Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
pbveteran

Community Poll - Removal of A.I.from the game?

75 posts in this topic

? So why have it , if it's just there to annoy you..

That's just it, AI doesn't annoy me. I take perverse pleasure in waiting by a blown tower until I see EI coming in then repair the tower and watch it wreak havoc..... kind of amusing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally I don't mind the AI. You always can check where the AI is and you got an idea of angle and range. I can imagine that it is tough for new players especially as they are not knowing that they are being shot at by AI. I've seen new players trying to shoot the AI and probably wondering why it is not dying.

Some AI towers are really nasty and even cover themselves but I think a general rule of thumb is never to approach an enemy town directly from E, S, W or N.

I really like the change that AI has to be repaired manually. Those who do it will be rewarded with enemy death screams nearby and in addition to that the defender has a general idea and understanding of where the enemy is coming from.

Just an idea. We are doing a lot to have ZoC working again. This is for the attacking party. What about the defending party? Maybe make AI positions placeable by engineers. The amount must be limited to avoid exploitations. Maybe to something we do have now - 1 per CP + AAA AI. Get rid off all stationary AI and make em placeable by players. They though should be easier to kill (a few head/body shots). To make it even more difficult you could limit / bind an AI to a CP. Only one AI can be placed per one origin CP. If an AI has been placed already from one origin CP no more AIs can be placed unless it gets removed or destroyed.

It would bring a bit of a dynamic fight into the towns we have fought for over and over in the past years I think. Just an idea

bb

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Personally I don't mind the AI. You always can check where the AI is and you got an idea of angle and range. I can imagine that it is tough for new players especially as they are not knowing that they are being shot at by AI. I've seen new players trying to shoot the AI and probably wondering why it is not dying.

Some AI towers are really nasty and even cover themselves but I think a general rule of thumb is never to approach an enemy town directly from E, S, W or N.

I really like the change that AI has to be repaired manually. Those who do it will be rewarded with enemy death screams nearby and in addition to that the defender has a general idea and understanding of where the enemy is coming from.

Just an idea. We are doing a lot to have ZoC working again. This is for the attacking party. What about the defending party? Maybe make AI positions placeable by engineers. The amount must be limited to avoid exploitations. Maybe to something we do have now - 1 per CP + AAA AI. Get rid off all stationary AI and make em placeable by players. They though should be easier to kill (a few head/body shots). To make it even more difficult you could limit / bind an AI to a CP. Only one AI can be placed per one origin CP. If an AI has been placed already from one origin CP no more AIs can be placed unless it gets removed or destroyed.

It would bring a bit of a dynamic fight into the towns we have fought for over and over in the past years I think. Just an idea

bb

Your idea does have merit. It's pretty much the same as we have now in some respects, especially with CRS talking 30 minute timers on PPOs in the near future. But there are a couple of points I would differ on.

One, if engineers are the unit used for placement, then it really makes them even more likely to be killed off quickly. I would hope that other units would be able to do so.

Two, the AI in an AB, airfield or naval base arent usually tied to a CP, and only one AI in an AB seems too little. I should think that those would remain static. Consider shore batteries that are nowhere near town CPs as well. I doubt engineers could place the "big guns"

Three, I understand the player repair idea on towns, but I think that it should be changed to a 24 hour timer, so that every single DO doesn't start out with a need to have engineers repairing everything in sight.

Still, it's an interesting idea.

!S

Edited by Quincannon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wow Lob12! Really? Is that the kind of community we are going to be now? If someone disagress with us, we just insult them and say to heck with them altogether?

I have always thought you better than that. I always thought our community was better than that.

You're a fantastic player and a valued member of the community Lob12. I haven't always agreed with you but I have always respected you. You're often a voice of reason. But not this time.

Look, this is a neat thread, like most, because we can voice our opinions. Opinions.

CRS has never stated anything to the effect that they intend to add more AI. No one thinks that they intend to do so. Certainly not me. I am not asking them to. I haven't heard anyone do that with any seriousness, except for the rare requests for artillery support AI.

