149 replies to this topic

[Koniving]

So, friendly AI barely registers aggression from the player.

When almost dead:
Ally 1: "I think you have me mistaken for someone else"

When hit multiple times
Ally 2: "I'm under attack"
When almost dead
Ally 2: "I COULD shoot back you know"

Ally 3, after allies 1 and 2 are already dead and receiving a full-frontal assault by me "I'm under fire!"

Also the three ally Atlases folded over very quickly, under 5 seconds for the first. The second I drew it out to over 30 seconds.

The third kinda just ammo-exploded.

I did inexplicably lose a leg and an arm after killing all 3 teammates, which is baffling as there was only one vehicle that completely ignored me because it was attacking the objectives.

I do like the fact that dead vehicles can be kicked around.

Edit: I've got an explanation for the inexplicable loss of limbs.

Enemies when dead can sometimes either ammo-explode or stackpole. You get a less-than-two-second warning before they do and the explosive radius appears to be 15 to 30 meters give or take. The damage goes further than the visual effect.

Edited by Koniving, 27 November 2019 - 07:36 PM.

[Jyi]

MischiefSC, on 27 November 2019 - 11:13 AM, said:

Making AI 'hard' is super easy. You can make it instantly read player inputs, see through all walls and structures and never miss. Have all enemy mechs focus fire and headshot the player every time he pokes his head out.

So how 'good' do you make the AI. Making AI act like a person is hard because people make unpredictable and often stupid choices that turn into lucky situations and they make predictive choices which are CPU intensive. So what we have is pretty much industry standard for a few reasons. Players are going to find ways to exploit AI decision making regardless of what you do or how good you make it so focus on overall performance.

Very much true. Making a ridicilously punishing "AI" is easy as heck. Just make them hit with every shot and see through walls, yes. But that's not a good AI. Neither is an AI that is unbelieveably dumb.

There should be a middle ground somewhere here. An AI that is not punishingly overpowered and omniscient but doesn't just stand there with drool bubbling at the side of their mouth. And there are good examples of this in much much older games - even games from the Mechwarrior -franchise. One example is the Grunt from the Halo games. They are mostly dumb as bricks, but they have the quirk of running away and panicking, and that gives them character. It's not exactly great AI design all over the game, and the challenge in it comes from unfair advantage mostly, but it's still better for having these quirks than not having them.

In case of a Mechwarrior game, there are many ways to create a decent AI. For starters, they could try to shield their heads and backs a bit better, instead of just charging towards whatever objective they've been given. They could have some rudimentary teamwork skills, with light mechs spotting for LRM's or something (not sure if they do, but they are not very competent at it). Try to do flanking maneuvers (again, not sure if they try, but are just not competent at it).

In addition to these, there could be cool stuff like patrolling. Wow, such an advanced concept, that was already in MW2. Or shut down mechs waiting to ambush you inside some garage in a building or in a cave or something - a concept which was somewhat less competently done in games like MW4 and 3 if I recall.

So far all I've seen are enemies that spawn out of thin air right next to you when you go past some magic checkpoint, and then run around like headless chickens.

Quote

In general though AI is always going to be mediocre because A: that's a good fit for majority of players who want an enemy they can beat and that you can throw at them in quantity and B: making AI behave incredibly well is resource intensive and it just means players will work out a more limited range of ways to exploit the AI to win anyway.

I don't exactly agree with this. I just provided some examples that would make the AI better than mediocre, and there are way more of those available throughout the history of videogames. Also, I don't think the majority of players just want an enemy they can beat, they want an enemy they can beat by playing competently. And while the players will always eventually find ways to exploit the AI, it doesn't mean it's going to be easy for an average player to find those exploits. Also, finally, the AI doesn't have to behave incredibly well, just well enough in a larger context. You can have a semi-competent AI and introduce other variables - like the aforementioned enemy numbers - to tweak the overall challenge. It'd actually be even easier to tune the challenge down for "less tryhard" players if the base mechanics were solid.

Edited by Jyi, 27 November 2019 - 01:58 PM.

[LordNothing]

Kaeb Odellas, on 27 November 2019 - 01:03 PM, said:

It's not "let someone else fix it." It's "tell the people whose job it is to fix things that there is a problem so that they can try to fix it." It's fine to have your own workaround, but a workaround is a temporary solution to a problem

Worse yet, it's a solution that only you have. Tell PGI what the problem is so that they can fix it for everyone.

And PGI are not being tight-lipped about this. They announced on the Discord that those were the only 3 HOTAS systems currently supported. Perhaps they could have announced it elsewhere, but they were by no means trying to hide it.

still wont do any good, unless pgi wants to do a full on direct input implementation this situation will remain. something microsoft actively tells developers not to do (you know, to sell game pads). the reason those 3 hotas are supportis is likely because they have hardware/driver support for xinput.

also i dont use discord or twitter so unless pgi wants to read their forum i dont really care.

