Author Topic: Targeting Priorities  (Read 3371 times)

Offline Velox

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 327
Targeting Priorities
« on: August 16, 2009, 04:16:24 pm »
     Imagine, if you will, the scene -

     The AI fleet is there, beyond the tumbling wreckage from the battle at the wormhole mouth.  It is black against the dim glow of distant nebulae, silent but for the hissing electromagnetic whisper of coded transmissions.  It is vast, malevolent.  It must be destroyed.
     Our ships form up, advancing through the drifting debris.  A low rumbling builds within the hulls of the missile cruisers as their quiescent autofactories come online, preparing to fabricate and assemble new ordnance; for now, the munitions bunkers are crammed full, the firing tubes loaded.  Flickers of incandescent energy begin to crackle along the edges of the bombers' magnetic launchers, and among them lurk the restless fighters, dagger-like, pointed at the heart of the enemy.  It is time.
     Extreme range: the faint echoes of the AI's transmissions abruptly become a roar and its ships begin to move, all in the same instant, and then our first missiles are away.  They arc through the void, our own little mechanical minds sent to slay their all-devouring brethren, and burst among the front lines of the AI's ships.  The vast fleet continues its implacable advance, its host barely diminished by our distant salvo, and our fighters burst from our front lines, riding pillars of fire towards the enemy.  The distance between the ships shrinks, dwindling; the AI bombers, maws glowing with the barely-contained hell within, take aim...

     ... and burst apart: turned from coherent entities into shattered wrecks in microseconds as the second missile salvo arrives.  The cruisers are in range now, deadly accurate and unrelenting with the hammer-blows of their munitions.  The bombers crumple and are consumed by their own fires and our fighters - almost missiles themselves - streak through the spreading ruin, navigational deflectors straining to push the wreckage aside.  They whirl and tumble, nimble as dancers, exchanging spits of fire with the AI's own fightercraft, marred and scorched by the enemy's own bursting missiles but now they are clear!  Open space, rapidly consumed, and then they are among the enemy's cruisers themselves.  Now they are not dancers but butchers, vengeful wolves among the fold; they whirl and arc and ply their knives and by the dozen, by the hundred, the enemy cruisers die.  The bursts and flares of this distant butchery is suddenly hidden from view, though: as the AI's own fighters sweep in, our bombers move up among the fleet.  The shredded cruisers can loose no missiles against them, and one by one they vomit forth their plasma bombs into the faces of the AI fighters: deflectors fail, hulls burn through, and all that reaches our cruisers is a hail of semi-molten debris.  The magnetic fields sweep it in and the autofactories feed hungrily, beginning to gain on the launch arrays as the firing slows.  
     The battle is over, the AI's fleet broken.  Humanity may yet be overcome, our lights own lights among the stars snuffed out - but not yet.  Not today.

     - Or, at least, that's how I'd like things to go.  The reality tends to be more like this:

     ... and blow our fighters to incandescent slag as our second missile salvo streaks past, battering a single AI fighter into ruins and lightly scorching the hull of another.  The cruisers' autofactories turn out missile after missile, each of which is thrown in turn at the rapidly-closing AI fighters, which - unmolested by our bombers, which have been ripped into tiny pieces and spread across half a quadrant by the AI's own cruisers, quickly close the distance.  Humanity falls back to an adjacent system, muttering darkly, and waits an interminable half-hour to build another fleet.

     How is it that units decide what to fire on?  I know that the first enemy into range is going to get a plastering from any weapon that can reach it, and rightly so, but after that I can't quite figure it out.  I recall reading at some point that the focus in AI War was intended to be on the positioning of units and not micromanagement, but most of the time I end up pausing the game and queueing up a sequence of kills for each unit type just so that they'll fire on the type of ship I brought them along to take care of.  Cruisers are a particularly prime example, as they seem to love happily blazing away at a handful of fighters when half a salvo would wipe out the five dozen bombers/infiltrators that are also advancing.  I find it pretty frustrating and am curious how units make their decisions.

