Stupid Units!

[Quadhelix]

Am I the only one who finds the units' AI to be incredibly frustrating?

Several times, I have lost units or come close to loosing units because when I ordered a badly damaged unit to retreat, its path was blocked by a completely healthy unit. What was worse is that the retreating unit would not try to go around, instead trying to drive through a unit that made no attempt to get out of the way.

Another source of frustration is the fact that the units tend to shot at what they want to shot, not what they're ordered to shot. I've ordered Comanches to attack an Arms Dealer, only to tear my hair out as they fired all of their missiles at a nearby Black Market, greatly reducing the firepower of my attack force. Also, in the final Zero Hour GLA mission, I had destroyed just enough power plants to keep the Patriots offline, so I didn't want my tanks to attack the powered down Patriots for fear that the Patriots' destruction would lower the power demand enough to bring the remaining Patriots online. No matter what I did, the tanks would fire at the Patriots while driving by.

Am I crazy:gnarly:, or do other people have this problem?

[ein1017]

I got two things to say about AI's

A: they are dumb
B: They cheat

[Quadhelix]

A: they are dumb
They don't have to be smart to follow orders, at least in terms of what to attack. If I order a tank to destroy the enemy power plant, I have no idea why the driver would feel it more important to shoot at some disabled turret nearby.

You're supposed to be the commander. How can you be the commander if your units ignore your orders and do whatever catches their fancy? If you tell a Stinger Site not to attack an enemy Oil Derrick, which you hope to capture soon, you shouldn't have to force the Stinger Site to fire at the ground!


B: They cheat
Your own units cheat?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!? :dismay: (;))

[ein1017]

I meant in general, even the enemy AI. Multiple times I have told a unit to go somewhere and they take the roundabout way that usually takes them near an enemy unit.

[xxrpggamemanxx]

The AI in Yuri's revenge cheats! I've seen them build 2 power plants at the same exact time!

[Statalyzer]

He's talking about the AI of his own units that doesn't follow orders properly, not the AI of the computer players.

[Daishi]

Am I the only one who finds the units' AI to be incredibly frustrating?

Several times, I have lost units or come close to loosing units because when I ordered a badly damaged unit to retreat, its path was blocked by a completely healthy unit. What was worse is that the retreating unit would not try to go around, instead trying to drive through a unit that made no attempt to get out of the way.

Another source of frustration is the fact that the units tend to shot at what they want to shot, not what they're ordered to shot. I've ordered Comanches to attack an Arms Dealer, only to tear my hair out as they fired all of their missiles at a nearby Black Market, greatly reducing the firepower of my attack force. Also, in the final Zero Hour GLA mission, I had destroyed just enough power plants to keep the Patriots offline, so I didn't want my tanks to attack the powered down Patriots for fear that the Patriots' destruction would lower the power demand enough to bring the remaining Patriots online. No matter what I did, the tanks would fire at the Patriots while driving by.

Am I crazy:gnarly:, or do other people have this problem?

Problems with targets is easily solved. Micro, using force-fire when necessary.

There are severe pathfinding issues in the game, but with the exception of that of the China dozer, you can solve them all by clicking faster and more often.

[yurihomer]

They don't have to be smart to follow orders, at least in terms of what to attack. If I order a tank to destroy the enemy power plant, I have no idea why the driver would feel it more important to shoot at some disabled turret nearby.

You're supposed to be the commander. How can you be the commander if your units ignore your orders and do whatever catches their fancy? If you tell a Stinger Site not to attack an enemy Oil Derrick, which you hope to capture soon, you shouldn't have to force the Stinger Site to fire at the ground!



Your own units cheat?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!? :dismay: (;))

unit treats base defenses the same as enemy units. so they attack. they do that in other strategy games as well, such as war craft 3 and star craft.

unit pass can be blocked in other strategy games as well, and i don't think AI is smart enough to move out of the way to let damaged unit to go through.

so try to pay a little more attention.

