Hard Light Productions Forums
Modding, Mission Design, and Coding => The FRED Workshop => Topic started by: technopredator on March 10, 2011, 09:33:06 pm
-
you have to fight 4:1, fighters with more manoeuvrability than you, because the impossible to kill dumbasses of your wingmen are distracting 2 cruiser all by themselves, because they're in GOd mode and they can't die but won't help you at all. You can't change weapons or armour of course so you're pretty ****ed up; best you can do is get about 3K away from the cruisers so they don't flak you to death. so unless you're really good at mouse fighting I can't pass this mission in hard setting, maybe uber pilots can pass this in insane yeah maybe 5 in the world, this is why I think is dumb. Oh and the campaign won't let you give them orders or reload weapons even when you have a friendly cruiser travelling with you.
And one feature I think really sucks in this game is that AI pilot never miss, that really stupid they should have random individual accuracy rating for each AI pilot and within that rate a random accuracy sub-range, to give the impression of realism.
-
Don't get mad, consequences are revenging you.
Hey, the mission isn't that bad. That one in the SOC loop where it's you against a million hercs is worse. If the game is hard try playing on medium or easy.
And the AI targeting does work pretty much as you described. The first few shots have random inaccuracy while the AI gets a "fix" on you and then becomes more accurate. So the solution is to keep hitting TAB and jink periodically to prevent the AI from getting a long burst off at you.
-
Avoid the beam and you won't get hit, pilot
-
Transcend gameplay is just there to transition you from one incredible brain**** **** brix moment to another. If you're failing in it, just turn down the difficulty and enjoy the actual point of the campaign.
Torturing yourself by running at higher than comfortable difficulty setting on a completely story-driven campaign seems pointless to me. Is there some inherent value in completing mission X of campaign Y at difficulty Z, when all difficulty settings lead to same end result?
-
Transcend gameplay is just there to transition you from one incredible brain**** **** brix moment to another. If you're failing in it, just turn down the difficulty and enjoy the actual point of the campaign.
Torturing yourself by running at higher than comfortable difficulty setting on a completely story-driven campaign seems pointless to me. Is there some inherent value in completing mission X of campaign Y at difficulty Z, when all difficulty settings lead to same end result?
Yes, realism.
Looks like I'm gonna have to turn down the difficulty for this one, because is really hard to stay away from 4 fighters outmanoeuvring you and chaff missiles all the time, they pretty much change direction really unrealistically fast, and the same when they have finally fixed you and fire you really god even if you TAB and 'Z' and turn like a madman , even fire shots at them and your wingmen, playing God with the cruisers take forever to call for help; really poor mission design.
I'd have liked better several wings of fighters, against the whole formation with support ship realoading you periodically, but well, is just a game and is just a mission I can skip or play it in medium/easy.
Cheers.
PS the motto only works in real life, not in a game
-
Realism kinda goes out the window with Transcend anyway, unless you believe in magically self-rearming and self-repairing fighters. Just go with it. :)
-
Realism kinda goes out the window with Transcend anyway, unless you believe in magically self-rearming and self-repairing fighters. Just go with it. :)
True but is nto excuse to try to improve it as much as you can. It would be more realistic if you could have a cruiser of some kind with your form and a finite number of support ships coming from that cruiser, but I think that is not possible in this game.
-
:wtf: Turning up the difficulty doesn't make the game any more real, just makes it more difficult! :nervous:
-
And one feature I think really sucks in this game is that AI pilot never miss, that really stupid they should have random individual accuracy rating for each AI pilot and within that rate a random accuracy sub-range, to give the impression of realism.
That's exactly how the game works. Ships have AI classes with individual accuracy ratings.
-
Transcend does 4/6-on-one dogfights a lot. A LOT. Playing on medium difficulty was still a handful in this campaign for me, and the weapons that are given to you are just a kick in the teeth for dogfights, with the exception of the Harpoons. Even then, getting an aspect lock on a Perseus close in is a tough one...
...I'll maintain that the Herc II is good for most any role imaginable, but your "elite, but amazingly inept" comrades as well as your awful loadout (what I wouldn't do for a bank of Tempests...) makes for a nasty time. Turning down the difficulty, as others have suggested, is not a bad call. I beat Transcend on Medium all the way through, but I died very often in the big, open dogfights which really like to happen. Oh, and beware the Kelpie. It has 10 guns and takes about 4 Harpoons to do in. Fortunately, it's a giant target.
-
@Thaeris: Thx for the advice.
That's exactly how the game works. Ships have AI classes with individual accuracy ratings.
