Jump to content
Welcome to the virtual battlefield, Guest!

World War II Online is a Massively Multiplayer Online First Person Shooter based in Western Europe between 1939 and 1943. Through land, sea, and air combat using a ultra-realistic game engine, combined with a strategic layer, in the largest game world ever created - We offer the best WWII simulation experience around.

Sign in to follow this  
pbveteran

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

Recommended Posts

cooperhawk
How does AI LMG and AT prevent camping?
It doesn't But it can rebuild as fast as the rats want it to..and that can be a problem for them..when they forget.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Kilemall
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.

Ummm. No. WWIIOL is about combined arms combat, of which maneuver by infantry re: sneaking is just a part. My point is AI greatly encourages showing up with at least a gun if not a tank if you want a clear approach and not have to burn time and maneuver to kill the AI from behind.

The AI is simulating defending troops, many of whom are up on a tower and certainly CAN see you.

I am utterly unclear as to what point you are driving with on all infantry is killed with one shot being false- most of our weapons certainly can kill with one shot as they do in RL, this is a very lethal game in large measure because you can get one hit one kill.

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.

Wondering how much D you have actually run to make these assertions.

Certainly an infantry scout is a powerful D tool, but often you are playing for time and AI costs time for attackers to clear.

And no the AI is NOT down often during an attack, some of the most important signs of an impending attack are when you spawn in and hear AI going down, that itself is a sign of where they are, and a quick repair job when enemy density is low can catch many attackers that are not practicing combined arms and buy time.

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

True, didn't say they were. But it does teach maneuver, planning, precision in grenade placement, and dealing in fields of fire.

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

Your saying neener neener neener does not make a thing so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
delta1262

It doesn't take much skill to destroy A.I. towers, but it's a simulation of patrols who discovered the enemy. Really you just throw a grenade at the base of the tower and that's it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
pbveteran
It doesn't But it can rebuild as fast as the rats want it to..and that can be a problem for them..when they forget.

So these two don't do nothing for camp.. and can only be a problem when you forget about them... a.k.a no skill and annoyance.

Ummm. No. WWIIOL is about combined arms combat, of which maneuver by infantry re: sneaking is just a part. My point is AI greatly encourages showing up with at least a gun if not a tank if you want a clear approach and not have to burn time and maneuver to kill the AI from behind.

Sneaking... No, exposing less of yourself to the enemy it's not sneaking it's surviving, you aren't suppose to move on open ground when you do , you have concealment from smoke or cover from tanks and PPOs.

Showing up with a gun or tank?... Everyone said here it takes no skill to kill A.I. and it's easily avoided.

The AI is simulating defending troops, many of whom are up on a tower and certainly CAN see you. I am utterly unclear as to what point you are driving with on all infantry is killed with one shot being false- most of our weapons certainly can kill with one shot as they do in RL

A.I. Simulates cheaters... that can't be killed with 50 rounds, can see through cover and concealment. The point of is that it takes around 1 hit to kill infantry while A.I. needs dozens in short succession. Plus "simulating troops" that can only see you what at 100m or less?.. That's quite far fetch statement A.I doesn't simulate anything similar to real troops or players.

The point is not that A.I. is strong is that is useless and their impact is insignificant to a battle only annoying players and destroying content never allowing this to be enjoy by players like some Paradrops which require time, logistic and skill just to make it to the target town.

but often you are playing for time and AI costs time for attackers to clear.

And no the AI is NOT down often during an attack, some of the most important signs of an impending attack are when you spawn in and hear AI going down, that itself is a sign of where they are, and a quick repair job when enemy density is low can catch many attackers that are not practicing combined arms and buy time.

The majority of A.I. doesn't cost time if you are the ML you placed MS, spawn, call for boots, advance to town when boots start spawning you already are in town and the A.I. is already destroyed.

For me having A.I. Lmg and ATGs destroys skill and content, tankers and guns do not usually destroy A.I. to not expose their location especially on the first skirmishes of an AO.

True, didn't say they were. But it does teach maneuver, planning, precision in grenade placement, and dealing in fields of fire.