[MeiSooHaityu]

I finally got the chance to give the game a shot, and so far (after 3 drops), I am thoroughly enjoying the game.

The UI is a bit busy, but serviceable. AI is decent and competent enough IMO. Graphics are hard to gauge because my computer is borderline potato (running Med graphics at 720p).

The mechs also feel good. They are weighty and bit slower than MWO. Also, they aren't as accurate with the weighty feeling torso twist. This is a good thing, it makes the mechs feel like they have a little bit more mass.

I like the level of customization. The MechWarrior portraits are cool (I love the thumbnail with the classic Neurohelmet).

Overall, I am really happy so far and glad I decided to get the game. Good Job PGI.

Edited by MeiSooHaityu, 27 November 2019 - 03:10 PM.

[Mystere]

OZHomerOZ, on 27 November 2019 - 06:34 AM, said:

Also support for TrackIR the Emotiv Epoc+ is essential, its the 21st century version of a neuro helmet aka must have.

FTFY. <shrugs>

Edited by Mystere, 27 November 2019 - 03:12 PM.

[Mystere]

Lightfoot, on 27 November 2019 - 10:43 AM, said:

Also if I run the TARGET joystick configuration software for the T16000M the game doesn't detect any joystick at all.

That is horrible!

[Mystere]

MischiefSC, on 27 November 2019 - 11:13 AM, said:

In general though AI is always going to be mediocre because ...

What's the point of having different difficulty settings, then?

Mister Blastman, on 27 November 2019 - 11:27 AM, said:

AI is mediocre only if the developers want their players to be mediocre people. If they want us to excel, they will give us the challenging AI we deserve. Those who can't handle the AI will suffer, and we'll like it.

It does not even have to be an either/or situation (i.e. difficulty settings).

Edited by Mystere, 27 November 2019 - 03:21 PM.

[Sunstruck]

If any of you guys have played Mechwarrior 4, the over all gameplay and feel is VERY similar. Theres a reason the enemy AI is more relaxed because if your lance turned a corner and all the sudden an entire base with tanks, artillery and mechs focused fire on you, you would instantly melt.

I mean theres been times when a dropship came in and dropped a whole lance of enemys right on top of me, normally that would be instant death, but I was able to hobble away and regroup with the rest of my team.

I mean yes the AI could be improved, especially with the AI lancemates and the commands but its not nearly as bad as VIP (RIP).

The game is def not for anyone into twitch FPShooters, the competitive guys, I mean playing MW5 puts into perspective how much MWO has bended the rules of battletech/mechwarrior to cater to the FPS crowd.

Anyway if the campaign is good it will be a good game, I hope they didn't leave out solaris .

[Dee Eight]

PGI could always put the player killing level generator in as a deathmatch mode for all the whiners complaining the AI is too easy. Too easy to win...fine... here...take all the turrets, vehicles and mech enemies dropping on you at once.

[Celtic Warrior]

LordNothing, on 26 November 2019 - 03:45 PM, said:

so far its crap, cant get my controls to work. 2 hours of tweaking and troubleshooting hasnt got me anywhere. input code is lostech.

Yep can't get the game to read my joystick nothing works. Thought they were going to have better JS support this time guess not. Kind of feel stupid I didn't refund the Beta testing now.

[Koniving]

Enemies (AND allies) apparently do Stackpole.

I just had my second encounter with the phenomena.

It's the single most painful thing to be hit by so far.

Edited by Koniving, 27 November 2019 - 07:42 PM.

[MW Waldorf Statler]

A1Ste4kSauce, on 27 November 2019 - 01:46 PM, said:

Back in the early MW4 days, the modding scene was essentially nonexistent, you only got disk dlcs from EB games like stores.

teh Moddins Scene was concentrated in the two Teams , Mektek and his great Mods and the HC Mod ...both was great big Modteams .

[FRAGTAST1C]

Jyi, on 27 November 2019 - 01:56 PM, said:

So far all I've seen are enemies that spawn out of thin air right next to you when you go past some magic checkpoint, and then run around like headless chickens.

This is a demo with Instant Action missions. Not scripted campaign missions. Whatever you've said could all be in the main campaign missions. Plus, there's going to be AI mods.

[MischiefSC]

Jyi, on 27 November 2019 - 01:56 PM, said:

Very much true. Making a ridicilously punishing &quot;AI&quot; is easy as heck. Just make them hit with every shot and see through walls, yes. But that's not a good AI. Neither is an AI that is unbelieveably dumb.

There should be a middle ground somewhere here. An AI that is not punishingly overpowered and omniscient but doesn't just stand there with drool bubbling at the side of their mouth. And there are good examples of this in much much older games - even games from the Mechwarrior -franchise. One example is the Grunt from the Halo games. They are mostly dumb as bricks, but they have the quirk of running away and panicking, and that gives them character. It's not exactly great AI design all over the game, and the challenge in it comes from unfair advantage mostly, but it's still better for having these quirks than not having them.