No it doesn't, works more like this:
The first few shots have random inaccuracy while the AI gets a "fix" on you and then becomes more accurate.
and stays that way, and I doubt it has a random accuracy sub-range.
-
There's not a contradiction there. The random inaccuracy values are determined by the AI class.
-
There's not a contradiction there. The random inaccuracy values are determined by the AI class.
I think there is because I think it doesn't stay at that random accuracy, improves and stays that way, and the accuracy sub-range should exist because you don't stay in a perfect accuracy rating as a human, you variate around that rating randomly, hence the sub-range.
-
I agree. :v-old: was just lazy.
But don't call it a bug. Call it a game mechanic.
-
If, when writing a mod, you want a bit more "human-like" inaccuracy in the AI, use $max aim update delay. It basically gives the AI a reaction time to update their aim when you change direction/speed.
-
The AI works fine and can be modified to behave in almost any way the modder pleases. It requires no changes.
This statement:
And one feature I think really sucks in this game is that AI pilot never miss, that really stupid they should have random individual accuracy rating for each AI pilot and within that rate a random accuracy sub-range, to give the impression of realism.
is either a lie or a total misperception as ships receive AI classes which determine their accuracy, evasion and other traits.
Transcend is meant to be played for the story, not the gameplay.
Turn it down to very easy bro.
-
On General on Insane the accuracy is 1.0... so yes, sometimes the AI is pegged to your lead indicator.
-
Well beyond General AI class there's "Balls of Steele" AI class, which makes the accuracy MORE THAN ONE (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/BeyondTheImpossible)
-
...which does nothing AFAIK. What's more scary is that BoS AI turns and fires faster than the player can (that is, faster than the tables dictate).
-
So, for the record, here's the nitty-gritty detail on how the "accuracy" modifier works, including code snippets for those to whom these things make sense.
if (aip->time_enemy_in_range > 2*range_time) {
scale = (1.0f - aip->ai_accuracy) * 4.0f;
} else {
scale = (1.0f - aip->ai_accuracy) * 4.0f * (1.0f + 4.0f * (1.0f - aip->time_enemy_in_range/(2*range_time)));
}
The "scale" factor determines how far off the aim can be: take the "ideal" point to shoot at (where the lead indicator is), add an arrow pointing a random direction, and make the arrow "scale" units long. The AI will aim at that point on the end of the arrow.
The scale variable is also affected by EMP and stealth, but we'll ignore that for now.
So, the factors that affect scale, and thus AI accuracy (in terms of not shooting at the lead indicator), are:
1. ai_accuracy: this is an AI.tbl setting ($accuracy).
2. time_enemy_in_range: this number fluctuates up and down from a variety of factors, but as implied by the name, generally goes up the longer the target is within range.
3. range_time: This number is calculated as 2.0 + ($AI In Range Time), where $AI In Range Time is an AI Profiles and/or AI.tbl setting. In Team vs Team multi missions, however, this number is just 2.0.
So, the minimum scale factor is:
(1 - $accuracy) * 4
For accuracy of 1.0, this gives a value of 0, meaning perfect aim. For an accuracy of 0, this would give a scale factor of 4.0... not perfect, but still not obnoxiously far off. Given enough time in a dogfight, the AI will converge to this equation and those values.
In the meantime, it uses this equation:
(1 - $accuracy) * 4 * (1 + 4 * (1 - time_enemy_in_range/(2*(2+$AI In Range Time))))
The bottom line is that how quickly the AI converges from least accurate to most accurate is affected by $AI In Range Time. The worst possible aim the AI can have seems to be fixed at 20 (for $accuracy = 0). It appears that accuracies outside of the 0-1 range will work, and do affect that number. Accuracy less than 0 will make the AI more inaccurate, but once you go above 1.0, accuracy starts to drop off again(see graph A).
EDIT: One more thing. There is no point in lowering $AI In Range Time below -2.0. Once it's at -2 or below, the code will always take the first branch (so the AI is always using max accuracy).
Some graphs (remember, smaller result for scale factor means more accuracy, where 0 is perfect accuracy).
A. Scale factor (y) in terms of $accuracy (x) (after AI has been in range a while) (http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=%281-x%29+*+4+x+from+-2+to+2)
B. Scale factor (z) in terms of $accuracy (x) and time_enemy_in_range (y) with $AI In Range Time=1.0 (http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=%281+-+%28x%29%29+*+4+*+%281+%2B+4+*+%281+-y%2F%282*%282%2B1%29%29%29%29+x+from+-2+to+2+y+from+0+to+6)
C. Scale factor (z) in terms of $accuracy (x) and time_enemy_in_range (y) with $AI In Range Time=3.0 (http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=%281+-+%28x%29%29+*+4+*+%281+%2B+4+*+%281+-y%2F%282*%282%2B3%29%29%29%29+x+from+-2+to+2+y+from+0+to+10)
This probably deserves it's own post, but what the heck.
