[SOURCEMOD] Brutal-OXCE 7.12.1

[Xilmi]

It is not very clear for me why you want to make your AI worse?

Not "make it worse", add options to gradually nerf it in the context of making mods that are otherwise too difficult winnable again.

I added an option recently that can use the unit's intelligence to determine a chance ot the AI rolling to make a completely random move instead of what it otherwise would like to do.

But when I'm getting reports of dumb AI-behavior, which by testing myself I can determine having been caused by using this lower-intelligence-option, this is distracting from valid concerns about AI-mistakes it.

The fewer options there are to mess with, the more I can be sure that reported issues are valid and not the result of setting the option to something that deliberately produces sub-optimal play.

Edit: Have you received my E-Mail answering yours in regards to granting rights for a pull-request?

[0xEBJC]

Edit 2: Even with the fixed formula, there still doesn't seem to be any chance to hit the Swarmoids.

I have hit swarmoids before with melee, but I forget how, thinking it was because the agent was enhanced with transformations, using a better armor like the synthsuit and probably using something like the electric club which does a calculation based off reaction for hit bonus.

Anyway, thanks for looking into this, I thought there was something more systemic possibly wrong with the AI which is why I pointed it out, didn't  know the AI calculates the hit change before determining to take a swing.

[Xilmi]

I thought there was something more systemic possibly wrong with the AI which is why I pointed it out, didn't  know the AI calculates the hit change before determining to take a swing.

Well, I'd say this behavior still hints to something systemic being wrong with the AI.
Their positioning-code still thinks it can attack them with melee and tries to reposition to do it.
The question is how this should be handled. I see 2 possibilities.

One is to teach the positioning-code about the hit-chance-reduction too, so it doesn't even try.
The other is to ignore the circumstance that they can't hit by internally limiting what they think the dodge chance reduces their accuracy too.

With armor-mitigation the AI does attack anyways, even if it calculates that their attacks will be fully mitigated by the armor.

So should they attack anyways or should they not even try and do something else instead?

[Abyss]

Some time ago you were asking for the AI to randomly make bad moves and now you are asking for them to plan ahead several turns at once.
I'm actually tempted now to remove the random-mistakes-feature again and instead look into planning ahead. I actually have an idea for something like that. Right now the "communication" of the AI-units is limited to sharing vision. What they lack is the ability to plan a coordianted push.

Hi, Xilmi!
Yep. I forgetting that some moves are random. Please forgive me not counting this while making suggestions. Actually, what you have done with weighted randomization and "mistakes" should be considered as fun feature and difficulty reduction. Not to be confused with overall strategy. Please don't disable this feature, it's so cool and fun, and makes game beatable again, yet still very intriguing.

The following text is total mess of thoughts:
- I brought you the save of Church of Dagon HQ assault (jungle castle), which spawned super-lucky.
It's sort of open terrain mission vs 100 enemies.
During a XCF campaign this mission appears again and again, until you terminate the fraction overall. HQ assaults always appear at the beginning of the month, in case you want to test different layouts.
I assaulted Church of Dagon HQ's three times already this campaign, and 2/3 times craft spawned next to castle, making fight more dense. A line of snipers covered under Osprey and reaction-fire+shots turn by turn is usual strategy for this mission.   
- I didn't bring you yet the different mission: Black Lotus HQ, which has underground & many doors layout with same 100 enemies. All different from that CoD castle mission. It's is fairly tough with same-armor agents even if 60% bad moves enabled, because enemy always spawns close and good at melee. This type of missions also the reason why players were against option "AI avoids proximity grenades". Because it was tough even with vanilla AI. This time I wait till some better armors will be available to do it.
- Not pleading for balancing these, because it's BAI feature! What was easy -becomes harder. It's cool.
But when: what was hard - becomes easier - it should be considered for tuning.
- So this all about particular usefulness of smart melee units on open terrain. While ranged units can perform either basic defense and offense, melee units lack defense opportunity. So they are kind of pointless there while running around from cover to cover, except being sort of "distraction" targets, until they approach to attack positions. I noticed that on static Aggro2 they tend to keep same distance. Same time, - I didn't test inherited aggressiveness option with 7.12.1 yet. So it may be that whole thing I write here is pointless. But also, I don't know if aggressiveness levels in VAI and BAI are comparable. In particular it may be that Aggro4 of VAI should be compared to Aggro2 of BAI, not 4. I don't know. Yet, one more thing keeps me from enabling this option: if some bosses will rush for me, while major of troops will cover - it will disbalance the game (make it easier and abusier). So, static aggressiveness right now. 

- Other issue with current state of players suggestions, is that AI will behave different on different options enabled. So each report will be different. And there would be no similarity, until everyone plays on same Aggressiveness and with similar options. Which are most preferred? Somehow believe, that lvl 0 and 1 are not as popular as 2 & 3.

- One thing, though IMHO, still lacks: a feature to roll for aggressiveness prior a mission. +/- 1 to taken option will lead to even more random experience, which would be amazing. Like, you take Aggro2 and some missions can be Aggro1, or Aggro3. Also, randomization roll can be also cool: by default, you set 20% deviation. Yet' sometimes you get 40 and sometimes 0 (but personally I would prefer 20-40%). Or different mechanism. Please consider it.

