|
Not sure how much this has been discussed, but I cant help but notice how bad the pathfinding is in this game.
Example 1: 1 immortal with a group of stalkers move up to attack. I use the immortal to target a ranged unit near dead, but it doesnt have a direct path. In order to reach the ranged unit, it needs to move around my stalkers. However, instead of moving around, it twitches back and forth trying to squeeze its way through.
Example 2: When units try to move around blockades or force fields. They will simply twitch around the nearest place that would normally allow passage instead of going around.
Case one could be blamed on the unit collision where usually a unit will push friendly units out of the way. However, it should know when a unit isnt going to move.
Case 2 has nothing to do with unit collision. In the example of force fields, I have watch a unit just try to force its way through a force field until it goes away. The pathfinding system is simply failing to take in account that the way is blocked.
Agree?
|
On April 19 2010 06:46 jeremycafe wrote:
Not sure how much this has been discussed, but I cant help but notice how bad the pathfinding is in this game.
Example 1: 1 immortal with a group of stalkers move up to attack. I use the immortal to target a ranged unit near dead, but it doesnt have a direct path. In order to reach the ranged unit, it needs to move around my stalkers. However, instead of moving around, it twitches back and forth trying to squeeze its way through.
Example 2: When units try to move around blockades or force fields. They will simply twitch around the nearest place that would normally allow passage instead of going around.
Case one could be blamed on the unit collision where usually a unit will push friendly units out of the way. However, it should know when a unit isnt going to move.
Case 2 has nothing to do with unit collision. In the example of force fields, I have watch a unit just try to force its way through a force field until it goes away. The pathfinding system is simply failing to take in account that the way is blocked.
Agree?
No.
Micro.
Need I bring up BW?
|
8751 Posts
Yeah, that's how the AI currently works. Makes for some great micro opportunities!
|
bad pathfinding and glitches helped make bw great, so maybe this is good?
|
pathfinding in sc2 is so much better than in bw, you can't expect the game to do EVERYTHING for you
|
Erm, i am having dejavu, or i have just posted like 4 posts in similar topic 20 seconds before?
|
8751 Posts
Most of the AI complaints I have seen from people are always in the context of interacting with their opponent. As far as I can tell, the AI is pretty damn slick when I'm doing things by myself. But yeah, when I interact with my opponent, shit can get pretty damn inefficient unless I micro. Sounds perfect to me.
|
For reals, did you play BW at all? Or did i just get trolled?
|
On April 19 2010 06:48 Ryuu314 wrote:
No.
Micro.
Need I bring up BW?
Sigh.
BW pathfinding was not as bad IMO. Units would not twitch back and forth. This is a broken game mechanic, and something that should have been perfected out early in the engine.
|
I don't think anyone should be complaining about micro opportunities after everyone was worried there wouldn't be enough in this game haha. I'm actually pretty happy to hear about this.
|
On April 19 2010 06:52 jeremycafe wrote:Sigh. BW pathfinding was not as bad IMO. Units would not twitch back and forth. This is a broken game mechanic, and something that should have been perfected out early in the engine.
even units in BW would twitch ~here's an example, if you didn't micro your melee units like zerglings, the ones in the back would just twitch back and forth trying to find a path to get to it's target. this isn't the case anymore in SC2 there's a lot less micro needed for zerglings
|
On April 19 2010 06:52 jeremycafe wrote:Sigh. BW pathfinding was not as bad IMO. Units would not twitch back and forth. This is a broken game mechanic, and something that should have been perfected out early in the engine.
lol.
the infamous dragoon dance?
as every other poster has said, these small inefficiencies are what allow for good players to stand out from the rest. If the AI microed our armies for flanks / maximum efficiency attacking, then it would really be, to use the phrase, a "1a2a3a" game.
|
On April 19 2010 06:48 jeremycafe wrote:
Units would not twitch back and forth. This is a broken game mechanic, and something that should have been perfected out early in the engine.
what are you talking about, what about the Dragoon and Reaver, they're fucking retards if you don't micro them.
|
8751 Posts
On April 19 2010 06:52 jeremycafe wrote:Sigh. BW pathfinding was not as bad IMO. Units would not twitch back and forth. This is a broken game mechanic, and something that should have been perfected out early in the engine.