-
There's an actual AI class called "Balls of Steele"?
-
There's an actual AI class called "Balls of Steele"?
Only in BP2
-
Creating his own AI class? That must be the work of a tactical geniu-
STEEEEELE!!!
-
Thanks Susi for the detailed post, but what I still don't know if after getting accurate the AI will get less accurate after losing the enemy from the HUD and seek to get accurate again.
@Battuta: pfffffff, whatever, most of what you write is crap just to justify your egomaniac POV.
-
Thanks Susi for the detailed post, but what I still don't know if after getting accurate the AI will get less accurate after losing the enemy from the HUD and seek to get accurate again.
@Battuta: pfffffff, whatever, most of what you write is crap just to justify your egomaniac POV.
I was lead mission designer on the mod with (currently) the most advanced AI out there. You are a terrible, terrible poster. I think we know where matters stand.
-
Some day I hope you will have an immortal place besides woutersmits on takashi on the HLP quotes list
and we will say 'ah, technopredator, remember when he asked for basketball hoops to be lowered so that he too could dunk like jordan, and for the AI to be changed so that he wouldn't find hard mode hard'
EDIT: I was wrong about everything, you were right, I made you a custom AI table
Place the following text in a file called ai.tbl in FreeSpace2/transcend/data/tables
; ai.tbl
; This file specifies AI class behavior for each skill level.
; We have five skill levels: Trainee, Rookie, Hotshot, Ace, Insane.
; (We should come up with better names.)
; We have a virtually unlimited number of AI classes. If you add a new AI class and
; you get an execution error about too many classes, increase MAX_AI_CLASSES, defined
; in ai.h. On Jan. 30, 1997, MAX_AI_CLASSES = 50.
#AI Classes
;$accuracy: 0..100 how accurately this ship fires its lasers
;$evasion: 0..100 how effective this ship is at evading
;$courage: 0..100 how likely to chance danger to accomplish goal
;$patience: 0..100 how willing to wait for advantage before pursuing goal
; trainee rookie hotshot ace insane
$Name: Coward.
$accuracy: 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
$evasion: 40, 50, 60, 80, 100
$courage: 50, 50, 50, 50, 50
$patience: 40, 50, 60, 80, 100
$Name: None
$accuracy: 0, 0, 0, 0, 0.0
$evasion: 0, 0, 0, 0, 0
$courage: 0, 0, 0, 0, 0
$patience: 0, 0, 0, 0, 0
$Name: Lieutenant
$accuracy: 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
$evasion: 0, 10, 20, 30, 40
$courage: 0, 10, 20, 30, 40
$patience: 0, 10, 20, 30, 40
$Name: Captain
$accuracy: 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
$evasion: 10, 20, 30, 40, 50
$courage: 10, 20, 30, 40, 50
$patience: 10, 20, 30, 40, 50
$Name: Major
$accuracy: 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
$evasion: 20, 30, 40, 50, 60
$courage: 20, 30, 40, 50, 60
$patience: 20, 30, 40, 50, 60
$Name: Colonel
$accuracy: 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
$evasion: 30, 40, 50, 70, 90
$courage: 30, 40, 50, 70, 90
$patience: 30, 40, 50, 70, 90
$Name: General
$accuracy: 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
$evasion: 40, 50, 60, 80, 100
$courage: 40, 50, 60, 80, 100
$patience: 40, 50, 60, 80, 100
#End
-
If you can't play nice.....
-
Kara beat me to it - is it too much to exect civility, especially out of senior, established members who should know better? HLP's attitude towards new people has gone downhill quickly over the past 12, 18 months, and it's not a good look.
If you don't like an individual, don't engage with them. Simple.
-
He received his dose of nice when he arrived. After that, you reap what you sow. You're free to brand the incompetent and sociopathetic with custom titles if you'd prefer to do it that way; it's certainly been the policy in the past.
EDIT: actually, this
HLP's attitude towards new people has gone downhill quickly over the past 12, 18 months, and it's not a good look.
is just a misrepresentation; hundreds of polite, civil new members, often with tech support issues, have been welcomed and helped without an issue.
You yourself argued that we didn't have to treat assholes civilly, Mr. BlackWolf; this was around the time of Derek Smart's return.
But this discussion should probably go elsewhere.