- Now I'm curious, how a coordinated push (if ever to be implemented) will interfere with aggressiveness options?
- And if 20% and 40% randomization can still be in place while coordinated push takes place?
- And: can coordinated push be random feature, like 40% for mostly ranged units and 60% for mostly melee units ? Because if this strategy means "smart gather" and then implement Aggro4 - is also the strategy player can adapt to and make counter-measures.

[Abyss]

One more good save to train AI:
Osiron hacienda. Overhelming amount of enemy armed with machineguns, that prefer to stay indoors on aggressiveness 2, while only 5 agents are present.
Oh, I've got brilliant suggestion:
BAI can estimate the amount of enemies by fire frequency (if dark). And, if supposed amount of enemies is threefold lower, it can assault attackers more aggressively, and shoot at previously detected positions much more often.

This mission all I did is threw 3 flares to the closest walls, placed crouched agents in 25 tile range and pressed end turn, rarely aiming some going-to-wild guys and exposed targets.
Some clarification: it's not about BAI works bad or so, it's about some better strategies.
And also, pre-primed grenades are off, but still could be more of them, as only 3 happened (all missed)

[Mr. Mister]

This is feedback on the XCom Files Garage example mod, and not on the BOXCE itself:

Is it intentional that the Mudranger cannot use the garage? I'd actually find it balanced that it can vs its hilariously short range; currently you kinda have to intentionally build a base close to a long-term mission site if you want to dare bring the mudranger in, but if it could be stored in a garage maybe it'd make more sense to keep one in a 1x1 tile just for the eventuality that a mission spawns very close to the base.

[0xEBJC]

Well, I'd say this behavior still hints to something systemic being wrong with the AI.
Their positioning-code still thinks it can attack them with melee and tries to reposition to do it.
The question is how this should be handled. I see 2 possibilities.

One is to teach the positioning-code about the hit-chance-reduction too, so it doesn't even try.
The other is to ignore the circumstance that they can't hit by internally limiting what they think the dodge chance reduces their accuracy too.

With armor-mitigation the AI does attack anyways, even if it calculates that their attacks will be fully mitigated by the armor.

So should they attack anyways or should they not even try and do something else instead?

First I want to say thank you... your work is great... I appreciate your time and don't want you to think I'm 'expecting' anything other than 'gladly thankful'

I'm not sure how much effort it would be, but here's some thoughts / suggestions:
1.) Maybe something that the AI would 'learn' where if AI controlled units attack at first don't know that they will miss or if it's a 'dumb' actions then ignore learned behavior.  After x# of tries (how ever you decide) then the AI stops that behavior, i.e. melee against a target where melee doesn't work like attacking a tank with a knife and low stats that will never hit or do dmg.  'Learned' actions could reset across battlescape sessions, especially for enemies, or be retained for player AI or not.  Also, I think it would be helpful to warn the player if their isn't a good action to take and pause auto player AI... for example all player agents only have melee weapons equipped and there is an enemy like swarmoids.  Or should the AI recognize they can't melee a target and go 'looking' for a capable range weapon... and what if the battlescape was started with only melee weapons and the only enemy is something like swarmoids and no civilians of any other npc that contains a usable weapon to kill or incapacitate the swarmoid like enemy.

2.) or just do the calc to hit and if it's a 'smart' action then don't attack, and if no sufficient actions could be taken, then pause autoplay player ai and prompt with message about not being able to take a successful actions?


Also not sure if you have looked at the keyboard short cut for entering and exiting auto-play player AI (default ctrl+a) but I've noticed a 'significant' difference between pressing excape to goto the menu which works almost always under heavy cpu load of the auto AI, and when trying to press ctrl+a to stop the auto AI under heavy cpu load it doesn't pickup the command.  I'm guessing it's how it polling and looking for the keyboard shortcut during each iteration of computing the ai actions or possibly not storing the keyboard command until a specific iteration is completed to decide to exit the auto  ai.  Sorry for bring this up again, not trying to be annoying but this has been a significant issue for me trying to exit auto ai player action in the middle of a battle.  And which I thought it was interesting that pressing escape to menu didn't have the same issue.

On another thought about the hang with the keyboard shortcut, is there a way no matter how much the cpu is taxed with the AI calc, to give priority to the GUI, mouse and keyboard shortcuts or even moving the battlescape position?

Again, thank you!

[Abyss]

Crash report: perhaps, some minotaur-related stuff. Crashed on turn 3 and, after reload, on turn 4. Same, just kicks out of the game with no notifications.   

[Xilmi]

what you have done with weighted randomization and "mistakes" should be considered as fun feature and difficulty reduction. Not to be confused with overall strategy. Please don't disable this feature, it's so cool and fun, and makes game beatable again, yet still very intriguing.

