What are the AI issues, specifically?

[hawkeye099]

As my empire is growing I'm stumbling over more issues:

• dock slot distribution - free docks on a carrier are not used/filled evenly, so fighters go to internal storage even when there are free docks available. Seeing this on my Boron Shark, with 16 fighters on 16 docks - expecting all docks loaded, but most times half of the docks are empty, half of ships stored. Slows down start/dock unneccessarily, and quite a nuisance....

• sometimes ships become braindead.
  Happens to ships assigned to a fleet, mostly when on auto command, both IS and OOS. Especially when fleet leader is ordered to move/attack, some ships fall behind and go numb (despite having a command).
  
  They don't get permanently stuck and follow manual orders, they are just sitting around and do nothing - despite having auto orders (defending, moving, docking, get back to formation, etc.). If I check them, all seems fine, no problems, no scans, no waiting signal, they just won't do what they're told to. Recalling subordinates does nothing. Only reliable solution is to manually drag their line on the map, which creates a new move order upfront and then cancel that order. That seems to "awaken" them and they return to duty.
  
  Looks like the internal scheduler "forgets" some ships sometimes. Getting worse the more ships I own...

• supply ship deadlocks. Happens to me frequently:
  L/XL wants repairs, runs to aux ship and docks, blocking it's port. Aux ship has trade order for L freighter, which has the stuff needed for the repair, but can't dock. Deadlock.
  Same for M ships with M trader, sometimes all bombers decide to restock, fill up whole ship space and block all docks. M trader with missile parts can't dock. Deadlock.
  
  Super annoying, because not easy to resolve - some are even cross locked in critical state, quite game breaking, you have to kill something to get out of it. If you can cancel orders, ships tend to return to their auto commands causing the deadlock again.
  
  Possible solutions:
  - assign auto resupply commands only when enough materials are present, i.e. restocking missiles
  - let ships dock only when enough materials are present to complete their task
  - let traders have priority, so blocked docks are freed
  (- maybe L traders could just get side-by-side and do their trade with drones without docking at all
  - maybe add dedicated trader ports on aux ships)

PS:

I dont know if it's a ai issue but for God's sake can we have different default actions for military and civilian ships?
I dont want my military ships fleeing from the Xenon and I don't want my miners standing and fighting the god dam Kahaak.

This.

[LameFox]

dock slot distribution - free docks on a carrier are not used/filled evenly, so fighters go to internal storage even when there are free docks available. Seeing this on my Boron Shark, with 16 fighters on 16 docks - expecting all docks loaded, but most times half of the docks are empty, half of ships stored. Slows down start/dock unneccessarily, and quite a nuisance....

I wonder if that behaviour was designed for carriers with launch tubes? Seems like it would not hinder those in the same way since fighters ideally want to get inside to launch.

[S!rAssassin]

And for NPCs trade and mining ships also should add actions and travel restrictions in enemy sectors by defaults.

[Yaeko]

While the ray is really good at sniping surface elements from long range

The AI can't do this with a ray. The player can, but that's not what this thread is about.

Afaik, we dont even have such a command for L/XL ships?

I usually put L Flak on the rays, so they automatically disable the Gravitons just by blasting it anyway.
But then... I better quickly leave the system, otherwise the exploding K will destroy all M turrets on the Ray

Same goes for the other destroyers, it really doesnt matter which one I throw at a K, they all are done for after blowing it up when I am in the system, even if I didnt actually lose the ship itself. (My best chance of getting Ks destroyed is to just park a bunch of rattlesnakes with ARG/PAR L plasma somewhere and let the K come closer - but thats literally just: overkilling so much, that the K pops within 3km of it entering the weapons range.

It would really help if we could set a "stay away distance" for each ship, so that I could tell those Rattlesnakes to stay at 7-8km of the K and not go "brawling" with it. (If egosoft wanted us to get screwed by gravitons, they wouldnt have made them 5.4km range.)

[LameFox]

It would really help if we could set a "stay away distance" for each ship, so that I could tell those Rattlesnakes to stay at 7-8km of the K and not go "brawling" with it. (If egosoft wanted us to get screwed by gravitons, they wouldnt have made them 5.4km range.)

Though, this runs into the same problem as previously: in many cases a K is faster, and on every ship most damage output is lost if facing away. Such a thing might be useful for stations to keep them from rushing it when they can't see their target module, but I think for a ship approaching them you'd still get better use out of "reverse and fire".

On a rattlesnake for instance, it's fast enough to run* but then you have two L turrets firing, maybe 4 if it goes diagonal. And further complications tend to arise during manoeuvres too, as ships will lose time to fumbling their way through a U turn.



*assuming it lands enough hits to keep the K out of travel drive.