     That said - thank you for the fantastic game, which you might as well have designed based half on my personal "things I'd like to see in a game" list and half on my "things that I never thought of but that I'd love if I saw them in a game" list.  Hooray!
« Last Edit: August 16, 2009, 04:43:20 pm by Velox »

Offline Revenantus

  • Arcen Games Staff
  • Hero Member Mark III
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,063
Re: Targeting Priorities
« Reply #1 on: August 16, 2009, 04:39:46 pm »
Hi Velox,

Welcome to the forum.

You certainly paint a vivid picture. :)

Ships will launch their first salvo at the first target to come into range, but will frequently check to see if there is a better target in range to swap to. Once the two opposing fleets have fully come into range of each other, the ships should theoretically do a pretty good job of deciding which targets to fire on.

Fighters are relatively fast, so I suppose the issue is that they come into range of your cruisers first, absorb the first salvo, then the cruisers then have to wait to reload before they can fire on the bombers that subsequently come into range. There are certainly some potential improvements to the targeting system to be made there, so we'll see what the developer, x4000, comes up with. :)

Glad to hear you're enjoying the game. :D

Offline x4000

  • Chris McElligott Park, Arcen Founder and Lead Dev
  • Arcen Staff
  • Zenith Council Member Mark III
  • *****
  • Posts: 31,651
Re: Targeting Priorities
« Reply #2 on: August 16, 2009, 08:10:31 pm »
Welcome to the forums, Velox!  Revenantus is exactly right on the targeting-as-soon-as-in-range thing.  I don't really have any plans to change the targeting priorities for something like this, nor is there really anything I can do -- fighters are already a very low priority for cruisers, but they get shot at first because they are there first.  The cruisers cannot really know whether they should hold their fire or start firing immediately, because there are a thousand different things you might be trying to do with your fleet, and there's too much complexity and just not enough CPU power for that sort of analysis.  The AI makes that sort of analysis on a different thread, but the AI knows what it is thinking and doing, whereas the game does not know what you are thinking -- hence the added complexity.

However, I still think you raise an interesting point, and I think I have a solution.  Basically, what we need to add is a "hold fire" mode.  A hotkey would toggle between these two modes (hold fire or regular), and ships would not look for targets or fire when in hold-fire mode.  This would basically let your ships hold their fire until they are within the range you want, and then when you "release the hounds" so to speak, they will already target very intelligently.  I'm adding this to my short-term list:  http://arcengames.com/forums/index.php/topic,758.0.html

As an aside, you can already work around this with many tactics such as

1. Splitting your fleet and using part of them as a diversion, which often will draw the fighters off at the start.

2. Placing your cruisers at the back of your fleet and then doing a group-move so that your bombers and fighters take out the enemy fighters first, and then withdrawing your bombers and fighters so that your cruisers can pound the enemy bombers, etc.

3.  Other similar sorts of tactics.  Basically, you will often get a much better result from actually moving around smaller groups of your ships in one battle, rather like what the AI does when attacking you, instead of just group-moving a big blob of ships across the map.  The big blob can be very effective, but will typically be less efficient than better actual tactics.

Either way, though, I think that the hold fire mode will be a useful addition, so that's definitely on the list.  Thanks! :)
Have ideas or bug reports for one of our games?  Mantis for Suggestions and Bug Reports. Thanks for helping to make our games better!

Offline Haagenti

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 322
Re: Targeting Priorities
« Reply #3 on: August 17, 2009, 04:51:24 am »
A simple tactic (which does wonders for me) is to:
1) always make sure you have more cruisers than the enemy
2) group-move into range of the enemy fleet until most of your cruisers are firing
3) group-move backwards
4) make sure you have no bombers in your group, as they will surely die

This will ensure that you put more fire on the enemy than he does on you (only cruisers will fire and you have more). Once the balance of power has shifted enough. move forward and annihilate his fleet.
Nerfer of EtherJets, Lightning Turrets, Parasites, Raiders, Low Automatic Progress and Deep Raids (to name the most important)

Look on my works, ye Mighty, and despair!

Offline Fiskbit

  • Arcen Games Contractor
  • Master Member Mark III
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,752
Re: Targeting Priorities
« Reply #4 on: August 17, 2009, 05:00:39 am »
Better tactic: use deflector drones. Single best unit in the game, without a doubt (and if you argue parasites, I argue parasites are good much because they can steal deflector drones...if they can get even close enough).
Have ideas or bug reports for one of our games?  Click here to get started with Mantis for Suggestions and Bug Reports.  Thanks for helping to make our games better!