[drgNz~]

If I'm correct, enemy defences and units would have a priority of "1" which means that they'll be fired upon automatically by units, because they're the biggest threat. Structures like powerplants however, would have a priority of "0" because of a lack of actual damage coming from that source.

Something like that.

The pathfinding problems are easily avoided by micro, which will get better if you're a regular player of the game.

[Jester Kirby]

You're not alone...fortunatly I'm not the type to get fustrated easily and usually just laugh when the units act stupid :rolleyes:

eccept today while doing a China mission...:wtf:

anyway yea...the game is dumb like that....as already said though massive clicking often helps...IDK about pounding on the keyboard but hey we all use the caveman method when all else fails don't we? :)

[Quadhelix]

Problems with targets is easily solved. Micro, using force-fire when necessary.
At least on ZH GLA 5, I tried everything I could think of to get my tanks to ignore the Patriots. I told them to move somewhere else. I told them to attack on of the remaining power plants. Nothing worked. Whenever they passed within range of one of the Patriot Batteries, they would open fire on it.


There are severe pathfinding issues in the game, but with the exception of that of the China dozer, you can solve them all by clicking faster and more often.
It's good to know that my frustrated/panicked pounding on the keyboard actually help. :D


they do that in other strategy games as well, such as war craft 3 and star craft.
The difference is that, in Starcraft, you can't knock out the enemy's power to disable his defenses. It makes no sense to give the player the ability to take out the enemy's power if the player's units are then going, against all orders to the contrary, to destroy the very thing keeping the power offline, namely the defense structures draining the power.


unit pass can be blocked in other strategy games as well, and i don't think AI is smart enough to move out of the way to let damaged unit to go through.
Just because it's common and reasonable doesn't make it any less frustrating. :banghead:


so try to pay a little more attention.
I was paying enough attention to realize that it was going to take only three or four more volleys from the RPG Soldiers to destroy my Listening Outpost (FYI, I managed to Dragon Tank the RPG Soldiers, but all that was left of the Listening Outpost's health bar afterward was and empty red bracket; one more hit from anything would have sent it to an early grave. Fortunately, it survived and was repaired).


If I'm correct, enemy defences and units would have a priority of "1" which means that they'll be fired upon automatically by units, because they're the biggest threat. Structures like powerplants however, would have a priority of "0" because of a lack of actual damage coming from that source.

Something like that.
Nevertheless, when I order a unit to attack a specific enemy, I expect the order to be carried out at the expense of all else. You mention the use of micro with regard to the pathfinding problem, but micromanagement is the one thing that the game will not allow me to do: you cannot micromanage a force that fails to obey your commands. I could understand the auto-attack if the Patriot Batteries were powered up and attacking my forces (in other words, auto-retaliation), but that was not the case.

In hindsight, the priority system that you mentioned might explain the problem that I had with the Comanches; I might have been playing Contra against the Toxin general (for those who don't know, Cotra's Toxin's Black Markets act like Bunkers). Still, I could be wrong on this and either way, by your scale, units/structures that the player has ordered for attack should warrant a priority of something around 10.

[C4]

At least on ZH GLA 5, I tried everything I could think of to get my tanks to ignore the Patriots. I told them to move somewhere else. I told them to attack on of the remaining power plants. Nothing worked. Whenever they passed within range of one of the Patriot Batteries, they would open fire on it.

There's nothing u can do beside micro. Some games like AoE2 have the "cease fire" option (but not firing-on-the-move:rolleyes:) but in ZH it looked useless to the programers (in fact the interface could use a lot more improvements like "follow", "patrol", "shift-tasking" to workers, and of course "cease fire", usefull to GPSed quads and stealthed tunnels, for example). Emperor-BFD had a good firing-on-the-move system: when moving freely the unit would shoot any units (as well defenses) nearby but once a target has been pointed the unit would move to the target not firing until then (significant if the unit have a slow ROF like Comies rockets).

