Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Topics - Xilmi

Pages: [1] 2 3
1
OXCE Bugs / Exploitable bug in TileEngine::unitOpensDoor
« on: April 13, 2024, 01:45:51 pm »
This issue was brought up to me by the streamer https://www.twitch.tv/dasrifftierchen

And since I could reproduce it in regular OXCE and not just my fork, I thought I better bring it up here.

The bug works as follows:

When a unit with reserved time-units tries to right-click-open a door while doing so would exceed the reserved time-units, the door will still get opened.
However, the time-units will not be spent, the vision will not be updated and the door-opening-sound will not be played.

This is because in TileEngine::unitOpensDoor the function tile->openDoor is called before _save->getBattleGame()->checkReservedTU.

I think TileEngine::unitOpensDoor needs a bit of restructuring to fix this issue.

I attached a screenshot and a save with the situation prepared for testing.

2
Brutal AI / Spotters are exploitable
« on: January 30, 2024, 02:17:46 pm »
Yesterday I had the case where the AI positioned units in a suicidal position.
The incident was related to the "new" spotter-feature. The problem was that the entire logic for the spotter was based on the position of where my unit had last been spotted and not where it could have gone in the meantime. In this case I accidentally found this flaw but after seeing in what situation that can happen, I realized how exploitable it is.

With the recent fix of line-of-sight-checking and another fix related to caching and auto-play, which made the AI play worse in auto-play than when playing against the player it does a much better job when playing without spotters.

I think I can remove the spotter-mechanic without regression. In one of my benchmarks there even was an improvement to losing only 1 sectoid to friendly-fire and none to X-Com.

I have to do some play-testing of what it feels like to play against then and whether this creates new weaknesses.

3
Having these filters to only show options depending on what fork they were added has its advantages but I guess at least some people don't really care what fork an option is from and just want them all at once.

I think especially with the hotkeys it would be easier to avoid weird effects/duplicates if the menu wasn't force-filtered by fork.

This was first asked here:

https://openxcom.org/forum/index.php/topic,11659.msg161331.html#msg161331

I thought before I mess around with this myself and risk further difficult merge-procedures, I'd ask here first.

4
Brutal AI / Videos
« on: January 14, 2024, 01:21:37 am »
If anyone has recorded or found recordings of other's who played Brutal-OXCE, feel free to share videos in this threat.

I'll begin myself with a Terror-mission:


5
OXCE Bugs FIXED / [FIXED] X-Com-Files doesn't run on 7.10.3
« on: January 02, 2024, 06:59:37 pm »
7.10.3 now doesn't run with XCF due to "/OpenXcom/mods/XComFiles/Ruleset/alienRaces_XCOMFILES.rul: Error for 'STR_MIB': Obsolete (to removed after year 2024) operation use of property 'retaliationMission' at line 472"

Reads like it was a scheduled removal of backwards compatibility that modders maybe were warned about.

Okay... it doesn't even seem to be related to the changes in 7.10.3.

There's actually code in Mod.cpp that says: "If the year is 2024 and I still find node["retaliationMission"], I'll throw an error! Sick!

Ah, it doesn't use the actual year, hence nobody else noticed. It uses the year in version.h, which reached 2024 in 7.10.3 for the first time.

I guess I could "fix" it by increasing the year that it checks against... But I'd still like to know who would think that having a hard-coded-expiration-date for backwards-compatibility of mods is a good idea. Like in what scenario would "it doesn't work anymore because of this arbirtrary reason" be preferable to "it still works" ?

6
OXCE Bugs FIXED / [FIXED] X-Piratez doesn't run on 7.10.1
« on: December 28, 2023, 10:45:09 pm »
On 7.9.19 it still worked fine. On 7.10.1 I get:

Error for 'STR_AIRBUS': Default HWP capacity cannot be negative.
Error for 'STR_AIRBUS_STANDARD': Default HWP capacity cannot be negative.
Error for 'STR_AIRCAR': Default HWP capacity cannot be negative.
Error for 'STR_AIRSPEEDER': Default HWP capacity cannot be negative.
Error for 'STR_AIRTRUCK': Default HWP capacity cannot be negative.
Error for 'STR_AIRVAN': Default HWP capacity cannot be negative.
Error for 'STR_AVENGER': Default HWP capacity cannot be negative.
Error for 'STR_BATTLE_TAXI': Default HWP capacity cannot be negative.
Error for 'STR_BIGENTRY': Default HWP capacity cannot be negative.
Error for 'STR_BIG_BIRD': Default HWP capacity cannot be negative.
Error for 'STR_BIKES': Default HWP capacity cannot be negative.
Error for 'STR_BRIG': Default HWP capacity cannot be negative.
Error for 'STR_BUCKAROO': Default HWP capacity cannot be negative.
Error for 'STR_CADILLAC': Default HWP capacity cannot be negative.
Error for 'STR_CAVES_DROP_ENTRY': Default HWP capacity cannot be negative.
Error for 'STR_CHARIOT': Default HWP capacity cannot be negative.
Error for 'STR_CHURCH_ENTRY': Default HWP capacity cannot be negative.
Error for 'STR_CONVOY': Default HWP capacity cannot be negative.
Error for 'STR_DELOREAN': Default HWP capacity cannot be negative.
Error for 'STR_DELOREAN2': Default HWP capacity cannot be negative.
Error for 'STR_DEVASTATOR': Default HWP capacity cannot be negative.
Error for 'STR_DRAKKAR': Default HWP capacity cannot be negative.
Error for 'STR_DROPSHIP': Default HWP capacity cannot be negative.
Error for 'STR_EXPEDITION': Default HWP capacity cannot be negative.
Error for 'STR_FATSUB': Default HWP capacity cannot be negative.
Error for 'STR_FAUST': Default HWP capacity cannot be negative.
Error for 'STR_FIREFOX': Default HWP capacity cannot be negative.
Error for 'STR_FIRESTORM': Default HWP capacity cannot be negative.
Error for 'STR_FORTUNA': Default HWP capacity cannot be negative.
Error for 'STR_FUEGO': Default HWP capacity cannot be negative.

Didn't try 7.10.0.

Seems like the "NEW Soldiers and vehicles as modifiable craft stats"-commit could be responsible for it.

With "oxceModValidationLevel: 0" it does work.
I guess it's more of a mod-issue then and the mod needs to be adjusted in order to properly work with OXCE 7.10.1.

7
Brutal AI / Changelog
« on: December 22, 2023, 01:41:06 pm »
All changes that have been made over time can be found here:

https://github.com/Xilmi/OpenXcom/releases

8
Brutal AI / Brutal-OXCE 8.3.4
« on: December 17, 2023, 01:08:15 pm »
I think my AI-mod is now complete enough for me to consider it releaseable.

The current version can always be found here: https://github.com/Xilmi/OpenXcom/releases

This mod is forked from OXCE and provides a few new options both for modders as well as for players themselves.
All the while being compatible with every mod that is also compatible with OXCE.

Installation-guide:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fV4VGWHe5zg

As the name suggests, the new options are primarily centered around AI and in particular about making the AI more difficult to beat.

There's one non-optional-change to how manufacturing works:

An item in the workshop-queue will only use workshop-space when either at least one engineer is assigned to it or production has already been started. This allows you to queue a lot of items to produce one after the other without granting any advantage to parallel production.

Here's a list of all the new options and what they do:

Geoscape:

"Aggressive retaliation" => This option existed before but was slightly modified. In addition to it's previous functionality of allowing all UFOs to potentially discover a base, it changes the behaviour of UFOs on a retaliation mission in a way that instead of searching the base near pre-programmed areas in a big area around the actual position of the base. This fixes an issue that allowed for better or worse to almost completely avoid base-defense-missions when putting bases in certain locations that weren't anywhere near the search-areas of the corresponding region. The radius of the area being searched is approximately 2670 km.

"Enhanced dogfight behaviour" => When enabled, as soon as you start shooting the UFO, you can only use max-distance or retreat when your craft is actually faster than the UFO. Otherwise the UFO will try to keep you within it weapon-range. The main impact this has, is that you can no longer kill every UFO as soon as you unlock the plasma-craft-gun or other weapons that outrange-the UFO with standard interceptors. You either need to bring several to deal enough damage until it gets in range of their own weapons or need faster craft.

"Hidden alien activity notification" => Shows sectors with 5+ hours of continuous undetected UFO activity.

Battlescape:

"Realistic accuracy and cover system" => Feature developed by Joy Narical and merged into Brutal-OXCE. Find the full documentation here: https://github.com/narical/openxcom-accuracy

"One-click grenade priming" => When enabled has the following effect: "You can no longer select the amount of turns after which grenades shall explode. The timer will just be set to 0 without having to pick a value."