Actually in BW, units that are not in range and are stuck behind units that are attacking will often move backwards. In SC2, they'll stay directly behind the units in front of them and move along the line looking for an opening.
On April 19 2010 06:46 jeremycafe wrote:
However, it should know when a unit isnt going to move.
You seem to know when a unit isn't going to move. Why don't you make the adjustments?
|
On April 19 2010 06:56 Terrakin wrote:Show nested quote +On April 19 2010 06:48 Ryuu314 wrote:
Units would not twitch back and forth. This is a broken game mechanic, and something that should have been perfected out early in the engine.
what are you talking about, what about the Dragoon and Reaver, they're fucking retards if you don't micro them.
You misquoted. It was OP who said that quote not me x]. Just wanted to clear that up.
|
So this isnt a debate about whether or not its working as intended. Glad to see people can drop their egos 
Unit movement is a game mechanic. It shouldnt be something you cant predict. Micro should come into play by moving units out of the way and then giving that one unit a direct path. Not having to click grid by grid around the units.
|
On April 19 2010 06:57 Liquid`NonY wrote:
You seem to know when a unit isn't going to move. Why don't you make the adjustments?
This isnt about me. It's about the game. The two example I posted were not even of my play.
Twitching units should be a thing of the past, especially for a triple a title.
|
I've had the same issue with forcefield quite often. Or sometimes units simple chose to try squeezing to a tight passage forever instead of taking another longer way around the obstacle and attack the unit from behind. I've seriously had 20 Zerglings and more in a group and only 2-3 were attacking while the other didn't have a clue >-<
Overall I love the pathing though. Just needs a tweak here and there.
|
On April 19 2010 06:56 Navi wrote:Show nested quote +On April 19 2010 06:52 jeremycafe wrote:On April 19 2010 06:48 Ryuu314 wrote:
No.
Micro.
Need I bring up BW? Sigh. BW pathfinding was not as bad IMO. Units would not twitch back and forth. This is a broken game mechanic, and something that should have been perfected out early in the engine. lol. the infamous dragoon dance? as every other poster has said, these small inefficiencies are what allow for good players to stand out from the rest. If the AI microed our armies for flanks / maximum efficiency attacking, then it would really be, to use the phrase, a "1a2a3a" game.
Soon the phrase will become just 1a :p
|
On April 19 2010 06:59 jeremycafe wrote:So this isnt a debate about whether or not its working as intended. Glad to see people can drop their egos Unit movement is a game mechanic. It shouldnt be something you cant predict. Micro should come into play by moving units out of the way and then giving that one unit a direct path. Not having to click grid by grid around the units.
I don't understand what your trying to say, the AI works fine for me. You can predict the movement, you just have to issue the right command.
also sorry Ryu, I just edited it.
On April 19 2010 07:02 jeremycafe wrote:Show nested quote +On April 19 2010 06:57 Liquid`NonY wrote:
You seem to know when a unit isn't going to move. Why don't you make the adjustments? This isnt about me. It's about the game. The two example I posted were not even of my play. Twitching units should be a thing of the past, especially for a triple a title.
The twitching units will only happen if you don't micro, the two examples you saw were probably just newer players.
|
The only pathing issue that I find entirely detrimental is the horrendous pathing some units take when you tell them to attack rocks. For example, on blistering sands, if I am trying to tell me units to attack the rocks behind the northeast base, my units attempt to run through my opponent's base to get to the rocks, rather than just walking the much shorter distance to attack the rocks from below the ramp. It makes absolutely not sense whatsoever.
|
|
|
I think too many people here are playing the "your just a noob" card than actually considering the mechanic's intent.
Whether it be attacking, or telling your own unit to move down your ramp. Micro shouldnt come into play when its simple move commands. If i say move to point a, if there is a unit in the way, it should know to move around it.