The difference is that, in Starcraft, you can't knock out the enemy's power to disable his defenses. It makes no sense to give the player the ability to take out the enemy's power if the player's units are then going, against all orders to the contrary, to destroy the very thing keeping the power offline, namely the defense structures draining the power.
In fact, in Starcraft, units fire to anything in its range, so Starcraft is not the best comparison. But as Yuri said, in most games units or everything that fires is an imediate target.

Nevertheless, when I order a unit to attack a specific enemy, I expect the order to be carried out at the expense of all else. You mention the use of micro with regard to the pathfinding problem, but micromanagement is the one thing that the game will not allow me to do: you cannot micromanage a force that fails to obey your commands. I could understand the auto-attack if the Patriot Batteries were powered up and attacking my forces (in other words, auto-retaliation), but that was not the case.

In hindsight, the priority system that you mentioned might explain the problem that I had with the Comanches; I might have been playing Contra against the Toxin general (for those who don't know, Cotra's Toxin's Black Markets act like Bunkers). Still, I could be wrong on this and either way, by your scale, units/structures that the player has ordered for attack should warrant a priority of something around 10.

Already answered. Bunkers are defenses so...

Just to the record, not only the China dozers move stupidly. the DragonTank is another braintrashed unit as well the outpost that sometimes have its own will (for the bad mostly).:irked: And your example employs them both:lol:.

And another stupid thing about the dragontank is the "impassable body" issue, that happens when u torch an infantry that keeps "dancing and dancing" on fire and prevents the flames to pass through it to the unit behind. Not a serious problem cause dragons mostly use firewall but its nevertheless annoying.

[Delta-4]

Still, I could be wrong on this and either way, by your scale, units/structures that the player has ordered for attack should warrant a priority of something around 10.The thing is that the unit will fire on anything it wants to when it's not firing on the target you ordered it to, so, since the tank's not firing on the power plant and it has a target, namely the Patriot Missile System, it will fire on the target. This occurs in just about every RTS I've ever played.
If you already figured this out, sorry for commenting on a resolved issue.

[Statalyzer]

There's no "stop" command in Generals?

[(U.S.S.R) Jamie]

turn "retaliation" off

[Quadhelix]

There's nothing u can do beside micro. Some games like AoE2 have the "cease fire" option (but not firing-on-the-move:rolleyes:) but in ZH it looked useless to the programers (in fact the interface could use a lot more improvements like "follow", "patrol", "shift-tasking" to workers, and of course "cease fire", usefull to GPSed quads and stealthed tunnels, for example).
I wish to second this.

Note to programmers: RTS requires Micro; Micro requires Control; Units that attack without orders to do so and lacking a mechanism to order them to stop eliminates control.


Emperor-BFD had a good firing-on-the-move system: when moving freely the unit would shoot any units (as well defenses) nearby but once a target has been pointed the unit would move to the target not firing until then (significant if the unit have a slow ROF like Comies rockets).
Wait. When EA made Generals, they owned the remains of Westwood. Westwood made Emperor. Therefore, EA owned the rights to that fantastic system. Why didn't they use it? :wtf:


The thing is that the unit will fire on anything it wants to when it's not firing on the target you ordered it to, so, since the tank's not firing on the power plant and it has a target, namely the Patriot Missile System, it will fire on the target. This occurs in just about every RTS I've ever played.
My point was that when a unit is ordered to attack a given target, it should ignore other potential targets until it has completed its orders.


There's no "stop" command in Generals?
Sadly, using the "stop" command halts the units' movement as well and, IIRC, once they stop, they will automatically attack anything that they "feel like" attacking.


turn "retaliation" off
I would do that if I were confident enough in my Micro skills to believe that I could jump to where my units were under attack and manually order retaliation while at the same time conducting an assault. :redface:

But I'll keep that in mind. Thanks!