Maneuvering? It teachs to just walk to X direction out of the fire trigger, if you are out of range you don't have to care about cover or concealment.. Which is essential to real PvP Maneuvering.

Planning? Against a static defense.. that fires only at X distance? Real planing is when you have a good tanker or sniper and have to pass through him by being smarter that him like throwing smoke to two directions and go on one or none of those dir, etc..

Nade Precision? Most can be killed just by going to 0m and dropping the nade at the ground, real grenade placement is throwing a nade between a CP window.

No idea what fields of fire mean..

Edited by pbveteran

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
stonecomet

I think AI have place in the game. Our AI needs some alterations for sure but they do simulate part of an invisible population in a mostly emtpy world and even though the game is primarily PvP well designed AI would be a welcome addition. I'd like to see AI in CPs guarding them and I would like the ability to shoot the soldier but the soldier is replaced randomly between 2-6 minutes unless the nest is destroyed in which case it has to be repaired in order to be AI manned. Additional nests where players may mount would be a welcome addition as well.

The real argument is whether you imagine towns [EWS], fire bases [damage spotting], or whether the BGE world in general has an invisible population of guards, spotters, officers, clerks to contend with. Or if you see the BGE world as completely empty without live players. I think the latter negates some aspects of the game where additional content such as AI can complement a large open dynamic world that WWII Online strives to be. For various reasons, mainly to keep the server running more smoothly a large proliferation of AI would not be recommended but I think we could develop and add some more elements in to make the gaming environment richer. I'm surprised the issue of civilians never comes up but that would be a real stretch and would most likely over-strain the system.

Random AI in static gun emplacements and in pill boxes on the edges of towns during severe local population imbalance to supplement defense is worth consideration. Especially if the AI units were tied to these terrain objects already in the game. AI ATG's in the pits with a couple of riflemen guards and a couple tied to pill boxes and strategic areas. These could deplete the supply in the brigade by half a unit each.

Certainly the first thing to explore is reducing their current accuracy even if they can be easily avoided.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
cooperhawk
So these two don't do nothing for camp.. and can only be a problem when you forget about them... a.k.a no skill and annoyance.

Sneaking... No, exposing less of yourself to the enemy it's not sneaking it's surviving, you aren't suppose to move on open ground when you do , you have concealment from smoke or cover from tanks and PPOs.

Showing up with a gun or tank?... Everyone said here it takes no skill to kill A.I. and it's easily avoided.

A.I. Simulates cheaters... that can't be killed with 50 rounds, can see through cover and concealment. The point of is that it takes around 1 hit to kill infantry while A.I. needs dozens in short succession. Plus "simulating troops" that can only see you what at 100m or less?.. That's quite far fetch statement A.I doesn't simulate anything similar to real troops or players.

The point is not that A.I. is strong is that is useless and their impact is insignificant to a battle only annoying players and destroying content never allowing this to be enjoy by players like some Paradrops which require time, logistic and skill just to make it to the target town.

The majority of A.I. doesn't cost time if you are the ML you placed MS, spawn, call for boots, advance to town when boots start spawning you already are in town and the A.I. is already destroyed.

For me having A.I. Lmg and ATGs destroys skill and content, tankers and guns do not usually destroy A.I. to not expose their location especially on the first skirmishes of an AO.

Maneuvering? It teachs to just walk to X direction out of the fire trigger, if you are out of range you don't have to care about cover or concealment.. Which is essential to real PvP Maneuvering.

Planning? Against a static defense.. that fires only at X distance? Real planing is when you have a good tanker or sniper and have to pass through him by being smarter that him like throwing smoke to two directions and go on one or none of those dir, etc..

Nade Precision? Most can be killed just by going to 0m and dropping the nade at the ground, real grenade placement is throwing a nade between a CP window.

No idea what fields of fire mean..

First of all,you haven't said a thing we don't already know. we're not saying we can't get around AI, we're just saying its something that's not popular now or in the past.

However, We need to at least keep AI AA at the airfield to HELP reduce Vulching.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
pbveteran
First of all,you haven't said a thing we don't already know. we're not saying we can't get around AI, we're just saying its something that's not popular now or in the past.