Regardless if the unit is moving to attack or simply move to a location, it shouldnt make a difference on how the unit decides to take that path.
|
what is really wrong with pathfinding is that the pathfinding knows that some destructible rocks have been destroyed even if you have no intelligence about that.
|
On April 19 2010 06:57 Liquid`NonY wrote:
Actually in BW, units that are not in range and are stuck behind units that are attacking will often move backwards. In SC2, they'll stay directly behind the units in front of them and move along the line looking for an opening.
well the only thing i find annoying is this:
c = command center
z= zergling
z
zzzzz
zcccc
zcccc
zcccc
that one zergling moves right
......z
zzzzz
zcccc
zcccc
zcccc
but then decides to turn around if it went through all the backtracing legs.
if it could start up a new backtracing calc right there, that'd be golden.
|
United States47024 Posts
On April 19 2010 07:05 Terrakin wrote:
The twitching units will only happen if you don't micro, the two examples you saw were probably just newer players.
Interesting that you have this opinion, because there are plenty of people with the opinion that the pathing engine is too good and doesn't allow *enough* places to micro.
|
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe FF does not affect the pathfinding at all and units simply try to walk in the same direction as if the FFs never existed. This leads me to believe that, at least at this point in the beta, is working as intended and therefore not broken.
The immortal part, on the other hand, seems to be a glitch that I expect to be fixed eventually. I've seen the immortal start walking from side to side outside of any interaction with any opponent, for instance when you attack the destructible rocks. Sometimes it will even start to walk away from your control group, like, really far away.
I'm pretty sure we can expect some fixes to obvious glitches, but not necessarily to the occasional inefficiency of the current pathfinding. I also think the inefficiency in the current pathfinding is desirable by a lot of players as it demands micro, thus making the game harder to master.
|
I have watch a unit just try to force its way through a force field until it goes away.
wat
|
this happens when there are 2 equal choices to get to a place, its very obvious when it will happen and you can counteract with just some move commands in advance.
You cant expect the PC do everything for you, the pathfinding allready is very forgiving.
|
On April 19 2010 07:29 TBO wrote:
what is really wrong with pathfinding is that the pathfinding knows that some destructible rocks have been destroyed even if you have no intelligence about that.
The same goes for things like wall-offs. If you tell a unit that is below a cliff to move to a point on top of the cliff it will stay around that spot and not try to follow the edge until it finds an opening if that opening is closed off by buildings. Here again the pathfinding has knowledge that the player doesn't have.
|
Kyrgyz Republic1462 Posts
It's just that the path won't get auto-recalculated when the force fields are placed. If you order your units to move/attack once more, they will stop poking into it.
What bothers me much more is that there is no way to make units keep formation. E.g. zealots will always insist to get mixed into a blob with the other units even if you manually put them forward before the attack, unless the attack order is issued separately to the zealots and then the other units, and even then they won't stay in a line as you put them but clump together. Same with marines/marauders - marines just won't stay behind.
I would really like to have a basic formation movement function. Actually I like how that was done in Warcraft 3, the group would move as fast as the slowest unit, and the formation was more or less preserved.
|
On April 19 2010 06:50 Liquid`NonY wrote:
Most of the AI complaints I have seen from people are always in the context of interacting with their opponent. As far as I can tell, the AI is pretty damn slick when I'm doing things by myself. But yeah, when I interact with my opponent, shit can get pretty damn inefficient unless I micro. Sounds perfect to me.
I agree with you, but thats because we (just a wild guess) are playing or want to play on a professional level while most casuals just want to have fun and don't stress out while micro'ing. Still I completely agree, shouldn't be changed at all. Pathfinding is really good already.
|
The AI problem I have is with units attacking when they shouldnt be. But maybe they fixed it? Hasnt happened to me that I can remmeber in the past week
|
A lot of you seem to define pathfinding as
"I want the computer to move all of my units into perfect positions for their roles and also attack the units which they counter. Also cake." Sorry guys, this isn't a game that plays itself.
The actual pathfinding is leaps and bounds ahead compared to the near retarded BW pathfinding AI.
|
I do have one issue with pathfinding. If you tell a worker to go scout say a Terran base, and by the time he gets there there is a wall up, the worker will not try to go up the ramp. It'll stop at the bottom and sort of squirm around a bit.