I think weighted randomization is a neat feature. It provides variety and only decreases difficulty slightly if at all.
Intelligence below 5, however dramatically lowers the perceived competence of the AI and will disrupt their game-plan quite a bit.

because enemy always spawns close and good at melee

This is the thing. Out in the open with extenter and/or realistic-accuracy the enemies are even more in a disadvantage than without it. They get sniped from far away and their own ranged-attacks are dramatically worse. Low damage and low accuracy.

- So this all about particular usefulness of smart melee units on open terrain. While ranged units can perform either basic defense and offense, melee units lack defense opportunity. So they are kind of pointless there while running around from cover to cover, except being sort of "distraction" targets, until they approach to attack positions.

Yes. But... As I said like 3 times before. This does not happen when intelligence is maxed out. They do not "run around from cover to cover". They stay in cover and force you to get to them until they can actually attack.

- Now I'm curious, how a coordinated push (if ever to be implemented) will interfere with aggressiveness options?
- And if 20% and 40% randomization can still be in place while coordinated push takes place?
- And: can coordinated push be random feature, like 40% for mostly ranged units and 60% for mostly melee units ? Because if this strategy means "smart gather" and then implement Aggro4 - is also the strategy player can adapt to and make counter-measures.

Yeah, it's actually a problem. It won't really work if they are not on the same page when it comes to aggressivenes and randomness would also make it much less useful.
One of the biggest strategical issues is indicisiveness. Both on the level of a single unit and on the level of the whole team. If only a few on the team storm the enemies' fortress, they will all die and the rest will be left alone.

I recently had Trauson play again, the one who's strategy was supposed to be countered by the behavior of Aggressiveness 2. And watching him play convinced me that this approach is still the overall best strategy. Anything more aggressive than that can backfire and is only better on stronger units.
But aggressiveness 2 is never really "bad". A strong unit that could survive rushing  forward doesn't become useless if it plays a little saver. I'd say that on average it leads to the best results.

A push, even a coordinated one, can still go wrong if the situation was misjudged. Like in your mission with the werewolfes. I think they'd do better if they hide out of your line of sight and jump people that come close to them rather than trying to bridge a huge gap of clear land where they have a lot of guns pointed at them.

It's a situation like Zerglings vs. space-marines in Starcraft. If the space-marines form some sort of ball and the zerglings come from the same side, chances are they all die before even being able to attack. But if they unborrow right ontop of the marines the marines get slaughtered. So melee-units best strategy is to stay out of the line of side of ranged-units until those are close enough to be attacked.

[Xilmi]

Crash report: perhaps, some minotaur-related stuff. Crashed on turn 3 and, after reload, on turn 4. Same, just kicks out of the game with no notifications.   

I can't even load this save-game at all without crashing.
Getting a huge amount of loading-errors in the log.

I can still load other games from you, so I'm not sure whether my crash on load is related to your crash.

[Abyss]

I can't even load this save-game at all without crashing.
Getting a huge amount of loading-errors in the log.

There's one more for different turn.
UPD it sometimes doesn't crash, I have no particular idea what it can be.

Trauson play

Can you share the link? I wonder to see

[Xilmi]

There's one more for different turn.

Crashes just the same. It might be related to mods you are using which I don't have.

Can you share the link? I wonder to see

I haven't uploaded it.
Does anyone know of a good editing-software, that doesn't take ages to recompress after cutting? All I want to do is just throwing away the last 5 seconds of the video. But with everyhting I tried that requires a very long process.

[Abyss]

Crashes just the same. It might be related to mods you are using which I don't have.I haven't uploaded it.

Ah, yes. Thank you, haven't considered this.
I have two mods:
Natasha morozova join https://openxcom.old.mod.io/natasha-morozova-join-for-x-com-files
and XCF arsenal additions https://mod.io/g/openxcom/m/x-com-files-additions
Also, there one more save for turn 5, JIC

Good editing software:

Depends on the platform.
On windows I use Premiere Pro, on Android YouCut video editor (it takes a while, though, to apply changes)

[Xilmi]

Natasha morozova join https://openxcom.old.mod.io/natasha-morozova-join-for-x-com-files
and XCF arsenal additions https://mod.io/g/openxcom/m/x-com-files-additions

Installing these helped. I can now load the game at least.

[0xEBJC]

Crashes just the same. It might be related to mods you are using which I don't have.I haven't uploaded it.
Does anyone know of a good editing-software, that doesn't take ages to recompress after cutting? All I want to do is just throwing away the last 5 seconds of the video. But with everyhting I tried that requires a very long process.

Here's a good list of software that I use for video editing:
https://obsproject.com/wiki/Post-Production-Tools-you-can-use

No matter how you look at it, cutting a portion off of a video, I've always had to re-encode the entire video.  Maybe Handbreak could do that? I use it to legally back up DVDs I own. It also might have features to cut or remove a section of the video...but I haven't looked into it.
https://handbrake.fr/

My preferred tool is Camtasia, I have an older version which works great for post production video editing and is fairly fast. Downside is I had to pay for it, it's not free. I've tried the demo of their newer versions and think they are too bloated and also are too expensive.

You can download older versions here, but I'm not sure if they'd still sell licenses for older versions?
https://www.techsmith.com/download/oldversions