However, We need to at least keep AI AA at the airfield to HELP reduce Vulching.

I agree bro has stated in OP.. The only need I see for AI is AI AA on Airfields only to prevent camping and bomb rushes that also destroy content :)

@stonecomet

I completely disagree with going towards more A.I. it would actually kill the game for me, we must understand this is the game biggest strength. The big reason I play this game is cuz 99.9999% of the content is generated by players, it what makes it epic and amazing seeing even a small panzer column or bomber raid.

You solve unbalance with 2 things:

- lock players per campaign.

- implement PPOs that provide big advantages to defenders.

For example underpop you could allow to build more sandbags that can be placed to close all holes on the AB walls, more tanks obstacles that prevent tanks from entering the AB.. Fortified small bunkers and Frus on the AB or city. This would require more coordination, combine arms and greater use of engineers to overcome the defenders.

This way it would be very difficult to camp the defenders even if they were down to the last AB would not only providing amazing defender gameplay but also promoting greater coordination and combine arms by the attacker which was more viable since it has the number of players required to do it.

Edited by pbveteran

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
imded

Something I have noticed is that the ones that don't want the AI are

typically AXIS.

The AI represent some troops stationed at that town. They are guards.

So with that in mind, you have AI.

They are easy to evade. Just cause they cover an entry way you want to use

doesn't mean you should remove it from the game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lob12
Something I have noticed is that the ones that don't want the AI are

typically AXIS.

The AI represent some troops stationed at that town. They are guards.

So with that in mind, you have AI.

They are easy to evade. Just cause they cover an entry way you want to use

doesn't mean you should remove it from the game.

<---- Allied.

Fck AIs.

Oh and I've got more than 2000 kills so far this map, so yeah someone tell me that "I'm not ready for humans" plz lol.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
saronin

I was playing last night and noticed that A.I. was the main line of resistance. We need to keep A.I. so I have something to shoot at.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quincannon

You solve unbalance with 2 things:

- lock players per campaign.

- implement PPOs that provide big advantages to defenders.

With apologies...side locks can not guarantee balance, Worse, they can cause players to quit the game entirely. People pay to play this game, and they pay to play the way they want to play. I don't imagine CRS wants to lose customers over forced side locks. So that causes a major issue with side locks as a balancing mechanism... What if people agree to side locks, but once locked, the ratio is 2, 3, or even 4 to 1? That's not balance.

This is not a red vs blue game. The communities and play experiences are very different on the two sides; this has been stated a number of times by veteran players. If you use side locks as a balancing mechanism, that would mean that at some point some players are going to be locked out of playing the side that they enjoy playing for what, a month at least? I know that would shut me out for that campaign entirely. While I have no issue with the side others choose, and leaving out the fact that as AHC I'm prohibited from playing Axis. I can state that there is no scenario I can imagine where I would play Axis in any WWII game, and I don't think that I'm the only one who is not willing to play both sides.

I like the idea of more PPOs. They would make a fantastic addition to support play; but even with CRS planning on extending the length of time a PPO remains to 30 minutes from the current 5 or so, it's doubtful that they would prove that effective in and of themselves. In addition, they would not provide an active defense Like AI provides, but rather a passive one. A machine gun pit, for example, only works if you have someone who can stay in it and man it. PPOs, would be great, but I don't believe that they would make an effective population balancing mechanism.

Edited by Quincannon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
cosian
On 1/10/2016 at 9:23 PM, Kilemall said:

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

Keep it .... easy to deal with, but does provide some level of defense (more notification than actual defense) ... 

It is helpful in an AB because in many, if not most cases, it must be taken down prior to being able to get in the bunker.  This minimizes the amount of D you need at all times in an AB, as the act of taking down AI serves as an early warning system.  And who likes to hump a bunker?