This is something that should be fixed, in my opinion; it's not really a big deal but there's no reason your opponent should know you have a wall without having to scout it. Plus this removes the chance to possibly kill the scouter as well.
|
On April 19 2010 08:50 Sadistx wrote:
A lot of you seem to define pathfinding as
"I want the computer to move all of my units into perfect positions for their roles and also attack the units which they counter. Also cake." Sorry guys, this isn't a game that plays itself.
The actual pathfinding is leaps and bounds ahead compared to the near retarded BW pathfinding AI.
This has nothing to do with my post.
There is a bug in the logic from moving from point a to point b. It simply doesnt always work. Whether or not its the best possible solution doesnt matter. But if I tell a unit to move to a location and it BUGS out, then its flawed.
"A lot of YOU" seem to think that a game cant be competitive if it doesn't stick to stone age mechanics and technology.
|
People keep whining about MBS, automine, clumping, and unlmited selection, yet apparently this bothers them? Are you fucking serious?
|
On April 19 2010 11:24 jeremycafe wrote:Show nested quote +On April 19 2010 08:50 Sadistx wrote:
A lot of you seem to define pathfinding as
"I want the computer to move all of my units into perfect positions for their roles and also attack the units which they counter. Also cake." Sorry guys, this isn't a game that plays itself.
The actual pathfinding is leaps and bounds ahead compared to the near retarded BW pathfinding AI.
This has nothing to do with my post. There is a bug in the logic from moving from point a to point b. It simply doesnt always work. Whether or not its the best possible solution doesnt matter. But if I tell a unit to move to a location and it BUGS out, then its flawed. "A lot of YOU" seem to think that a game cant be competitive if it doesn't stick to stone age mechanics and technology.
Well the examples you brought up are:
Immortals get stuck behind units that are firing. That's good for competitive play though, it means you have to micro your units so that you get the most damage done. This prevents everyone from just pressing 1a, as stalkers move faster than immortals and zealots.
Your second example is one of the strengths of forcefield. It needs you to micro units properly or else they will get trapped. Once again, good for competitive play. If the unit simply walks around the forcefield without any trouble, the power of forcefield is reduced greatly.
I fail to see where the unit BUGS out. That would imply that you wouldn't be able to move the unit manually, which you can.
Look, most people (me included) here won't see it your way, simply because this the pathfinding is much better than it was in SC1. I'm gonna take you didn't play brood war on the map medusa, as I can't imagine the trouble on blistering sands if there was still Brood War AI.
|
On April 19 2010 06:50 Liquid`NonY wrote:
Most of the AI complaints I have seen from people are always in the context of interacting with their opponent. As far as I can tell, the AI is pretty damn slick when I'm doing things by myself. But yeah, when I interact with my opponent, shit can get pretty damn inefficient unless I micro. Sounds perfect to me.
Perfect summation of my thoughts. The only real pathfinding issue I've found is Reapers who sometimes don't know they can jump over ledges or something and get stuck when they shouldn't. Pretty annoying when you order a reaper to move across the map and a few seconds later he's at your base humping the wall.
|
On April 19 2010 07:05 BDF92 wrote:Show nested quote +On April 19 2010 06:56 Navi wrote:On April 19 2010 06:52 jeremycafe wrote:On April 19 2010 06:48 Ryuu314 wrote:
No.
Micro.
Need I bring up BW? Sigh. BW pathfinding was not as bad IMO. Units would not twitch back and forth. This is a broken game mechanic, and something that should have been perfected out early in the engine. lol. the infamous dragoon dance? as every other poster has said, these small inefficiencies are what allow for good players to stand out from the rest. If the AI microed our armies for flanks / maximum efficiency attacking, then it would really be, to use the phrase, a "1a2a3a" game. Soon the phrase will become just 1a :p
Considering how many noobs there are in sc2, it's just *box units*a now.
|
ok so if you A-move 2 rows of units toward a hostile wall of buildings, you guys are saying that you want the first row to start attacking, and the second row to bug out?
why shouldn't the 2nd row move to the side to make 1 longer row?
