PDA

View Full Version : Maximum number of units.


Pat Proctor
03 Feb 05, 17:32
Gents,

One of the ProSIM developers asked a good question, the answer to which, I think all can benefit from:

Patrick

Minor question - what is the max number of units which can be played on ATF
before the AI fails?


Here's my answer:

The short answer is that you can always put a battalion of maneuver and a couple battalions of artillery on the board, in any situation, and be OK. Beyond that, the question gets complicated.

There IS NO HARD LIMIT on how many units you can put on the board. But, at some point, the engine bogs down so much that on low-end systems, the game is unplayable. Here are the factors that impact this and how.

1. Complex terrain = less units. The more terrain objects you add, the more they bog down the engine. Objects that obscure but do not block vision cost the most in CPU-cycles. 0 height terrain objects that effect movement only cost the least.
2. Mountainous terrain = less units. This actually HELPS the viewing process, but HURTS the path finding process. The net impact is that the more mountainous the terrain, the less units you can put on the board.
3. Friendly units cost more than enemy units. Friendly units cost more because the player might do ANYTHING with them, from the most complex company missions and company formation paths through the most constrictive terrain to no missions or formations at all. You have to "worse-case-it" and expect that the player will do the toughest stuff. You can be a little more liberal with adding friendly units if the player is in the defense, as he will probably not do much in the way of missions or formation movement.
4. More enemy missions = less units. The more missions you give to your enemy force, the fewer you can put on the board. The MOST costly missions are those that are triggered by the Faction AI, during game play. They can actually pause the simulation for a minute or more, if they are very complex.
5. More enemy formation movement = less units. The most costy formations and paths are those that are planned through constricted terrain AND triggered by the Faction AI. Whenever possible, give paths to hierarchies WITHOUT formations set, as this disables pathfinding.
6. Enemy in defense = more units. When the enemy is in defense, he has few or no missions and formations. This costs less CPU cycles.
7. Greater view range = less units. If you have units on the board that don't need to see anything, like civilians or ammo pallets, give them very low, or even 0 view range. This will cause them not to take up many cycles on viewing, the second most costly engine activity (after path planning).
8. More path finding = less units. Whenever possible, if the enemy must use missions that are started by the faction AI, use the "assign path" order first, select and use the ".none." for the formations in the property sheet. This will streamline the AI planning that happens in the mission initiation.
9. Piecemealing = more units. If you can, either by positioning of enemy defenses, or planning of enemy movement, prevent ALL of the enemy's units from being in contact with ALL of the player's units at once, it will prevent too much sighting and shooting all at once.

The MAXIMUM number of units you could have on the board:

1. The enemy in defense with no missions or formations assigned.
2. faction AI includes only simple Assign Path orders and only one phase.
3. All enemy artillery and ammo carriers have a 500m view range.
4. Completely open, flat terrain (ala Basrah attack from ATF).

= One friendly brigade with artillery battalion vs. two regiments with five artillery battalions.

(if the enemy did a full frontal attack, with all of his forces closing with the enemy at once, you might STILL get a little bit of lag at the highest contact point.

Deltapooh
04 Feb 05, 07:04
Thanks for this information. Its EXTREMELY useful.

CPangracs
04 Feb 05, 09:07
This is why I'm a big fan of timed triggers! they can lead to very unpredictable enemy behavior (good!) and are not a hit on the CPU. I like to use the synch matrix approach to developing battle plans for the red forces, and it has been found to be some of the most difficult scenario challenges in Raging Tiger and in my next release.

Creative use of time triggers will allow a much greater number of units in the scenario and a bigger challenge for the player. I WILL, however, throw-out a word of caution.

Just because you CAN do something doesn't always mean you SHOULD do something, and this is not more evident than in the number of units on a 30km x 30km map! Scenario developers should keep in mind that human players are limited in the number of entities they can handle in a realtime simulation. This is very apparent in the high-level sims like JCATS and JANUS. Normally, 14-16 "entities" can be handled appropriately by one person, but 6-9 is optimal. Now, this can be Vehicles, Platoons, or a mix (It's unlikely that you could effectively run a scenario with 9 Companies, but I'm going to be trying in my new game! ;)).

The more entities you have to deal with during a scenario, the more frustrating it can be for the player. This is where "locking" certain units can come in very handy (such as artillery), and only allowing fire missions to be plotted by the player. This essentially allows the player to worry about the tactical ground combat.

Just a few thoughts on the subject.

Curt

XRAY
05 Feb 05, 06:02
Curt

Do you keep notes on the various usage of script commands, for example your creative application of time triggers?

I’ve been toying with the idea of delving into the Black Arts (AI-Scripts) for sometime now but find the task somewhat daunting.

Without giving too much away and spoiling the scenarios in you new game it would be nice if you could share your expertise on AI-scripting with the forum.

Although the Captain P’s tutorials are very good in describing how to use various aspects of AI-Scripting, experiences (including pitfalls to avoid) of scenario designers like yourself would be invaluable.

Perhaps more amateur designers would then be more willing and able to contribute good scenarios in the future.

CPangracs
05 Feb 05, 09:42
Well, without giving too much away, like I said in the earlier post, I love using time triggers almost exclusively for the very reason that too many trigers and faction AI scripts will completely bog down the system.

I look at the enemy's objective for the scenario, the map, and the amount of time the friendlies have to accomplish their mission. The era that I'm replicating in my next game requires very simple and rudimentary scripting because there were no such things as Phase Lines and Attack By Fire Positions (except in the later bonus scenarios! ;)). So the enemy scripting required is minimal.

I try to use the "Cancel Toggle Order" and "Toggle Order" in timed phase orders as well to represent units in hide positions (locked: invisible), and I also use it in conjunction with the event ellipse to launch secondary attacks and airstrikes. The trick, IMO, to good scenario scripting is to have the enemy act entirely unpredictable, and the way to do this is with time triggers INSTEAD of scripting specific faction AI scripts to always react to the friendly forces. I look at the mission of the friendly faction and what I would do IF this happens, and I try to make the enemy faction do the complete opposite. The thing here is that the player could do almost anything at anytime, and having the enemy shape the battle on HIS time schedule often throws the player for a bit of a loop!

I can't really go more in depth than this right now, and maybe Pat can shed more of the technical light on the subject with some scripting tricks he knows, but I always try to use the KISS principle,...Keep It Simple Stupid! ;)

Pat Proctor
05 Feb 05, 11:21
This page:

http://www.prosimco.com/uploads

Explains how to add a triggered movement. Just replace the "Force Percentage" condition with an "AI Time Limit" condition, and you have a time triggered move!

But, yes, I am not the best of technical writers. Curt can almost certainly explain it better than me.

XRAY
05 Feb 05, 12:33
Thank you gentlemen for your prompt replies.

I’m definitely going to take the plunge this weekend and spend some quality time with the scenario editor. In fact I’m just in the process of printing out the online tutorials so I can study them at leisure.