably just as well as fuel would become an issue otherwise.

Thanks Andy. On one level I'm always secretly fearing the worst, but every time it turns out you guys have got it covered......and then some!

[Andy Mac]

No sorry suffix changes were on the list but were tied to the old AI so we couldnt change em

But then we changed the AI and we could have added more but it was to late.

ORIGINAL: Harald Velemans

Hi Andy,

will there be new suffixes for the LCUs, like Territorial Command, Detachment or Company?

Harald

[Dili]

Will be possible to not use suffixes if someone wants to use non English namings?

[Andy Mac]

Hmmm not 100% sure I think so as the AI is less dependent on suffixes now
 
But you would need to test it when modding not soemhting I could say on either way

[Dili]

Thanks, another related question, will missing suffixes affect units abilities? I mean an unit not called Armored will loose Armored abilities?

[JeffroK]

I have fiddled with renaming a number of units and dropped the suffix. I havent yet seen any problems but havent looked too hard. I have renamed 7th British Armoured Tank Brigade as 7th Armoured Brigade and it still works

I thought that you allocated a unit type which was independant of the naming field, but could be wrong. (just looked, you allocate a unit type 9-armoured unit, after you go through the naming process.)

From memory, sometime 2-3 years ago, I got told that it affected the ability to split a unit.

[Dili]

Thanks. Let's hope it will be possible.

[Andy Mac]

It is and you can I think the AI may do some funny things with them though

[Dili]

If there are no more problems than AI and armored units and others don't loose capabilities it is good enough for me.

[JeffroK]

Dili,
 
I have used it and havent seen any ill-effects.
 
As I have changed mostly Allied units and play as the Allies v AI the AI hasnt had a chance to play up.
 
I would like to see in AI, the ability to have the japanese suffixes for their LCU, its their for their aircraft and though it takes getting used to, hasnt created any problems.

[Dili]

I would prefer freedom to put any naming we want without affecting Unit abilities. Of course not affecting AI would be even better.

Per wikipedia:

IJA = Dai-Nippon Teikoku Rikugun
1st Tank Division = Sensha Dai-ichi Shidan
1st Guards Division = Konoe Dai-ichi Shidan
1st Inf. Division = Hohei dai-ichi Shidan

[Andy Mac]

Out of scope for us not sure if it would work or not