I mean, it's great to have opportunities to micro and all, but this seems like a simple bug. Agree with OP, units sent to a location should go to the location you send them.
|
Honestly, all it takes is ONE or TWO extra clicks to move them, not a-move, into the desired position you want them to attack from. It's really not even that hard of a micro thing...
|
The only really retarded thing I've seen watching streams is that it's apparently impossible to attack rocks with Immortals, that bugs them out about 80% of the time. In fact, the Immortal bugging out looks almost exactly like the Goliath bugging out, come to think of it...
But yeah, just from watching there don't seem to be huge problems?
|
?? I've never had my units 'twitch' when I want them to move forward. If units are shooting, they're effectively in hold position until the target moves, so of course your unit can't pass through it.
Are you saying units should go around your army to reach its target? Why can't you do it yourself?
You're ignoring all the people who are telling you there is a solution: micro the unit yourself, it involves two clicks. Part of the RTS genre is knowing how to position your army and spread it out. If you clump them together against force fields or whatever, its your fault.
|
intrigue
Washington, D.C9935 Posts
in broodwar the ai checked if it could go through something, if not it automatically tried to go around. in sc2 if the way is blocked units will try to squeeze through other ones, and this generally works because friendly units move out of the way when they collide. seems like attack animations take away this fluid property though, as they should (sliding while attacking with marines would be pretty cool, but ridiculous haha). since movement and unit positioning is basically the definition of tactics, i think microing these situations should be left entirely up to the player - i can see making the AI even 'smarter' being actually really annoying, as it'd have to stop some units attacking, make them run around to make room and part, blah blah
as a whole i'm really pretty happy about the AI, the big issues being units prioritizing workers in combat, ground vs broodlord/broodlings, and right click glitching out to attack move instead of move every now and then
|
The unit AI is probably fine from what I've seen but graphically it may be worthwhile for blizzard to do something to prevent unit "twitching" when stuck. In that the unit should obviously know it is moving a negligible distance before turning around repeated times and so the animation of its trying could be stopped to get rid or the "twitching" and when space opens up it would move normally. This would have no effect on micro and would make unit behaviours in some situations look less unprofessional.
|
On April 19 2010 11:49 palanq wrote:
ok so if you A-move 2 rows of units toward a hostile wall of buildings, you guys are saying that you want the first row to start attacking, and the second row to bug out?
why shouldn't the 2nd row move to the side to make 1 longer row?
I mean, it's great to have opportunities to micro and all, but this seems like a simple bug. Agree with OP, units sent to a location should go to the location you send them.
Well this only occurs if there is a narrow choke point, units move to the sides if there is room, attatcking a defended chokepoint should always be advantageous to the defender, so I don't see a problem with this.
|
The real problem is when your units are trigger happy and have this tendency to attack/chase when their not supposed to.
|
Well I dont know hot to tell you this, but here goes...
The reason for all the twitching characters is actually not a flaw, it is part of the game design.
This twitching ability was Dustin Browder`s baby project, he tried to get the twitching unit in previous games he was part of the design team of, but they would not let him.
Now that he is the head designer in SC2 he finnally managed to put a little of himself in the game, hence the twitching characters.
Basically what these twitching characters represent is true understanding and knowledge Dustin has for Starcraft, which is somewhere between 0 and (infinite)0
Let the Twitching BEGIN !!!
|
Here's a programming explanation of perhaps why this "twitching" occurs in SC2.
this glitch is likely due to the "fluidity" of unit movement that has been included in SC2. If, for example (gonna get very technical), you were using Dijkstra's Algorithm to try and get to the nearest enemy unit (or to one you specified), in SC1 you'd be forced to walk AROUND units, regardless of whether they're just standing there, or engaging in battle, and that would be the shortest valid path.
However, SC2 has this very nifty thing where a unit "collides" with a group of units, and they make space, just like how a drop of water isn't a separate object and gets included into the main mass of water. Let's call this "fluidity". Yet during battle, it would be extremely frustrating (and wrong in all sorts of ways) for units to "move" out of the way when they're fighting, just to accommodate your immortals so that they can fight. Therefore, I'm guessing that the twitching is, currently, due to the fact that when units fire, they become "immobile", but when they don't, or perhaps when they kill their intended unit, they become "mobile".