[C4]

Wait. When EA made Generals, they owned the remains of Westwood. Westwood made Emperor. Therefore, EA owned the rights to that fantastic system. Why didn't they use it? :wtf:

I also never understood why! Anyway every game by any company can use ideas employed in other previous games, so one system that proves good should be used and if possible enhanced. Once again EA is guilty!:irked:

Anyway i believe also that if u micro your units decently u can most times avoid the problem spoken of. It is not that serious to be decisive in most cases.;)

[Daishi]

Maybe the programmers didn't think it made much sense, and that you should be doing some damage whenever you have the opportunity. It's nothing to yell at the corporation about.

[Derek]

Actually ZH is surprisingly good in this department. Most games (such as DoW and AoE3) have a default stance that is rather aggressive: units will not only attack anything withing their attack range, but also anything in their visual range or (somtimes) anything that attacks them, even when it requires moving to get within attack range. This leads to units wandering off without orders, only to get picked off by larger groups of units. Although this can usually be fixed by changing attack stances, that is usually a hastle and you forget to do it. ZH's default stance is ideal, units attack anything within their range but only move when given an explicit order. Since most units have a good RoF this is a good stance, for the units that do fire slowly it can be problematic, but those are fortunately few.

The stance of objects can actually be changed, but only in the .ini files. If I recall some units, such as artillery, do have their stance explicitely turned down so that they will not waste shots on minor enemies passing through.

[C4]

I mostly agree with u Derek, but not only the ROF takes importance but also the speed of turret turn in tanks. Imagine u order an Overlord or Dtank to attack a critical unit and it turns the turret behind to attack a minor target... Sometimes it can be the difference between keeping or losing your WF (or destroy or fail the enemy's) or anything else important. ZH is good about attacking stances but it was stupid to lose such good system from Emperor-BFD.:|

In games like AOE series there are stance options like stand-ground that can help (at least the options exist), and in such games an unit is not so valuable as it is in ZH.

[chitty]

Most annoying units?

I'd say getting owned by dragon tank and humvee rushes that I need a palace for in order to make units that can actually compete

[Statalyzer]

Most annoying units?

I'd say getting owned by dragon tank and humvee rushes that I need a palace for in order to make units that can actually compete

That was way out of nowhere and totally off the subject. In the future please don't make such chitty posts.

:squint:

:shifty:

Yeah, thanks, I'll be here all night.

[drgNz~]

Most annoying units?

I'd say getting owned by dragon tank and humvee rushes that I need a palace for in order to make units that can actually compete

You don't need a palace to stop either of them. Stop playing no-rush 10000

[chitty]

That was way out of nowhere and totally off the subject. In the future please don't much such chitty posts.

You killed me

[Quadhelix]

Most annoying units?

I'd say getting owned by dragon tank and humvee rushes that I need a palace for in order to make units that can actually compete I'm sorry to ask this, but did you read any of this thread before you made this comment?



Another problem that I have in this area is that when I make really large groups of Red Guard, they seem to behave a bit oddly. For example, I told a group of about 50-100 Red Guard to attack a Stinger Site, and the leading Red Guardsmen started running in place (I can't speak as to those behind them; my attention was on the front lines). I fixed the problem by ordering them to move closer to the Stinger Site, but the bug still confused me.

[chitty]

I'm sorry to ask this, but did you read any of this thread before you made this comment?

Alright, stupid units:

My battle buses driving right up to enemy tanks to say hi and then blowing themselves up with their own rocket soldiers

[drgNz~]

Alright, stupid units:

My battle buses driving right up to enemy tanks to say hi and then blowing themselves up with their own rocket soldiers

Your problem: You have no micro.

[C4]

Another problem that I have in this area is that when I make really large groups of Red Guard, they seem to behave a bit oddly. For example, I told a group of about 50-100 Red Guard to attack a Stinger Site, and the leading Red Guardsmen started running in place (I can't speak as to those behind them; my attention was on the front lines). I fixed the problem by ordering them to move closer to the Stinger Site, but the bug still confused me.

Well, it happens when u manage to move large groups (like 50-100 red guard:eek:). The game must determine the pathfinding (and here we have attack pathfinding and move pathfinding with different algorithms so...) of all the units and chokes a bit. Anyway u've already found the answer, problem solved!;)