Do you know what the greatest thing about this game is, Lob12? It's YOU. It's StankyUS. It's VonDouche. It's Igor and JVR and Katonka and WillyT and Gophur and XOOM andthe list goes onandonandon. It's the people. It's all of these wild wonderful crazy people who love to play the best World War II game out there. NOT the best PVP game out there, but the best World War II game out there.

And all of those people have different ideas of what makes the game great, and what they want to see happen. And we grouse and we grumble and we agree and we disagree. But in the middle of all that... we actually LISTEN to each other's ideas and opinions. No one person will ever be all right. Everybody will be wrong. But we will all , hopefully, take the best ideas and give them to CRS, who will listen to us and try to work in what they can.

I waited a decade to play this game. I knew it existed, and thought the webpage seemed neat, but becase of something I misread, I never subscribed. My loss. But during that time I played other WWII games because they were my favorite genre. The very best times I had were playing BF2 FH2 with my best friend in online co-op mode with bots and people. The map was always full of opponents and sides were even, even if people had better skill.

But in the end I came here because this game is not just a string of endless matches with no consequence. Here your battles matter because they are part of something bigger. Here, you can actually get promoted. Here you can become an Officer and help make a difference. Here you can play a support role and make a difference. In this game you can get an award for your best team effort, not just for the number of kills you get. My only real regret is that my best friend won't play with me.

This game is fantastic. This community is fantastic. We don't all agree on things like AI, but if we discuss them sometimes we come to compromises. Why does everything have to be all or nothing? AI, FRUs, FBs, MSPs, climbing trees... They are all aspects of this game that people argue over. But in general, we have learned to try respectfully disagree with each other.

Oh and the other best part of this game? It supports almost every type of gameplay. Mo likes his 88s. Bar loves his SMGs. Delems loves Navy. Capco and CSM308 are in the air. Bloodybill is the best FB buster I know, hands down. Me? I'm an engineer. A Navy engineer, but an engineer. I like repairing things and I really like blowing em up. AI is an important part of that. Heck, one of my favorite memories in this game happened because there was AI. If I'm in a town, one of my favorite things to do is repair the AI, because that can help defend the town I'm in more than I could as a rifleman. Don't just say "play better". I know my abilities after all these years. I just have a different skillset. Does that make me a worse player than you? I used to think so. But some really good players told me that I'm just a different kind of player, and that in my own way, I may actually be a good player, regardless of stats.

So, with apologies to pbveteran for not following his voting standard correctly, I'm just going to say that I respect the opinions of everyone on the forum and in the community on this or any other issue. And Lob12? If you want to say "screw me" because I don't hate AI, go ahead. But pardon me if I don't return the favor. I'm going to listen to what you have to say because someday you might have an idea that revolutionizes our game, and I'd hate to miss it because I stopped listening to you over a difference of opinion.

!S Everybody!

You missed the wink over my answer lol. Bah.

I really hate AIs, I would be in favour of total eradication of all AIs.

But, I really like that since the last patch they need to be manually repaired. It makes me accept them more easily.

From my point of view, AIs do not support gameplay; they prevent it. They make attacking harder for no valid reason because they do not behave like human players. Everybody has been wtf pwnt by a LMG AI firing through 5 layers of bushes, where a human player wouldn't even have saw you. Its not fun. Especially for new guys. Before the manual patch repair thing, they would often repop in my face and kill me before even appearing lol.

All the AIs do is take PvP away from the players (and this is this game's butter and bread : PVP). The only legitimate ones are the coastal defence AIs and AA AIs imho because they are here to prevent camping, vulching etc.

Edited by Lob12
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Meh I kind of like AI for example in AB Rushes.

It is really important you coordinate the AB rush properly so the AI doesn't mow down 5 of your guys. It adds a challenge.

Some docks/railroad AI are almost impossible to get to though, that might need a change.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Meh I kind of like AI for example in AB Rushes.

It is really important you coordinate the AB rush properly so the AI doesn't mow down 5 of your guys. It adds a challenge.