As a result, the AI algorithm (assuming shortest path alg / dijkstra's) probably flickers between what it considers to be the shortest VALID paths to the enemy; when the friendly attacking units in front of it, say, kill the enemy unit they were targeting, they become "mobile", and therefore "fluidity" is engaged; the shortest path for the Immortal to the enemy is now THROUGH those fluid units. However, they immediately switch to another target, and now become "immobile" units; "fluidity" is disengaged, so although the actual shortest path is THROUGH, the shortest VALID path is now a different path, and so the unit will twitch the other way. The cycle repeats itself, and the unit will endlessly twitch back and forth.
I don't know how much of this is valid but I think it's a fair guess at what might be happening.
|
"Some of you" seem to have got it backwards.
BW was not a good game because Dragoons would suddenly stop and require babying to perform simple commands such as move.
Similarly, having whatever unit getting stuck (not even trying to move around the arc of units) when trying to execute a specific attack (say, attack target) is no doubt a flaw in the game mechanics.
My $0.02.
|
On April 19 2010 18:29 Doomgaze wrote:
BW was not a good game because Dragoons would suddenly stop and require babying to perform simple commands such as move.
But they did. And you had to baby them.
And those who could baby them better had a decisive advantage over those who could not.
And that made it a much more competitive, complex (read better) game.
Similarly, having whatever unit getting stuck (not even trying to move around the arc of units) when trying to execute a specific attack (say, attack target) is no doubt a flaw in the game mechanics.
It's not a flaw it's a feature 
|
sc2 ai > sc1 ai
That being said, it still doesn't do everything for you. Why should it?
If you play a FPS game, and the game mechanics auto target units on the screen...would it be as fun/competitive as those which don't? Sure, inexperienced players would enjoy this more because for them, (mis)targeting is what frustrates the lesser experienced players. The more experienced players are at a higher level because they can manually do what needs to be done.
In sc2, if I have an arc of units and new units streaming in, the new units will go around the arc if there is space to do it. If there isn't space, then I do what every RTS veteran knows to do - REPOSITION MANUALLY. The reason sc1 was the greatest RTS ever is because of the "strategy" involved. This includes unit positioning.
|
^LunarC:
So if any or all units would stop moving randomly, the game would be EVEN better, right? :s
Of course I realize that better players will be able to handle "broken" units better, but my point is, the "broken" aspects of certain units should not even exist in the first place.
|
On April 19 2010 08:29 Random() wrote:
It's just that the path won't get auto-recalculated when the force fields are placed. If you order your units to move/attack once more, they will stop poking into it.
What bothers me much more is that there is no way to make units keep formation. E.g. zealots will always insist to get mixed into a blob with the other units even if you manually put them forward before the attack, unless the attack order is issued separately to the zealots and then the other units, and even then they won't stay in a line as you put them but clump together. Same with marines/marauders - marines just won't stay behind.
I would really like to have a basic formation movement function. Actually I like how that was done in Warcraft 3, the group would move as fast as the slowest unit, and the formation was more or less preserved.
That's why you need to hotkey your units under separate hotkeys. Zealots under 1 and Stalkers under 2 for example and then just move them separately. Otherwise they'll just bunch up into an inefficient blob.
|
On April 19 2010 17:56 Wings wrote:
As a result, the AI algorithm (assuming shortest path alg / dijkstra's) probably flickers between what it considers to be the shortest VALID paths to the enemy; when the friendly attacking units in front of it, say, kill the enemy unit they were targeting, they become "mobile", and therefore "fluidity" is engaged; the shortest path for the Immortal to the enemy is now THROUGH those fluid units. However, they immediately switch to another target, and now become "immobile" units; "fluidity" is disengaged, so although the actual shortest path is THROUGH, the shortest VALID path is now a different path, and so the unit will twitch the other way. The cycle repeats itself, and the unit will endlessly twitch back and forth.
I don't know how much of this is valid but I think it's a fair guess at what might be happening.