AI:

"Brutal-AI" => This is the name-giving core-feature of this Mod. It includes an almost complete rework of how the AI determines what to do. All enemies can see and attack what anyone on their team sees. Not only that, they can even change the order in which they operate, so that for example a spotter will wait for other aliens to act first before it decides to continue looking for enemies or to hide again. It will generally try to maximize damage-output when attacking and is very capable with using grenades. A lot of bugs in the basic AI are fixed with enabled brutal-AI. (For example arcing-shot-prediction-bug) Those bugs were deliberately not fixed in the base-AI to keep it behaving exactly as it is. An exception are bugs in the "pick up items"-code, as that's also optional for base-AI.

"Brutal AI for neutral forces" => If a map features a third faction, you can let them be controlled by Brutal-AI too. If it's civilians all that'll do is make them hide a little better. If it's Space-Marines they now may actually prove worthy allies.

"Allow AI to use explosives on turn one" => Ignores all turn-delays for items that may be set in mods. By default only blaster-launcher and grenades are concerned. But it would also overrule other turn-limits.

"Bug hunt mode for Brutal AI" => Since the basic-AI also is cheating, Brutal-AI does so as well by default. This option allows to disable AI-cheating and makes a massive difference in perceived difficulty. When enabled the AI knows where all of your units are all of the time. But it only uses this knowledge for movement-purposes. It will not shoot at your units without first revealing them. It will, however, take this information into account when deciding where to move. Disabling this means the AI has no clue where your units are and will start randomly scouting the map until it sees one. When it sees one temporarily that then moves out of vision, unlike the base-AI it will not know where it went, only where it was. It will then either check or fire at this position and then consider the unit it saw there gone. It will also update that knowledge once it sees the unit somewhere else.

"Allow Brutal-AI to pre-prime grenades" => Isolated AI-units that have nothing to attack will prime their grenades to then be able to use it later for a much lower TU-cost compared to only priming it when it has a target for it.

"Brutal AI avoids proximity-grenades" => If enabled units controlled by Brutal AI will recognize when there is a proximity-grenade on their path and avoid stepping on it. Not working for units with maximum aggressiveness.

"Spread out" => Units controlled by AI will deliberately avoid standing too close to each other in order to reduce the impact of explosives.

"Performance optimisation for huge maps" => Normally the AI will pathfind for the entire map and also remember line-of-fire and vision for all it's units in the entire map's range. Now this will be toned down when the amount of tiles on the map times the amount of enemies exceeds that of a 60x60x4 with 30 enemies. With this option massive maps like 120x120x10 with 115 enemies become kinda playable again.

"Targeting behaviour for Brutal AI" => There's 4 different behaviours which kinda act as a difficulty-level the default is 3.
1 => As for the base-AI, the AI-units can only attack what they can see themselves.
2 => AI units can also attack whatever any of their friends see.
3 => AI units will remember locations of player-units they've become aware of and use blaster-launcher-weapons against them.
4 => The AI goes into hard-core-maphack-mode and can now attack everything it has a line-of-fire to without the need for vision. It is completely ridiculous and I don't really recommend using this.

"Aggressiveness-mode" => This replaces the old "Inherit aggression"-toggle and has a total of three options for now:
0> Baseline Aggressivness.
1> Multiplied with unit-aggression.
2> Multiplied with unit-aggression and take Leeroy-flag into account.

"Intelligence-mode"
0> Static intelligence.
1> Inherit intelligence from unit-intelligence
2> Inherit intelligence from difficulty-level.

"Automated combat" => Hands the control of even your own units to the AI. Warning: That's a bit experimental and might not produce the results you desire. Can be toggled on and off during your turn in Battlescape by pressing ctrl+a.

"Sneaky AI" => This was not changed in how it works. It prefers going longer paths over paths that are visible to the enemy. It was just move to this new category because it fits here.

Extended:

"Fog of war" => When enabled any tile that was previously visible to the player but currently isn't will now be drawn in the selected fog of war color.

"Select fog of war colour" => Values from 1 to 15, each representing a different shade colour. Hint: 1 and 6 look good.

"Smart ctrl-click and auto-equip" => Ctrl-clicking items in the loadout-phase will prefer slots that are faster to reach. The off-hand will be deprioritized if the main-hand holds a two-handed item. Auto-equip uses the same logic.

Features for Modders:

All the features for brutal-AI can also be enabled separately while the player themselves has disabled them. This way modders can customize the experience as they with for their players.