Some docks/railroad AI are almost impossible to get to though, that might need a change.

Some towns are really annoying to get into too...

When you have an AI tower covering the AI tower... it sucks

Lets not even mention the fact that my grenades stick in the damn box like half the time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I see the need for AI, but it should be killable in the way regular player inf is killable. One head shot to the gunner should disable the gunner

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would like to see the AI nests remain.

I would like to see the AI MG AAA nests removed however as they are too accurate. Or at least their firing arc changed. You can fly low level over the town and take hits from it.

Maybe it is accurate in some respects, but it can be a hassle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@silky

Shooting them in the head and killing them would be a welcome addition. Still what is the need for A.I. that you mention?

@Quincannon

I will ask again for the sake of a real debate

1 - Give me an example why A.I. helps now underpop? or the Need for it especially with AI ATG and AI LMG..

2 - What is this WWII Fix you mention and how does it correlate with A.I.?

(So far you only told it's because of battles that continue and have an impact on the game that has nothing to do with A.I.)

3 - What do you prefer BF 1942 with Bots & players or only with players?

Edited by pbveteran

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
@silky

Shooting them in the head and killing them would be a welcome addition. Still what is the need for A.I. that you mention?

@Quincannon

I will ask again for the sake of a real debate

1 - Give me an example why A.I. helps now underpop? or the Need for it especially with AI ATG and AI LMG..

2 - What is this WWII Fix you mention and how does it correlate with A.I.?

(So far you only told it's because of battles that continue and have an impact on the game that has nothing to do with A.I.)

3 - What do you prefer BF 1942 with Bots & players or only with players?

1. It allows for more versatile gameplay. (i.e. engineers repairing them). It helps lowpop defenders by attacking attackers and by warning defenders of the general direction of an attack. It helps defend factories, coasts or airfields, making such objectives more of a challenge. I don't get to bomb, but I think it would be very boring if 90% of the time I could just fly in low and bomb the factories with no AA. Most players aren't going to sit at factories in HOPES that there might be an attack to defend against. In town battles I believe that AI make the attacks more challenging.

2. I love WWII stuff. I enjoy playing WWII games. That's my chance to be on the PT 73 or to fight the Axis hordes. Playing this game is my chance to really have that WWII experience, or "get my fis" as it were.

How does it correllate with AI? Well think back to all those old WWII movies. How many times did a patrol come across a hidden German machine gun nest? How many times did the attacking heros have to tale out the enemy's MG towers to get to their objective? Lots of times, there were just guards at the enemy installation, both in towers and at the doors, that the attackers had to take out. But when we play, we don't really HAVE machine guns. We don't have many players who are willing to go up in an MG tower to watch for the enemy, because it makes them a target or because it's boring. If I'm sailing a destroyer towards an enemy port, or bombing a factory, there shoudl be defenses, like coastal guns or AA guns.

I guess it's all part of the immersion factor. Empty cities with absolutely no defense does not give me that immersion. I play this game almost solely because it's a WWII game. Normally I won't have anything to do with PVP. It doesn't really interest me. But the best WWII games are online PVP, so I play. But think about how much a lot of people HATE softcaps because there is no opposition.

3. As far as the BF series, while I liked BF 1942, I found the FH2 mods for BF2 superior. And to me, when was able to play with my best friend, I preferred the combination of bots and players to be the most fun of all .

The battlefields were always full of allies and opponents of varying skill levels. I loved that game. TBH I only switched over to this game because I wanted MORE immersion than I was getting. I wanted what I did to feel like it mattered.

I enoy playing against all our opponents in this game, but in the end, whether person or AI, I am fighting online avatars when I'm on the field, and the real fun for me is when there is a relativley balanced playing field.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Im good with AI as a trainer for attackers, a driver to have combined arms, and a helpmate to first responders on defense when they are often outnumbered.

The disabling of AI autorebuild has really been a good change, especially for particularly odious AI like AF or deepwater bases, while preventing autocamps to these sensitive facilities.