That sounds completely reasonable to me and as a consequence it should NOT be fixed imo. The AI should not start to anticipate other (friendly) units actions but act/react on the given state of a unit at a point in time. In combat it should be the player who knows the general unit behaviour and issues commands accordingly.
The issues of not moving up a blocked cliff instead and taking advantage of destroyed rocks, even though the player has no knowledge much more disturbing. This definitely needs to be fixed!
|
On April 19 2010 06:52 jeremycafe wrote:Sigh. BW pathfinding was not as bad IMO. Units would not twitch back and forth. This is a broken game mechanic, and something that should have been perfected out early in the engine.
If you actually look closer at it, the "twitching back and fourth" is how the new AI solves the old AI's pathing problems.
Old AI: zergling #1 in front of me stopped? Attacking his target? It's coo, I'll just wait for him to finish before moving forward.
New AI: Zergling #1 in front of me stopped? Attacking his target? Zergling #2 will immediately dart to the left or right without stopping to find an opening.
Zergling #2 in front of me stopped? Attacking his target? Zergling #3 will immediately dart to the left or right without stopping to find an opening.
...repeat...
zergling #10 in front of me stopped? Attacking his target? Zergling #11 will immediately dart to the left or right without stopping to find an opening. No opening? That's fine, keep darting back and fourth until one presents itself and immediately jump in.
I'm like over 9000% sure that the new AI has a better algorithm. Classic example is a zealot ramp block. It's a million times easier now to engage because I don't have to round up the stray zerglings trying to run back across the map for a path that doesnt exist.
|
iNfeRnaL
Germany1908 Posts
Why you make such a big deal out of this when everything has been said perfectly on the first page?
On April 19 2010 06:50 Liquid`NonY wrote:
Most of the AI complaints I have seen from people are always in the context of interacting with their opponent. As far as I can tell, the AI is pretty damn slick when I'm doing things by myself. But yeah, when I interact with my opponent, shit can get pretty damn inefficient unless I micro. Sounds perfect to me.
/thread
|
On April 19 2010 19:17 iNfeRnaL wrote:Why you make such a big deal out of this when everything has been said perfectly on the first page? Show nested quote +On April 19 2010 06:50 Liquid`NonY wrote:
Most of the AI complaints I have seen from people are always in the context of interacting with their opponent. As far as I can tell, the AI is pretty damn slick when I'm doing things by myself. But yeah, when I interact with my opponent, shit can get pretty damn inefficient unless I micro. Sounds perfect to me. /thread
if im not mistaken infernal appears to have found the answer to the question
|
I noticed this and I was like 'fuck yeah, Dragoons are still in the game!'
I like this, now you can't just a-move!
|
On April 19 2010 06:51 DrGabriel wrote:
For reals, did you play BW at all? Or did i just get trolled?
So you're about the 3'rd person to say this on the first page of replies.
What you're essentially saying here is that we want a bug to remain in the game so it stays true to the original? ...
If I right click on a unit, it should go to the unit, I don't want 1990's pathing, I don't mind if my other 4 Stalkers don't step out of the way to let the Immortal through but to have the Immortal go back forth in a bug loop is ridiculous.
|
yeah, they should make units randomly stop moving or attacking so newbies cannot 1a2a3a and sc2 will be much more fun, skill intensive and require more micro than bw.
(its sarcasm btw)
|
On April 19 2010 19:07 Doomgaze wrote:
So if any or all units would stop moving randomly, the game would be EVEN better, right? :s
Of course I realize that better players will be able to handle "broken" units better, but my point is, the "broken" aspects of certain units should not even exist in the first place.
Well, I think that's kind of an exaggeration of the issue. People that approve of the current pathing are not saying things like "the game would be better if you could only select and control one unit at a time because it raises the skill ceiling." They're saying that there needs to be a balance between what the AI does for you and what you as a player have to do to obtain maximum effectiveness of your units.
I think Nony's quote sums it up the best, so far. When out of combat, the pathfinding of the units is nearly flawless. You don't have to fight with yourself to get your units to behave. Once you engage in conflict with an opponent, things get a little more complicated and you'll have to issue tactical commands to get the most out of your army. However, if you don't issue those tactical commands, your army is still operating reasonably well.