Offline Haagenti

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 322
Re: Targeting Priorities
« Reply #5 on: August 17, 2009, 06:47:44 am »
Better tactic: use deflector drones. Single best unit in the game, without a doubt (and if you argue parasites, I argue parasites are good much because they can steal deflector drones...if they can get even close enough).

I have not yet had the pleasure of playing with/against them. Looking in the wiki:
- Is the electric effect an area effect?
- Can you target them with your own laser-firing units?
Nerfer of EtherJets, Lightning Turrets, Parasites, Raiders, Low Automatic Progress and Deep Raids (to name the most important)

Look on my works, ye Mighty, and despair!

Offline Fiskbit

  • Arcen Games Contractor
  • Master Member Mark III
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,752
Re: Targeting Priorities
« Reply #6 on: August 17, 2009, 07:04:33 am »
If you target one with a laser-firing ship, you should give it more health. Regarding an area effect, if you're referring to its weapon, it should only hurt a single ship at a time. The reasons that deflector drones are so fantastic is that they have high unit caps, they're cheap, they build quickly, and they outrange cruisers. When the map offers them, these are my starting unit of choice. :)
Have ideas or bug reports for one of our games?  Click here to get started with Mantis for Suggestions and Bug Reports.  Thanks for helping to make our games better!

Offline Haagenti

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 322
Re: Targeting Priorities
« Reply #7 on: August 17, 2009, 07:20:21 am »
they outrange cruisers

Say no more. I see they are also fast, so they should be able to keep everything at a distance. In a human-human scenario they would indeed be my favorites as you would also run rings around the human fleets (it's much easier to run rings around the AI).

I still think that I'd prefer the huge fleets of the parasites (plus the fact that you have about five AI specials and five draws from Advanced Research giving you 10 chances on getting the Drones anyway).

Studying the table in the wiki I see that the Drones are the only ship I have never seen....
Nerfer of EtherJets, Lightning Turrets, Parasites, Raiders, Low Automatic Progress and Deep Raids (to name the most important)

Look on my works, ye Mighty, and despair!

Offline Admiral

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 547
Re: Targeting Priorities
« Reply #8 on: August 17, 2009, 12:04:06 pm »
I have a huge fleet of these that I parasited. Is there any use to them except their range? I just lump them in with my fleet and don't care if they get killed, as they seem useless to me, but I am hardly the master tactician that others here seem to be.

Their icon looks like a female chest mannequin like you'd see at a department store.

Offline Fiskbit

  • Arcen Games Contractor
  • Master Member Mark III
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,752
Re: Targeting Priorities
« Reply #9 on: August 17, 2009, 02:02:22 pm »
Range and speed. Managed well, you can destroy just about anything before it has a chance to fire a shot at you. If you have enough of them, you don't even have to manage them. They're great for taking out defenses, as well, since these things outrange most defenses. Less importantly, they also can't be killed by sniper fire. The drawback is that they're unable to kill structures immune to minor electric shots, so you can't have an attack fleet of just them. Even so, the combination of both superior range and speed compared to cruisers makes them incredibly effective and a wonderful cruiser replacement, leaving cruisers as the backup in my fleet for dealing with substantial enemy groups that aren't killed right when they come into deflector drone range.
Have ideas or bug reports for one of our games?  Click here to get started with Mantis for Suggestions and Bug Reports.  Thanks for helping to make our games better!

Offline Velox

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 327
Re: Targeting Priorities
« Reply #10 on: August 17, 2009, 06:50:07 pm »