In case of a Mechwarrior game, there are many ways to create a decent AI. For starters, they could try to shield their heads and backs a bit better, instead of just charging towards whatever objective they've been given. They could have some rudimentary teamwork skills, with light mechs spotting for LRM's or something (not sure if they do, but they are not very competent at it). Try to do flanking maneuvers (again, not sure if they try, but are just not competent at it).

In addition to these, there could be cool stuff like patrolling. Wow, such an advanced concept, that was already in MW2. Or shut down mechs waiting to ambush you inside some garage in a building or in a cave or something - a concept which was somewhat less competently done in games like MW4 and 3 if I recall.

So far all I've seen are enemies that spawn out of thin air right next to you when you go past some magic checkpoint, and then run around like headless chickens.



I don't exactly agree with this. I just provided some examples that would make the AI better than mediocre, and there are way more of those available throughout the history of videogames. Also, I don't think the majority of players just want an enemy they can beat, they want an enemy they can beat by playing competently. And while the players will always eventually find ways to exploit the AI, it doesn't mean it's going to be easy for an average player to find those exploits. Also, finally, the AI doesn't have to behave incredibly well, just well enough in a larger context. You can have a semi-competent AI and introduce other variables - like the aforementioned enemy numbers - to tweak the overall challenge. It'd actually be even easier to tune the challenge down for &quot;less tryhard&quot; players if the base mechanics were solid.

What you're talking about is a huge issue in game design in general right now. I'm very familiar with AI for games and DOOM was a big deal because they found some excellent ways around the bottlenecks to it.

AI wants resources. The more decisions each "mob" (mobile) has to make has calls. It's even more problematic when you want it player responsive in a predictive way, as in trying to flank or put the player in a crossfire. It's easier to say "move to X distance" and general shooting concepts and movement concepts that are independent of what the player does. Having an AI recognize cover is extremely difficult, having it recognize and respond to destructible elements even more problematic, especially with dynamic or semi dynamic missions.

Graphics and destruction are resource hungry. So is mob population and even stuff like collision based damage (like what DOOM has) and ragdoll physics. That's part of my low expectations for AI. Variety in enemy mechs and player mechs, destructible terrain and mobs having the same functional stats as players means you've got limited tools to make the AI look better than it is.

AI in games isn't bad because nobody knows how to make AI make smart choices. It's that picking between 8-12 active mobs with mediocre AI and 3-5 active mobs with good AI (that most players will use exploits to beat) isn't a hard choice in most games. Fewer smarter mobs is more viable in corridor environments where it's easy to feed the players a trickle of enemies.

As to spawns and patrols, these are instant action missions. That may be in the campaign. Certainly within scope. Teamwork, good cover use, flanking and such are more iffy. Variable environments and mobs don't "see" and players are not confined to specific areas.

You want to learn Python and make it work for this or any other game without unacceptable tradeoffs on physics, mob population and graphics then you are a step ahead of any game designer I know.

[LordNothing]

Celtic Warrior, on 27 November 2019 - 06:47 PM, said:

Yep can't get the game to read my joystick nothing works. Thought they were going to have better JS support this time guess not. Kind of feel stupid I didn't refund the Beta testing now.

see my joystick thread. apparently there is not support for direct input sticks (you know most normal joysticks and hotas units), only controllers that use xinput. but there are workarounds.

[FRAGTAST1C]

MischiefSC, on 27 November 2019 - 07:53 PM, said:

AI in games isn't bad because nobody knows how to make AI make smart choices. It's that picking between 8-12 active mobs with mediocre AI and 3-5 active mobs with good AI (that most players will use exploits to beat) isn't a hard choice in most games. Fewer smarter mobs is more viable in corridor environments where it's easy to feed the players a trickle of enemies.

As to spawns and patrols, these are instant action missions. That may be in the campaign. Certainly within scope. Teamwork, good cover use, flanking and such are more iffy. Variable environments and mobs don't "see" and players are not confined to specific areas.

Spot on!

Plus, there are comments on here about taking a single Assault and winning the entire mission solo. Good! That's what I like. But in this context of their complaint, they're failing to see that they've access to all the weapons. Yes, they don't have access to better tiers but all the weapons are available to customize their loadout with. Try doing something like that when you don't have access to weapons such as Gauss rifles and ERPPCs or LBX 10 slugs and so on.

The game is going to revolve around salvaging the items first and then the cost of repairs, modifying mechs, the cost of your company, travel expenses, etc., In such an environment, the AI being "easy" isn't taken seriously as the game needs to be accessible to all. For all we know, the enemy mechs could be with armour value like the ill-maintained lance of "older mechwarriors" in Battletech and a good shot can core them out.