It's not like units are randomly walking backwards across the map when they can't find a target (and I don't think very many players here would advocate a pathfinding system that causes their units to randomly walk backwards across the map). Units just don't function *perfectly* in combat without manual manipulation, which is desirable.
|
I honestly don't see how this is still an argument in any way. The new AI pathing is retardedly stronger than its predecessor. Sure, there are some design choices about building attacking prioritization that I would have done differently myself, but design-wise, its a million times better than BW.
Micro will always be involved, though. The AI can't do EVERYTHING for you. Has nothing to do with a "retarded AI," a player should still need to intervene.
|
I stepped out of this thread because it was never an actual debate about whether or not the pathfinding was working as intended or if it is bugged.
Everyone here jumped on the "your a noob, learn to micro" bandwagon. Just because players learned to adapt to a BUGGY unit in sc1 doesnt justify buggy pathfinding in sc2.
What I don't understand is how you all honestly think correctly working pathfinding is going to make one player any better than he was before. Or that MBS or automine is somehow going to increase the level of play from a player. Get real, the time you are no longer spending to do those actions will be spent elsewhere. You will still be making better decisions, more controlled movements, etc.
There really isnt any debate here. Most agree its buggy, but try to sound "leet" by saying its not an issue. The unit collision feature is causing the pathfinding to act buggy. Bottom line, its not acceptable in games these days. Pathfinding is a perfected technology. Games should be moving forward, not backwards.
I agree with the one post about just making all the units stop randomly. A bug is a bug, how well players adapt to it should not determine if its fixed. Nor does it change the gap between skill levels.
|
Took me quite a while back when i played bw to get dragoons to not be completely retarded and just fight in an orderly fashion, i don't want to do that again :D
The programming explanation is not bad, i thought they had a very simple greedy type algoritm so maybe replacing it with an A* or just adding more depth to the search would make it better. With so many units, the pathfinding needs to stay simple to not lag out the cpu i guess, so A* would be hard to get. If it's the fluidity going back and forth it's an easy fix, i hope you guessed right.
|
On April 20 2010 04:45 jeremycafe wrote:
I agree with the one post about just making all the units stop randomly. A bug is a bug, how well players adapt to it should not determine if its fixed. Nor does it change the gap between skill levels.
Well, again, this is just going a little overboard. You asked in the OP whether we agree that there is a problem with pathfinding. The general response you received is "no, we do not find the pathfinding to be hindering gameplay." Your response above is akin to saying, "Well, how about the designers implement bugs that make the game unplayable. Then you'll see that I'm right." That's a totally different situation. If the pathfinding were hindering gameplay, we'd be right there with you. But that's not the case.
So far, the current pathfinding works perfectly fine outside of combat and provides interesting competitive gameplay during combat. So what exactly is your complaint?
If it's just that the units are "twitchy," then remember that it's still a Beta and some of those jittery animations may be worked out before release. If you really feel that there is a gameplay problem, then spell it out.
On April 20 2010 04:45 jeremycafe wrote:
What I don't understand is how you all honestly think correctly working pathfinding is going to make one player any better than he was before. Or that MBS or automine is somehow going to increase the level of play from a player. Get real, the time you are no longer spending to do those actions will be spent elsewhere. You will still be making better decisions, more controlled movements, etc.
MBS and automine aren't really being argued here. Yes, there was concern over those, but blizzard implemented other, more meaningful, macro mechanics such as Mule, Chronoboost, and spawn larva to fill in the gap. Generally, there have been favorable responses to those mechanics.
If you're arguing that all units should move in perfect formation, forcing their way past other units to a position from which they can attack, then you're going to meet resistance. It would reduce the complexity of unit control in Starcraft. I don't know how that's arguable.
If you're only arguing that a unit blocked by other units should try to move AROUND those units instead of waiting patiently behind those units, then you may have a reasonable request - but it's tough in a fast paced game like Starcraft where there are high volumes of quick moving fragile units engaged in dynamic combat scenarios. Generally, players want to maintain as much control over their units as possible and having them wander out of position while looking for an opening may be less advantageous than having them wait nearby while manually moving other units out of the way.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
