An idea about Flowfields and Stealth

Hey,

as far as I can tell the engine can automatically update the cost of terrain used in the Flowfield algorithm and different layers of cost for different units can be used. This got me thinking about the possibilities for gameplay.

Say you have a cloaked/stealthed unit. Instead of having to babysit it to evade units you could just have a toggle on the unit so that the flowfield used for that particular unit is counting cost for enemy units. This would mean the stealthed unit would automatically dodge the enemy. I think this would make the units seem more intelligent and would remove micro. A problem I can see with this is that it would veer of the shortest path so much that it takes way too long to get there.

Another usage of this method would be aircraft automatically dodging area's that contain a lot of anti-air and instead flying around it. You would of course have to scout the AA first.

I'm no expert on path-finding or anything, but from what I heard this should be feasible (maybe even moddable?).

Thoughts?

That was a TEST app for specifically testing the flowfield.

Think of the flowfield system only something the enact the Player's commands, not giving commands itself.

Basically it comes down to Automation, and so far, Neutrino isn't a big fan of it.

Mike

There's no reason the flowfield can't be used for some automatic systems. In the stream, Elijah expressed interest in having cost field written down beneath falling structure to get units out of the way.

I do, however, think more complex commands like this should be implemented via different means through Sorians AI instead of being built into the pathfinding.

But thats a different type of situation, such a system is essentially solving a problem that isn't a problem, or in other words if units get out of the way automatically, by bother have falling buildings in the first place?

But the AI has nothing to do with individual commands like that(or at all really), what you're talking about is automation.

Mike

I see no other purpose for unit AI then, did Causeless confuse enemy AI with unit AI or something? If Sorian's AI is for units then I see no reason for Causeless to be wrong, despite it being a little contrary to most of the anti-automation things mentioned by the dev team.

Flowfield cost should definitely be used to prevent units from committing suicide and doing stupid things. Particularly, they should avoid:

- Detectors, if stealthed
- Turrets
- Anti-air, if flying

If units avoided those things, that would be very nice and remove a lot of frustration.

It would also remove a lot of gameplay and player input. Again, what is being talked about here is Automation.

Mike

Exactly what gameplay would it remove? Would it reduce micro? Yes. That's the point.

Input? INPUT?...
Player input is just clicking or pressing keys.
Is repeat queues would also bad because it decreases player input?

I know you can do better Mike.

Read more of Neutrino's posts, that is generally the developer standpoint, that automation removes an element from the game. The key example used is distraction techniques, but I imagine if you stepped away from an anti-micro standpoint, you'd see others. The primary one I can think of that isn't mentioned, on the offensive side, would be the ability to think up tactics that the developers didn't think of, or that the AI (If such a thing exists, I'm starting to think I'm going insane) couldn't conceive of easily.

I think I've read most of neutrinos "anti-automation" posts. As he himself stated he didn't want Starcraft'esque micro while he seemed to think that Zero-K unit automation went a bit too far in some instances like build priorities.
The point is not that you are gonna let the AI play for you(although if you are an AI programer you might like that).
The point is that you remove minor tasks that could easily be automated.
The player will have control over when and how his units are following this automated behavior and it will be incorporated into the tactics and strategies that this player pursues.

When you say distraction techniques what do you mean?
Is it to tickle the opponent so that he miss your big assault or is it forcing that player to react to your micro?
If kiting is not automated for example you would be forced to kite manually with them and this might detract from your general view of the solar system.
I'm not a big fan of having your attention and micro force me to respond in kind even though I find it very satisfying to play games where you can feel exactly where your opponent is putting his attention.

I would say this is a grey area.

Auto attack is automation. Engineers deciding what to build for you is bad automation. See how one is a useful mechanic to help the player carry out his decision and one is not. I don't think Neutrino is against units carrying out orders intelligently.

This is a interesting idea by the way for cloaking units. It may or may not be valuable, but it sure should be tested if and when there are cloaked units with a minimum distance to remain invisible. I am confident commanders will have cloaking. This is the #1 way to avoid sniping in TA. It requires a massively expensive power generator to keep him cloaked too. :3

Also, it should be easier for players to determine how close they are to breaking stealth. Eve in League of Legends has a ring that shows how close she is to being detected. This would be good for PA. I haven't played much with FA cloaked if they have cloaking.

See my post below.

Well? Neutrino himself discussed the distraction techniques, he didn't go into detail either, what I think he was referring to would be tickling to make them micromanage in one area, to assault them in an area where they'd need to micromanage to survive, and other variations. Regardless, all of that was about loads of potential micromanagement, that personally turned me waaaay off, way worse than the prospect of adding a couple waypoints so my stealth bombers avoid anti-air.

I get your point, and agree with it, on the hiding aspect. But I think Neutrino's real goal, is to do away with the aversion to micro management by making it more intuitive and less labor intensive. However, that is just me attempting to read between the lines.