You can tweak the AI to be like Quake 3's Xaero on Nightmare with a rail-gun if you want. But why expect the developers to do it, especially in a demo? Are any of the AI pilots Elite? I don't think so. But the campaign will have such AI pilots that the players have to deal with. Right now, the complaints feel like they've tested a cup of sea water and decided that there aren't any sea creatures in the ocean.

As it stands, the AI is serviceable and if it makes it into the base game, it isn't the end of the world. By the time we finish the campaign, someone will have tweaked the missions files to include Elite enemies.

[N0MAD]

Just so low expectations shown in these forums, i suppose you all been playing this title by such a low level Dev team, that its just well expected.
Mischief i could debate at least 1/2 dozen of your points but its hard to get thru that Stockholm syndrome.
I have been watching alot of utube videos,Beef plus others, and private twitch sessions and it seems that this will be a great game for people that like to see they killed 40 dead brained ducks, in a mech.

[MischiefSC]

N0MAD, on 27 November 2019 - 08:14 PM, said:

Just so low expectations shown in these forums, i suppose you all been playing this title by such a low level Dev team, that its just well expected.
Mischief i could debate at least 1/2 dozen of your points but its hard to get thru that Stockholm syndrome.
I have been watching alot of utube videos,Beef plus others, and private twitch sessions and it seems that this will be a great game for people that like to see they killed 40 dead brained ducks, in a mech.

I'm not sure what other than "Okay Boomer" to say to this.

While you're watching videos of a comp tier player playing the easiest mission (the bottom one really is the easiest to smash like that) vs bad stock mechs dropped in groups of 4 in the open while he's in a meta assault and trying to conflate that with what the campaign gameplay will be like, why don't you Google game AI design.

Not that it matters. That you're trying to equate my having no issue with the AI in MW5 being industry standard with Stockholm Syndrome gives all needed perspective to the relevance of your opinion.

[N0MAD]

MischiefSC, on 27 November 2019 - 08:35 PM, said:

I'm not sure what other than "Okay Boomer" to say to this.

While you're watching videos of a comp tier player playing the easiest mission (the bottom one really is the easiest to smash like that) vs bad stock mechs dropped in groups of 4 in the open while he's in a meta assault and trying to conflate that with what the campaign gameplay will be like, why don't you Google game AI design.

Not that it matters. That you're trying to equate my having no issue with the AI in MW5 being industry standard with Stockholm Syndrome gives all needed perspective to the relevance of your opinion.

The AI is not industry standard, even 15 year old games like Guild Wars, have excellent AI, other nearly as old games like Age of Empires Online, and more in the same gender like ARMA all have excellent thinking AI, its by far not industry standard .
Try play those games thru or generated insta action missions then come back tell me about industry standard.
But i know youre going to defend MW5 like you defended and argued that FW was best thing since the beginning of gaming.
BTW, congrats, i here all the cool kids are using the "ok Boomer" expession, very catchy.

[FRAGTAST1C]

N0MAD, on 27 November 2019 - 08:51 PM, said:

ARMA all have excellent thinking AI, its by far not industry standard .
Try play those games thru or generated insta action missions then come back tell me about industry standard.

I have played all 3 ARMA games and the AI is shady at best. They have super accuracy while your guns suffer from a lot of spread. You can so easily crawl past the AI in ARMA and take them out from behind a shack while they fiddle around with grenades. The really good AI was back in F.E.A.R but a quick NSR melee attack would down a whole cluster. There is always a work-around and your complaints about top tier pilots being able to win missions solo is more or less about having proper loadouts first and foremost. Try completing the Defend Base mission solo in a Heavy without altering the loadouts. It is tough. It can be done but it isn't easy as you're making it out to be.

This is a mechwarrior game which is supposed to be a vehicular simulation with fps-combat elements. In that regard, we should be comparing it with the likes of Starlancer or the AI in Jane's Combat Simulation games. Right now, you're basing stuff about the game that's in a demo state. There may or may not be Elite AI enemies in the final game but when they do have that, then the difficulty changes 'cause first, you'll need good salvage to have outfitted your lance. It's the same with HBS Battletech. That game becomes very tough when you use RT. The vanilla Battletech stops being difficult when you sort you lance out and get all the good weapons in. Right now, in the demo of MW5, you have basically unlocked all the mechs and weapons except the tiers. So, yes, if you bring a lance of decent composition, it'll be easy to people who are good at games in general.

Will you go around watching some big-name FPS tournament winners or speed-runners plough through games like Doom on Nightmare and say, "Eh... the game is too easy. People have low expectations"? What about Dark Souls or Bloodborne speed-runners that complete the game on SL 1 without getting hit? Do you go, "Oh, look at that. Dark Souls and Bloodborne are dead easy"?