The files to edit for that is "units.rul"
You can add the following:
"isBrutal" (true/false)
"isCheatOnMovement" (true/false) (equivalent to omniscience for brutal-AI)
"aiTargetMode" (equivalent to Targeting behaviour for Brutal AI)

Note: If "Inherit unit-aggression" is enabled, the Aggression-stat of the unit will be used. However, if the aggression-stat is 3 and above, it will map to Aggressiveness 3. The maximum aggression via inheritance can only be achieved with the LeeroyFlag. This is because in some mods a lot of units use aggression-values of up to 8, which otherwise would all map to a pretty bad and non-competitive behaviour.

If both the mod and the player use brutal-AI-options but they differ, the higher one will be used. For example: You set "Brutal AI" enabled with "Omniscience" and target-Mode 2 and the Mod has it enabled but no omniscience but target mode 3, the unit will use target-mode 3 and omniscience.

If asked to describe how using this mod with default-settings (ignore-grenade-timer/brutal/omni/preprime/3) increases difficulty, I'd say when we quantify difficulty with the kill:death-ratio for soldiers, I'd say it's about 5 times more difficult. Especially early-on with basic gear and especially when the enemies have access to explosives.

If you want to combine this with other mods that increase difficulty, I recommend to tone it down and maybe use the non-cheating-variant and fire-mode 2. Unless, of course, you are ready to suffer or really, really good at this game.

Major Milestones:

2.0.0: Movement-logic completely rewritten to be much more efficient and comprehensible.
3.0.0: Inclusion of auto-play, allowing the possibility for player-controlled-units to be controlled by the AI.
4.0.0: Consideration of all possible attack-options of all equipped weapons. Including walking closer to increase accuracy or use melee-weapons.
5.0.0: Prediction of enemy-movement and taking it into account for decision-making.
6.0.0: Using a heat-map to quantify danger and being aware of potential support from allies when deciding how brave to be.
7.0.0: The AI is now capable of weighing self-preservation against attacking making it less likely for them to end their turn exposed when decent cover is nearby.
8.0.0: 64 bit executable, the AI can now determine to use a dedicated spotter.

9
Brutal AI / Anyone succeeded to build a 64bit-version for windows?
« on: December 16, 2023, 11:09:50 pm »
I only find guides for the 32-bit-version which includes a step: "Download and extract the pre-compiled dependencies (into repo's root): openxcom-deps-win-vc2017-newest.zip"

This only includes pre-compiled dependencies for the 32-bit-version.

Apparently the 64-bit-version of OXCE for windows isn't even build under windows.

Has anyone done it anyways? Maybe by compiling the dependencies manually?

I'm getting reports that the 32-bit-version has issues with mega-mods as it can run out of memory and crash. So I'd like to upgrade to 64 bit.

10
The X-Com Files / Speedislife's XCF-run with Brutal-AI
« on: May 15, 2023, 12:44:59 pm »
Over the past week a Twitch-streamer called "Speedislife" was streaming X-Com Files with Brutal-AI on Superhuman Ironman.

It was a really fun journey to watch until he decided to restart in August 1998. After that first restart he did it over and over whenever something remotely bad happened and almost every time I tuned in it was a new run. I think he now stopped doing it at all.

His reasoning for the first restart was that he was too far behind in progress of what he thought he was supposed to have by that point. As someone with extremely limited experiece with XCF I cannot really judge it.

I personally wish he had played it out until the bad things he expected to happen actually would happen.

The last two things that happened in the run was that he did a Manor, which he won with 4 out of 16 people still alive at the end, 3 of which badly wounded. Really close and thus exciting to watch.

After that a UFO was shot down in the military and he already anounced that he would be too weak to even attempt it and did so anyways. He played uncharacteristically sloppy and got wiped. Almost looked like he wanted to provoke this to happen to make a point.

One thing I noticed being quite different to vanilla-X-Com is the huge discrepancy between Rookies and people that have been in service for a while. It seems like the stats go up way more quickly and also reach significantly higher values. So having to replace 20 veterans with rookies is a massive reduction in overall combat-strength. Another big difference was that the ratio of health to damage was so that most hits resulted in injuries rather than death, meaning that agents often could be saved. And of course that a lot of missions were quantity over quality. Basically tons of weak enemy units, sometimes a few decent ones sprinkled in.

During the time he streamed it, I also made 2 AI-modifications to things I noticed. I think the prior absence of these made the first attempt quite a bit easier compared to the later ones. It was about the behavior of enemies with short-range-weapons, of which there are plenty. They used to use the same peaking-logic as those with long-range-weapons often resulting in dying to reaction-fire with no way to fight back. After the modifications they'd only peak towards locations where they wouldn't expect the enemy yet. This means you'd have to come closer to them and get into their effective range.