Radar jamming, or "stealth fields" as they are called in SupCom, would show their range on the ground in FA. Anything inside the stealth field would not show up on enemy radar.
The mobile stealth field generators were even active when you had them in transports so you could potentially keep air units stealthed with them but it was really hard to manage.
Cloak was only available for a few select units. Cloak without stealth could be detected by radar.
Cloak with stealth could only be detected by Omni sensors.

Agreed

Honestly, I don't think kiting will be automated. I didn't like it when the AI did it in Age of Kings. AI assisted kiting can be extremely unnerving and unfun. In general, we want to be making decisions about where our units go. A kiting AI could move our units to locations we never intended.

Hope nobody was gambling on kiting AI.

I believe that cloaking units avoiding detection is a reasonable automation assuming you have the intel for it and turned it on but probably requires some testing.

Here's a similar question:

Should air craft avoid enemy AA. I would say not unless this was a feature that could be easily dissable and enabled or microed through with a few number of ques through the high cost areas. You may need your air ASAP and don't care if they take some damage on the way.

Here's an idea if you were to implement this idea: if you que in a zone of damage cost that cost goes away, so as long as I show I am not concerned about the damage cost by clicking in it, it vanishes for the specific set of orders. This might make overriding cost easier through player commands. This is pretty low priority stuff, but it is cool to talk about.

Well.... What I said had nothing to do with Kiting and what you quoted was talking about giving the user more micromanagement easier, rather than giving more automation?

However, there is a post in the Macro Management thread about AI that makes AI assisted Kiting seem to just be a natural consequence of how intelligent the AI is going to be. Which leads me to believe this game may wind up being Micromanagement on the home, economical front, and point and click on the battle front... Which... Sounds scarily tedious... I mean, at least let us micromanage our units to help us make up the gap if we are crap at micromanaging economy...

My hope is that the Neural Map style AI is going to be used for enemy AI, and not to unit AI...

Yeah, I don't think you have anything to worry about. Maybe Neutrino will read this stuff and share some wisdom with us.

I am confident the cost stuff is primarily for the computer played AI. That is consistent with what Neutrino and Elitron said.

Edit: Sorry, I quoted you because I agreed.

Well, cost fields, the integration fields, and the Flow Fields, are all for pathfinding exclusively. And they do pathfinding so simply that units may be able to afford Higher level AI without introducing strain on the computer. And they will absolutely be used for every single unit in the game, AI or otherwise.
Flow Fields are awesome, and I'm still star struck over how amazingly easy they are on computing while allowing for complex, contextual pathfinding.

I think the same aswell, the thing is that there are just as many definitions for Micro as there are RTS games.

Obivously a blanket statement like 'All automation is bad' is just plain false, but that doesn't mean all automation is good either.

Look at the Factory Repeat Function, I like it because;

A] I am always in Full control of it, I can turn it on or off as needed and/or adjust what is being built very easily.

B] With the Rate based Eco it's also really easy to plan for it and over all is easy to understand and account for mentally.

Factory Repeat is pretty much as close to idiot proof as you can get IMO, the game encourages constant production, so you'll use it because to achieve the same result without it requires much more effort and is honestly more cluncky and requires upkeep from the player. It's almost ambiguously good, especially when combined with things like factory assists where you only have to set one Factory's Queue and can share it among your other factories while not having to interrupt it if you need an extra engineer or something.

When you get to things Like Auto-kiting and what not, you start getting to the point where the player has less control and can't really be classified as strictly good, what if while kiting they don't kite in the direction you expect? or are kiting something they don't need to/shouldn't, it gets a lot more complex and harder to grasp and for me at least, they're my units, I want them to follow my orders exactly, with all the improvements in managing you base and economy, there isn't much reason to automate the more action-oriented portion of the game.

Mike

Neutrino's desire for one million units may be a factor too.

Also good description of the issues associated with this kind of automation Mike.

At best, I would say such a player side use would not go beyond structures, if that.

Also, it is important to note I am using the word cloaking and not stealth, because in general you are not going to have data on enemy site range which is going to be the predetermining factor for stealth units to avoid detection in the first place. Cloaking I believe may have a set range proximity of detection (TA did).

Look at the Auto Kiting in Zero-K, I like it because;

A] I am always in Full control of it, I can turn it on or off as needed and/or adjust the positions of my units very easily.

B] With the Order queuing Fight Commands it's also really easy to plan for it and over all is easy to understand and account for mentally.

Auto Kiting is pretty much as close to idiot proof as you can get IMO, if the game encourages kiting, so you'll use it because to achieve the same result without it requires much more effort and is honestly more cluncky and requires upkeep in the form of micro and a lot of attention from the player. It's almost unambiguously good, especially when combined with things like patrol or attack move where you only have to set one command queue for your units and they will kite anytime your units encounter enemies while not having to interrupt the command queue every-time an enemy get close to them or something.