     The basic approach that I build on as the situation warrants is to bring a mass of cruisers (I love 'em - I knew I was utterly sold on the game the first time I watched a massed missile salvo make its silent, inexorable transit and crash home) into range with a control group of bombers behind them and another of fighters nearby, off to the side a bit if I can swing it.  Once the AI engages I'll pull the cruisers back and let the enemy ships wade through the firestorm, making sure to let the enemy's own cruisers get into range briefly so that they will stop to fire and get separated from the group.  I snap them up with the fighters (sending them in from an angle to avoid the advancing fast-movers' fire if possible, or right on through if there's no other choice) and then once the AI's missile capability is pretty much gone I'll bring the bombers up into the cruiser group.  Unless I blow my timing that's right about the time that the enemy anti-cruiser vessels are coming into range, and their ensuing collision with a wall of plasma bombs is always fun to watch. 
     I'm not surprised that my impression that the retreating cruisers seem prone to firing excessively on advancing fighters instead of the other (eminently destructible) ships in range is probably incorrect.  I'll take a more systematic approach to my observation and see if I can't figure out what I'm doing wrong.  Thanks for the consideration, and the hold fire mode does seem like it would have some rather deliciously useful applications.


Offline x4000

  • Chris McElligott Park, Arcen Founder and Lead Dev
  • Arcen Staff
  • Zenith Council Member Mark III
  • *****
  • Posts: 31,651
Re: Targeting Priorities
« Reply #11 on: August 17, 2009, 07:32:34 pm »
A simple tactic (which does wonders for me) is to:
1) always make sure you have more cruisers than the enemy
2) group-move into range of the enemy fleet until most of your cruisers are firing
3) group-move backwards
4) make sure you have no bombers in your group, as they will surely die

This will ensure that you put more fire on the enemy than he does on you (only cruisers will fire and you have more). Once the balance of power has shifted enough. move forward and annihilate his fleet.

#5, for me, is to keep fighers comingled with my cruisers, and to keep a reserve of bombers directly behind the cruisers.  Then when the enemy fighters start heading in, I briefly bring the bombers in and take them out, then retreat them until the enemy cruisers are dead.  Then sending my fighters forward is often a really quick way to slice up the enemy cruisers (while also losing a lot of my fighters, but they are oh-so-cheap).  In the end, the cruisers then finish mop-up while taking very few losses, and the bombers are free to come in and beat the heak out of whatever big structures are there.

And of course there are a dozen variations on that, but in an open-field battle if I'm not using diversions, then some sort of shifting-lines tactic like that is what I'm doing (assuming I have time to devote to that particular battle, and am not splitting my attention with some other area of the galaxy).
Have ideas or bug reports for one of our games?  Mantis for Suggestions and Bug Reports. Thanks for helping to make our games better!

Offline x4000

  • Chris McElligott Park, Arcen Founder and Lead Dev
  • Arcen Staff
  • Zenith Council Member Mark III
  • *****
  • Posts: 31,651
Re: Targeting Priorities
« Reply #12 on: August 17, 2009, 07:34:31 pm »
     I'm not surprised that my impression that the retreating cruisers seem prone to firing excessively on advancing fighters instead of the other (eminently destructible) ships in range is probably incorrect.  I'll take a more systematic approach to my observation and see if I can't figure out what I'm doing wrong.  Thanks for the consideration, and the hold fire mode does seem like it would have some rather deliciously useful applications.

No worries -- glad that sounds like it will work well for your situation.  I'm glad you brought this up, because I think the hold fire mode will really be interesting in a lot of situations, as you say.  It's one more mechanic to really allow tacticians to control the battle.
Have ideas or bug reports for one of our games?  Mantis for Suggestions and Bug Reports. Thanks for helping to make our games better!

Offline Admiral

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 547
Re: Targeting Priorities
« Reply #13 on: August 18, 2009, 12:13:49 am »
You guys are so much more advanced than I am. My way of handling battles:

1) Build a fleet of mixed ships
2) Give move orders to move through the enemy formation
3) Win

I don't think I'd have the patience to micromanage a battle like that. That turns the RTS game into more of an RTT game! :)

Offline x4000

  • Chris McElligott Park, Arcen Founder and Lead Dev
  • Arcen Staff
  • Zenith Council Member Mark III
  • *****
  • Posts: 31,651
Re: Targeting Priorities
« Reply #14 on: August 18, 2009, 12:17:24 am »
I'm not much a fan of micromanagement, either -- compared to what some people in other RTS games do (managing each individual unit), this is pretty lightweight.  But I definitely designed the game with different playstyles and degrees of intensity in mind.  I don't think your method is any less valid than the others. :)
Have ideas or bug reports for one of our games?  Mantis for Suggestions and Bug Reports. Thanks for helping to make our games better!