If you can't deal with the AI, you're not ready for the humans.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello All,

I would like to see a slight modification to the current implementation of AI.

What I feel it would be a more plausible implementation is to have all of the AI’s “self repairing” as it was. BUT, yes I do see you rolling your eyes back or the “wtf” seeps into your mind, as I was saying. . . BUT, when an Attack Order (AO) is placed on the town the ALL of the AI Self Repair stops within that town till the AO is removed from the town. Either method of AO removal will do, wether the AO is “removed” by the placing High Command or the town is “captured”. Once the town no longer has an AO on it the AI “self repair” resumes from the AI’s current state. The ONLY AI repair that occurs while a town has an AO on it is whatever the Players do in this regard. Both friendly and enemy.

A potential fly in the ointment is, how easily this can be implemented? Possibly not now but maybe in the future with the 1.35 code base.

Cheers

James10

Edited by james10

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Remove all AI in favor of PPO, such as anti personnel mines and anti Tank mines.

Also, AOs should require and a higher said amount of players to be able to cover the size of some these big towns.

Of course all when this can be done over time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Remove all AI in favor of PPO, such as anti personnel mines and anti Tank mines.

Also, AOs should require and a higher said amount of players to be able to cover the size of some these big towns.

Of course all when this can be done over time.

Exactly Denial of areas should be done by PPOs like setting barricades, anti-tank obstacles that required engineers to blow them up, barbwire that tanks needs to go over them or engineers to blow them up. Sandbag barricades to add protection to infantry, tanks and AA.

I would be more cautious with mines or minefiles this would need to be very limited on the start and must also kill teammates to work correctly and eventually have a way to bypass/diffuse.

Im good with AI as a trainer for attackers, a driver to have combined arms, and a helpmate to first responders on defense when they are often outnumbered.

The disabling of AI autorebuild has really been a good change, especially for particularly odious AI like AF or deepwater bases, while preventing autocamps to these sensitive facilities.

If you can't deal with the AI, you're not ready for the humans.

Trainer for attackers?

It only teaches you to look at the map and check the dir of A.I. nothing else. WW2ol is about moving with cover to cover and expose the less of you to the enemy direction through foliage and other natural obstacles, A.I. ignores all of this, plus almost all infantry is killed by one shot which this also ignores and makes it false.. This is actually doesn't add training towards infantry and combine arms combat it does otherwise.

Helper to first responders?

If the enemy is there the A.I. is already down, if the enemy isn't there then you should do like in real life go to a high vantage point and scan the horizon and turn your audio this is more realistic and very immersive.

Plus for the attacker seeing a enemy player on the church tower or a 232 going for a hill to scout for infantry is very immersive especially if you haven't been discover yet.

If you are good at blowing A.I. it doesn't mean you are good with a tank or as infantry.

Nothing you said validates A.I. try again...(It's impossible btw)

Edited by pbveteran

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

PPO only if:

1) It can be destroyed by whatever means.

2) It can damage/kill both friendly and enemy.

I don't care for it myself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One correction to my reply, AI.....AA, AT, MG at airfields and maybe even boat docks should be kept in place ..... maybe even increased since those are areas that will be camped often if removed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My only beef with AI is that it takes 50 to 100 bullets to kill one. If I wanted to put fifty bullets into an infantryman without him dying I'd fight Bar.

If you can get close enough or aim well enough to put a round into the guy's head then the AI should go down. The end. Let him fall down and stay down for at least 30 seconds until someone can take his place. That should give us enough time to close and dump a grenade onto it.

In other words, it should be possible to stun-lock AI even before it is destroyed. Shoot the crew, stun the AI. Close range, destroy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
One correction to my reply' date=' AI.....AA, AT, MG at airfields and maybe even boat docks should be kept in place ..... maybe even increased since those are areas that will be camped often if removed.[/quote']

How does AI LMG and AT prevent camping?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Some towns are really annoying to get into too...