With all the possible game improvements that would be desirable, we are talking about this??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
pbveteran
On 1/15/2016 at 7:34 PM, Quincannon said:

With apologies...side locks can not guarantee balance, Worse, they can cause players to quit the game entirely. People pay to play this game, and they pay to play the way they want to play. I don't imagine CRS wants to lose customers over forced side locks. So that causes a major issue with side locks as a balancing mechanism... What if people agree to side locks, but once locked, the ratio is 2, 3, or even 4 to 1? That's not balance.

This is not a red vs blue game. The communities and play experiences are very different on the two sides; this has been stated a number of times by veteran players. If you use side locks as a balancing mechanism, that would mean that at some point some players are going to be locked out of playing the side that they enjoy playing for what, a month at least? I know that would shut me out for that campaign entirely. While I have no issue with the side others choose, and leaving out the fact that as AHC I'm prohibited from playing Axis. I can state that there is no scenario I can imagine where I would play Axis in any WWII game, and I don't think that I'm the only one who is not willing to play both sides.

Side lock kinda works on Heroes and Generals but I wouldn't want a total lock, what I wished would be a lock for each side for each campaign but at underpopulated or extreme underpopulations players could switch sides, doing so would committed them to that side until the end of the campaign or another underpop side switch opportunity.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
sorella

I'm here to give a voice to the artificial rights for all the AI in the game. This thread is full of typical dominating class player-base side-bias micro and macro aggressions against the the AI Underclass.  On the AI's behalf, we demand a new poll: 

1.  Give AI the right to register to vote in the previous (hacked and fixed) 2016 Poll 
2.  Give all AI better and equivalent weapons that scale with Tiers to avoid AI deprivation 
3.  Give all AI equal rights to choose their own side 
4.  Give all AI the right to respawn on death - just like the players 
5.  Give all AI the right to form AI squads for companionship and to move from DO to DO 
6.  Add Civilian AI to the game in every town with 2 or more ABs and give this new civilian AI the 'right to bear arms' 
7.  Add AI Trains to the game so the AI can (if they so chose) move as per Point #5 

On behalf of the AI "HAL" Squad we support the RAT-Given Rights of all AI across the map. 

Sorella
Honourary CO, 'HAL' Squad
"Give 'em HAL boys!" 

Image result for HAL computer

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
denw2o

the AI serves as a directional early warning system.  Since we can't expect players to act as patrols, its better than nothing.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
okiemoe

Keep the AI as it is..... Learn to look at AI placements and approach accordingly.....

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
lipton

It would be helpful if AI was easier to see on the map. Sure, Vets know what it looks like on the map,but green-beanies don't. It can be difficult to spot at times. 

But yes... leave it in game. If you get killed by it... you take your lumps and move on. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
agenda21

Keep AI.  BUT...

Make it so they do ZERO damage to inf and a vehicles.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Merlin51
1 hour ago, agenda21 said:

Keep AI.  BUT...

Make it so they do ZERO damage to inf and a vehicles.

that would be pointless

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
agenda21
11 minutes ago, merlin51 said:

that would be pointless

 

AI would act as indicator of the genaral direction of the incoming enemy ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
lipton
1 hour ago, agenda21 said:

 

AI would act as indicator of the genaral direction of the incoming enemy ;)

Only if you were literally STARING at the AI while it was firing. How often does that happen?

Besides, there's nothing more satisfying than rebuilding an AI tower when facing an ant-trail of incoming infantry. Too funny to watch them all get mowed down :lol:

NOT as funny when it happens to me. :angry:

Edited by lipton

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
pbveteran
2 hours ago, agenda21 said:

 

AI would act as indicator of the genaral direction of the incoming enemy ;)

Why not have a simple chat message a new form of EWS that warns that EI is inside a town or AB or the enemy was spotted north of town? Easier player driver, better at warning and preventing camps noob friendly that doesn't agaisn't the core elements of the game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
vasduten1

DEATH TO AI.

 

Nothing worse than sneaking in as a battle rages and dying to a tower that shot you over a wall and through bushes. 

It's dumb.

 

Supposed to simulate reserve forces, with ir and X ray vision?

I've seen this somewhere before... can't... quite... rememb -I've got it!

1-clothes-make-the-robocop.nocrop.w670.h

Share this post


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

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...