I'm not sure whether the mission against the aliens was representative of what to expect a few more months down the line. If so, I can understand it. It looked similar to how my TFTD-attempts against Brutal-AI go. What I also wonder is how much more powerful he could theoretically have gotten before 1999.

I learned a lot about how to approach this mod and should probably give it a serious try too. You need to obtain a lot of knowledge of when and with what kind of gear/stats what kinds of missions are doable. The toughest part I imagine is investing a lot of time into the run before noticing it's actually not salvageable. But that also probably makes it more emotionally engaging.

11
I wanted to set up a rather specific test-battle in XCF.
One that is like the "Strange Lifeforms"-missions where you spawn in a biome of your choice with your craft, no enemy crafts or buildings and then just a whole lot of the creatures of my choice.

I was looking at the super excessive-list of mission-types but couldn't find the one that is like this.

Can anyone tell me what I should be looking for in the mission-type list?

12
Brutal AI / Inconsistency between tile- and unit-visibility
« on: May 12, 2023, 09:11:53 am »
I'm curious what other people think about the discrepancy between unit-visibility and tile-visibility. I just watched a stream where the streamer was fighting spiders in a jungle. The spiders would hide in the shadows and weren't really visible to the player. But they were visible to his units and he could aim at them.

It was a lot of aiming into the dark to be able to shoot them.

I did some research and found out that tile-visibility is determined by the "Stop_LOS"-flag in MCD-file of the object. Whereas unit-visibility is determined by an actual 3D-voxel-check.

A lot of the trees in the jungle have the Stop_LOS-flag set and should be vision-blocking while their LOFTs (3D-Voxel model) are usually quite a bit thinner than the tile.

So I was wondering whether it shouldn't be a requirement for units to see each other that the tile they are residing on is also visible.

13
Note, almost everything I'll write about here spoils the following video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T0Ydl82-0JU

So if you are curious on seeing how someone fares with the odds stacked up against them, like this without being spoiled, watch the video first.

Spoiler:
Here's my conclusion: The game has an issue with reverse-difficulty-scaling and Brutal-AI just exacerbates this issue.
Surviving the first two months with it showed to be extremely difficult. It required a lot of skill, dedication and even a bit of luck.
The first goal is to extend the X-Com-project by not dropping too low in score twice in a row while getting what's necessary to get you to the mid-game.
In TFTD this means Ion-Armor. Ion-Armor made it so, that small-ufo-missions against non-lobsters became kinda trivial and secured a relatively stable income of score and stuff to sell while still looking a bit challenging. He tried to do a medium-landing site once but it was still too hard.
His new goal was Molecular-control. The ingredient necessary was a life Tasoth. He encountered them first on a cruise-ship-mission. And he got exactly what he came for. No chance to beat the mission but getting one life Tasoth was doable.
He didn't need to do anything difficult to stay afloat while getting his psi-training-facilities up and training his soldiers. All the score came from small subs. Bigger subs were ignored and terror-missions were just retreated from.
Molecular-control changed everything. Once he had a few decent psi-soldiers, it turned the game into a meme-fest and trivialized everything he did after that. The AI stopped mattering at that point. If they don't have control over their own units anymore, it makes no difference whether they would have acted smartly or not. He could beat a large lobsterman-sub fielding the nastiest of weapons without any losses. There's quite a lot of stuff to do to finish the game but I have a hard time imagining that anything could happen that could still stop him or even provide a reasonable challenge.

Sure, there were a few bloopers from the AI that he capitalized on and allowed him to get into this position. Most prominently the interaction of "There's 1 alien without a weapon spawned on Terror-Missions all the time" and "Brutal-AI will now try to pick up any weapon it can and is not limited how far it will go for this." This made getting the living Tasoth exceptionally easy as it was basically delivering itself for a juicy weapon he put out as a lure. Fixing the loadouts or changing the AI not to want to walk into danger they'd otherwise avoid to get one would have made it more difficult.

But I feel that any further improvements of the AI just make the discrepancy between extremely difficult early-game and mind-numbingly-easy mind-control late-game even bigger.

I'm now thinking of making a mod that turns the psi-item into something that just gives you a passive bonus to the stats that make mind-controlling you more difficult instead of giving that super-OP-ability to yourself.