When you have an AI tower covering the AI tower... it sucks

Lets not even mention the fact that my grenades stick in the damn box like half the time.

so you just stated that AI is better than you :rolleyes:

AI > Lob12

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
so you just stated that AI is better than you :rolleyes:

AI > Lob12

Yeah well perma-ban > Lob12 also

But not bronco apparently. So I guess you're pretty damn good.

PS : trolling skills still sub-par btw.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

AI > Lob12

Nice way to waste a tiger btw roflmao

I guess its part of the fun of playing "under cover".

Edited by Lob12

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm going to address these statements first:

If you are good at blowing A.I. it doesn't mean you are good with a tank or as infantry.

Nothing you said validates A.I. try again...(It's impossible btw)

1. So what if someone is better at blowing AI than driving tanks or regular infantry combat? One of the BEST parts of this game is that people can play support roles in addition to running and gunning. I have almost never been able to get out of the vehicle spawn in a tank without getting destroyed. I would need to waste tons of aircraft to become adequate, which i won't do to our side, and in a one on one smg or rifle fight I will almost always lose. But I can blow things up and repair them, drive trucks, tow people resupply people and a dozen others support things. Sucking at direct combat in this game does not mean you are irrelevant. It just means that your stats don't reflect your real contributions.

2. Your last statement, if you believe it, would likely.make any discussion of AI with you pointless. If you are convinced that it is impossible to justify AI, then why are you asking others to share their reasoning for their opinions? Is it just so you can try to convince them to agree with you, or is it just a general debate for the benefit of the fence sitters?

OK, now I'm going to address something else that you mentioned. 'Immersion". Considering that immersion and flavor are the two MOST important points of this game, at least to me, this is my number one hot button. :)

I admit that this is a game, subject to a great number of things that interfere with true immersion. That said......

If I am playing a bomber pilot in a WWII game, I expect Flak and lots of it. If there is no flak at factories or over an airfield I am going to bomb, then where is the challange? Unless the enemy finds me and intercepts me with fighters, if there is no flak, then a bombing mission is just a long tedious exercise in learning how to hit the target. No flak removes the need for high altitude bombing and eliminates the need for the skillset. In our game, we may have a few people willing to try to spawn in with AA to protect factories, but almost none are going to sit there in the hopes of protecting the factories or airfields with spawned AA. In addition, lacking defensive AA, airfields can be rather easily shut down completely and camped by a coordinated enemy air attack. With no need to worry about ground defenses, many air missions would turn into little more than great flight simulations.

If I am playing a destroyer in a WWII game, I expect some coastal guns to deal with when I am attacking an enemy port by air. in a coordinated assault, I expect AA defenses. Lacking either, it's just a quick sail in with nothing at all to slow me down.

If I am attacking a town in a WWII game, I expect to see defenses that include anti-tank and machine guns. I should not be able to simply drive into an enemy town unopposed and deploy before they can even spawn in to defend their own town. I should not be able to prance into the enemy's bunker before they even know that I'm there and face no defenses whatsoever.

In WWII, there were tons of defensive personnel to protect installations. It's a given that even if CRS were able to get all the subscriptions they wanted, the percentage of people who will be willing to sit and guard factories, coasts and towns, instead of spawning in for action would be incredibly low. Think about how many folks have complained about guarding FBs or CPs, and those get attacked regularly.

I have played most of the other WWII games, and it's usually easy to fill up a match based in a 15v15 or even a 32v32 population. But even in those matches, when there is a shortage of people, gameplay suffers. I remember one night in BF2 Forgotten Hope, there were only two of us online and the other guy wanted to start a knife fight... I refused and switched to a server with bots. I was not sitting at the login screen of a WWII game with the intentions of just playing a one on one PVP fight in an empty town for the sake of PVP. (Personally, for me PVP is merely a factor I have to accept if I want to play in a WWII game with friends.)

And in many ways I think that is part of the question when we look at having AI... do you just want a combat PVP shooter that uses WWII weapons; or do you want an actual semi-realistic World War II combat simulation game, with everything that entails? What kind of 'immersion ' are you really looking for?

Edited by Quincannon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.