Q Attack widget

sort
jseah 11 years ago (edited 11 years ago) Consider this a concept trial. The widget is very raw, so expect bugs and strange behaviour. May also crash. -> Use at your own risk. During testing, I squashed one infinite loop bug. There is no telling if more are lurking out there. If you ever get the message about finding no positive roots, please link me to replay. It is not supposed to happen. v0.1 http://www.mediafire.com/?mrg25rohqd29294 Framework for advanced tactical AI (to be added) is complete, so I'm putting this out to get ideas and feedback. Bug reports are welcome, but I'm not actively looking for bugs since I expect this to be changing alot as I add to it. Currently all this does is replicate auto-skirm behaviour for hammers, while also keeping them in formation. Move forward in formation, retreat in formation. Maintain maximum range. It also skirms ghost buildings and will do so until the spot is confirmed clear by direct LOS. (cloak will fool it) To use: Select a bunch of hammers, give fight order with the Q key held down. To cancel, give any command other than formation move via custom formations (I can't detect this easily) ---TODO: Skirms keep max range from un-IDed radar dots Skirms break from group when given move order from custom formation Skirm from the side of the enemy they are on instead of side from which they originally got the order Skirms jink as simple fire avoidance Escort behaviour for riots Escort/repair/reclaim behaviour for cons Threat analysis and targeting Enemy fire detection/avoidance? Avoid standing behind obstacles blocking fire (may need new engine features) Avoid pathing up cliffs and into units +0 / -0
jseah 11 years ago (edited 11 years ago) http://zero-k.info/Battles/Detail/84053 I troll the AI with Q attacked hammers and a morphed com. Demonstrates its features, failings and a bug or two. You can see the very dense formation line it uses, that deforms to ranges and targets. Notably, it will not skirm units without weapons. I didn't even realize that was the case until it happened. +0 / -0
qwerty3w 11 years ago (edited 11 years ago) That's awsome! Can't wait it to be finished. Hope it will include more functions in future versions, such like chain explosion avoidance for suicide bombs, and auto jump for jump bots(should be switchable). +0 / -0
jseah 11 years ago (edited 11 years ago) That's very far in the future. Rather than work with individual unit tactics, I aim to do the more general group tactics first. Concentrate fire, use correct unit types, etc. Obviously, a human will easily outmaneuver it, but at the point where you could use it on mixed groups of units is when I might consider using it in actual games. Ultimately, I would like Q attack to be able to handle small task forces in at least a non-suicidal manner so you can give a Q attack command to a group and forget about them for 10 seconds without everything dying. Somewhere after this, I intend to rewrite and do general clean up. If I get it to the point where you could win a game vs CAI with zero micro except for Q attack commands, then that would be the point where I would consider calling it properly done and then start adding bells and whistles. So your autojump and anti-bomb chaining suggestions are a very long way off indeed. +0 / -0
qwerty3w 11 years ago (edited 11 years ago) It doesn't matter, I'll be waiting. +0 / -0
Antelope 11 years ago What about a widget that forces Racketeers to fire on different targets, so you don't have multiple Rackets keeping a single target stunlocked. That is the biggest issue with the current fight command - you give a group of Rackets a fight command in the direction of enemy, and they all stop at the first target and repeatedly hit it. It's the main reason I don't use Rackets - I have to manually assign targets to each Racket, which then breaks auto-skirm. They refuse to auto-skirm away when given attack command, so they sit their stupidly and take fire from raiders unless micro'd carefully. A working fight command that picks multiple targets would be great. +0 / -0
SinKitty 11 years ago It is sometimes also useful to skirm with between 80% to 100% of range to get better targets... I think the range differences are not very well spaced out. It would be easier if each range class has 10%/15% more than the previous one +0 / -0
jseah 11 years ago v0.1b http://www.mediafire.com/?tugv2g2gszz5bmj Cleaned up another infinite loop bug Will now skirm un-IDed radar dots (the hammers will shuffle around due to radar inaccuracy) +0 / -0
jseah 10 years ago (edited 10 years ago) v0.1c http://www.mediafire.com/?3h74j5th2muh3pl Keeps formation, units will not wander off too far from each other Lower chance of errorneous solutions (still unresolved) Enabled for hammers, rockos and rogues +0 / -0

Forum index > General discussion > Development >