[Yaeko]

Though, this runs into the same problem as previously: in many cases a K is faster, and on every ship most damage output is lost if facing away.

True, this would only help in situations with more than 1 destroyer - a K can only chase one after all, unless xenon suddenly come up with instant duplication of their assets

One ship will always have to "tank" the K.

I worded this weirdly it seems: I just dont want ships to go to 3km with big ships due to the explosion radius rendering them useless then, especially anything that is not a Boron ship with the huge shields for Turrets and Engines.

[A5PECT]

I'll keep harping on this: current X4 destroyer AI is not conducive to the way that ship class is actually designed. They don't have the speed or maneuverability to reposition themselves while under fire, attempting to only wastes time that could've been spent putting their guns on target.

If Egosoft wants "fire and maneuver" performances from capital ships, they need to create a new class of L ship designed around that. Which I wouldn't mind seeing. But as long as destroyers exist in the game as they do now, their AI behaviors need to be restructured to accomodate them properly.

[Yaeko]

If Egosoft wants "fire and maneuver" performances from capital ships, they need to create a new class of L ship designed around that. Which I wouldn't mind seeing. But as long as destroyers exist in the game as they do now, their AI behaviors need to be restructured to accomodate them properly.

yeah, proper "tanky" "brawler" type "not-destroyers" - but then, we still got the old destroyers that would have weird AI. (I dont think egosoft gets around "fixing the AI" unless they completely replace current destroyers, or at least massively buff their shields and turret shields. They still wouldnt use their guns then, but at least they would still be usable after a K pops 3km away from them.) EDIT: Actually, just reducing explosion damage to destroyers would also work.

I mean, its kinda fun and looks nice when they brawl each other, but as you said: current ships arent designed for that at all.

[GCU Grey Area]

I mean, its kinda fun and looks nice when they brawl each other...

May look nice, however I find it's best not to let enemy destroyers get into brawling range.

My destroyers are always part of a mixed fleet which is led by a carrier. Around 1/3 of it's S fighter complement are heavy fighters assigned to the Bombardment role. They use heavy missiles (e.g. H.Swarm, Starburst, etc) & backup long range gun to attack subsystems, such as engines. Their primary purpose is to distract & slow the approach of enemy capitals - in particular their targets can't use travel drive to rapidly close the distance while under fire (or move at all if they've managed to knacker it's engines).

This means my destroyers have much more time to blow them to bits while they're still at long range & distracted. Often they don't even get close enough to shoot back. Incidentally, remaining 2/3 of my carrier-based S fighters & all it's M frigates have the Intercept role - their main job is to protect the heavies from enemy S&Ms, since those heavies are generally poorly equipped for dogfighting themselves.

[A5PECT]

(I dont think egosoft gets around "fixing the AI" unless they completely replace current destroyers, or at least massively buff their shields and turret shields.

They don't need to replace destroyers, just give them class-specific AI. They eventually did this in Rebirth, where large ships with fixed forward weaponry (succelus, balor) were given different fight behavior from turret-based capital ships.

Current capital ship AI works fine for Xenon Ks and Is, as they have no forward guns and all of their firepower comes from turrets. Those ships are designed in a way that allows them to fire and move simultaneously, while controlled by the AI. They don't need to change anything there, besides maybe adding turret-centric capital ships to other factions' fleets.

[Yaeko]

(I dont think egosoft gets around "fixing the AI" unless they completely replace current destroyers, or at least massively buff their shields and turret shields.

They don't need to replace destroyers, just give them class-specific AI. They eventually did this in Rebirth, where large ships with fixed forward weaponry (succelus, balor) were given different fight behavior from turret-based capital ships.

That would be "fixing the AI", the other option, yeah.

I was just rambling, dont take all of that at 100% face value^^

[Hector0x]

Does anyone know about the AI differences between destroyers with main batteries and those without? What happens if some modder removes/disables the main guns and creates a new type of turret with similar stats?

[LameFox]

Does anyone know about the AI differences between destroyers with main batteries and those without? What happens if some modder removes/disables the main guns and creates a new type of turret with similar stats?

The AI knows when the ship doesn't have any guns on it and just flies around the target instead of trying to line up shots. Not sure about the range it prefers. They didn't seem like they were intentionally keeping to max L plasma range or anything, and I recall I've had Barbarossas die to Ks they could in theory kite indefinitely if they knew to try.

There also doesn't seem to be any obvious difference between one that never had any guns like a Barbarossa, or one that could have them but they weren't installed. In my test using Syns as turret only ships they seemed to be better at not clustering and ramming each other than usual. Presumably if you invented an XL turret for them the behaviour would be the same.

[flywlyx]

sometimes ships become braindead.
Happens to ships assigned to a fleet, mostly when on auto command, both IS and OOS. Especially when fleet leader is ordered to move/attack, some ships fall behind and go numb (despite having a command).