14
Brutal AI / Found a bug in Pathfinding::isBlockedDirection
« on: March 11, 2023, 06:35:40 pm »
When trying to implement a cover-evaluation-check for my AI I stumbled across an inconsistency in Pathfinding::isBlockedDirection.
For the even directions, north, east, south and west there was only a check on whether the north- and west-wall are blocked. But not for the "Bigwall".

It seemed to not have terribly much impact on anything but my AI's method.

I played several missions of regular UFO with it and then switched to TFTD.

And alas: I realized: I can't climb on the Triton anymore!

Not being able to climb on the Triton was OG behaviour! Adding these extra checks in isBlockedDirection results in the same behaviour.

The lines I added to achieve this are the ones about the O_BIGWALLs in the following code:

Code: [Select]
case 0: // north
if (isBlocked(unit, startTile, O_NORTHWALL, bam, missileTarget)) return true;
if (isBlocked(unit, _save->getTile(currentPosition + oneTileNorth), O_BIGWALL, bam, missileTarget, BIGWALLSOUTH)) return true;
break;
@ -882,6 +883,7 @@ bool Pathfinding::isBlockedDirection(const BattleUnit *unit, Tile *startTile, co
break;
case 2: // east
if (isBlocked(unit, _save->getTile(currentPosition + oneTileEast), O_WESTWALL, bam, missileTarget)) return true;
if (isBlocked(unit, _save->getTile(currentPosition + oneTileEast), O_BIGWALL, bam, missileTarget, BIGWALLWEST)) return true;
break;
@ -893,6 +895,7 @@ bool Pathfinding::isBlockedDirection(const BattleUnit *unit, Tile *startTile, co
break;
case 4: // south
if (isBlocked(unit, _save->getTile(currentPosition + oneTileSouth), O_NORTHWALL, bam, missileTarget)) return true;
if (isBlocked(unit, _save->getTile(currentPosition + oneTileSouth), O_BIGWALL, bam, missileTarget, BIGWALLNORTH)) return true;
break;
@ -904,6 +907,7 @@ bool Pathfinding::isBlockedDirection(const BattleUnit *unit, Tile *startTile, co
break;
case 6: // west
if (isBlocked(unit, startTile, O_WESTWALL, bam, missileTarget)) return true;
if (isBlocked(unit, _save->getTile(currentPosition + oneTileWest), O_BIGWALL, bam, missileTarget, BIGWALLEAST)) return true;

15
Brutal AI / Modders, Players, Overchoice. How to best deal with it?
« on: March 10, 2023, 02:22:36 pm »
I'm seeing some rather contradictory opinions on how configurable a feature should be depending on who you ask.

In the case of my Brutal-AI, I'm seeing modders, who want to have as much control over the feature as they possibly can and seem to not only want to be able to tweak any possible parameter about it but also ask for even more of them.

On the other hand I'm watching players who seem a bit overwhelmed by the options that already exist because it is not clear what kind of experience to expect.

What I've been pondering is whether instead of having 5 different options that all impact the AI's behavior, to simply condense the likely chosen option-combinations into difficulty-levels. There I could focus more on the experience they are going to provide instead of what it means from a technical perspective.

Of course this would drastically reduce the amount of possible combinations. But considering the phenomenon of "overchoice", that can also be a good thing. I think someone who had a bad experience with the current default-configuration might be much more likely to "lower the difficulty-level" instead of reading through and understanding how which option could impact the gameplay in a way might be more suitable to them.

So for those who know about Brutal-OXCE, to make the question less meta and more exemplary, here's what I have in mind:

Instead of having:
"Targetting Mode for Brutal-AI" (TM, 1-4)
"Allow AI to preprime grenades" (PG, bool)
"Allow AI to ignore item-use-turn-limits" (ITL, bool)
"Omnicience for Brutal AI" (OMNI, bool)
"Charge Mode for Brutal-AI" (CM, 0-2)

Right now that's 2x2x2x4x3 = 96 possible configuration-combinations.

I'd instead do something like this:

AI-Difficulty with meaning using the abbreviations I just introduced:

1 = TM 1
2 = TM 3
3 = TM 3, PG, ITL
4 = TM 3, PG, ITL, OMNI
5 = TM 4, PG, ITL, OMNI

Charge mode as global option would be removed completely and instead just always adhere to the Leeroy-flag. Same for TM 2 as it's difference to TM 3 doesn't justify it's separate existence anymore.

Do you think anyone would miss a now possible combination or do you think it would be more accessible and thus motivating to try and find the personal sweet-spot among this massively reduced amount of possible combinations?

Pages: [1] 2 3