They don't get permanently stuck and follow manual orders, they are just sitting around and do nothing - despite having auto orders (defending, moving, docking, get back to formation, etc.). If I check them, all seems fine, no problems, no scans, no waiting signal, they just won't do what they're told to. Recalling subordinates does nothing. Only reliable solution is to manually drag their line on the map, which creates a new move order upfront and then cancel that order. That seems to "awaken" them and they return to duty.

Looks like the internal scheduler "forgets" some ships sometimes. Getting worse the more ships I own...

Yes, it's a common issue, especially noticeable when there are multiple ships in the same fleet.
In this video, for instance, only 3 out of the 5 Rattlesnakes are actively engaging the K, while the other two are completely off target.: https://youtu.be/ywDvqwtwUbM?si=AL5dcKEJj-lTtieC

The AI knows when the ship doesn't have any guns on it and just flies around the target instead of trying to line up shots. Not sure about the range it prefers. They didn't seem like they were intentionally keeping to max L plasma range or anything, and I recall I've had Barbarossas die to Ks they could in theory kite indefinitely if they knew to try.

There also doesn't seem to be any obvious difference between one that never had any guns like a Barbarossa, or one that could have them but they weren't installed. In my test using Syns as turret only ships they seemed to be better at not clustering and ramming each other than usual. Presumably if you invented an XL turret for them the behaviour would be the same.

Not having a primary weapon spares the ship from the compulsory Y-plane alignment, but it comes with its own set of issues. The system involves a min-max range setting, recalculating positions only after the minimum range is triggered. Although the min-max setting is tied to the pilot's level, it's not particularly meaningful for players, as all player captains are treated as full level.

However, the new position doesn't ensure that the ship can clear the shooting range of the target during movement, especially for dynamic targets like the K. Consequently, while they don't collide with each other as frequently due to no longer being required to move to the same Y-plane, they still struggle to "kite" the K because they lack a clear understanding of how "kiting" should function.

[hawkeye099]

sometimes ships become braindead.
Happens to ships assigned to a fleet, mostly when on auto command, both IS and OOS. Especially when fleet leader is ordered to move/attack, some ships fall behind and go numb (despite having a command).

They don't get permanently stuck and follow manual orders, they are just sitting around and do nothing - despite having auto orders (defending, moving, docking, get back to formation, etc.). If I check them, all seems fine, no problems, no scans, no waiting signal, they just won't do what they're told to. Recalling subordinates does nothing. Only reliable solution is to manually drag their line on the map, which creates a new move order upfront and then cancel that order. That seems to "awaken" them and they return to duty.

Looks like the internal scheduler "forgets" some ships sometimes. Getting worse the more ships I own...

Yes, it's a common issue, especially noticeable when there are multiple ships in the same fleet.
In this video, for instance, only 3 out of the 5 Rattlesnakes are actively engaging the K, while the other two are completely off target.: https://youtu.be/ywDvqwtwUbM?si=AL5dcKEJj-lTtieC

This is the most annoying and fun killing issue I encountered so far. Ships not following auto orders, and having to manually fix them, is simply a no go.

[hawkeye099]

Extremely annoying AI issue:

• Ships not returning to formation after executing (auto) commands and hanging out somewhere far from fleet, making those formations useless.

There is no reliable command to get misplaced ships back into formation and/or force braindeads (see above) to resume duties..

[flywlyx]

Extremely annoying AI issue:

• Ships not returning to formation after executing (auto) commands and hanging out somewhere far from fleet, making those formations useless.

There is no reliable command to get misplaced ships back into formation and/or force braindeads (see above) to resume duties...

There should be an option for capital ships to enforce ships to maintain formation; the current formation seems more decorative, as any command disrupts it.

[LameFox]

Adding this here as I think it demonstrates several of the points covered re: pursuit of an enemy, formation keeping (or lack of), and so on.

viewtopic.php?f=180&p=5213675#p5213675

[hawkeye099]

Might be unsual, but thanks for the most constructive, meaningful and on point thread by far - which is quite rare, despite the count of posts. There are so many valid issues worth being mentioned, not exaggerating and mainly reporting stuff, some ideas on top. So plz keep it as clean as of now, maybe we have some (positive) impact...

Hoping that Egosoft acknowledges this too.

[V3N]

Drones won’t deploy when parent ship is obviously outnumbered. Building stations takes forever because ships carrying needed wares never get to them. If you have to mine resources for a station supply mission it’s a guaranteed fail because your AI won’t use travel drives and will sell your ore/gas in the wrong system. Somehow the enemy AI is smarter than the player owned AI because I see xenon Ks soloing entire systems