XR vs X4

[pref]

I do agree X-Rebirth still needs improvement in this area but lets not put X3 on a pedestal it does not deserve.

Saying its better then XR's does not put it on any pedestal.
If you take the freight exchange example, it means that XR AI cannot avoid a single nearby object in empty space - this rarely occured with X3 pathing, while i had it in XR pretty often.
Also i never had the issue in X3 that a ship cannot attack a station it is ordered to, because its AI cannot fly into weapon range, but just circles around the target with a 50km radius.

I dont think XR is anywhere near X3's pathing, and i don't mean to praise X3 with this.

[Sam L.R. Griffiths]

I don't think it's on a pedestal, but this is one of those areas we were told was fixed and that they needed all this time to get working and it still isn't.

Arguably it is improved in X-Rebirth though...

The problem being addressed is quite complex, it is not a simple task to resolve paths of multiple objects moving arbitrarily in 3D space. Any solution that does resolve it without imposing some kind of "drive on rails/roads/tracks" type restriction is likely to be quite expensive computationally speaking.

X-Rebirth's pathing does not work perfectly and neither does X3s both have their issues but generally speaking the pathing issues in X3 are worse (or equal at best) IMO.

[Slashman]

Arguably it is improved in X-Rebirth though...

The problem being addressed is quite complex, it is not a simple task to resolve paths of multiple objects moving arbitrarily in 3D space. Any solution that does resolve it without imposing some kind of "drive on rails/roads/tracks" type restriction is likely to be quite expensive computationally speaking.

Sure. but then don't say you fixed or solved it and use that like it is a great new feature when it required you to turn off damage from collisions. It kind of comes across as dishonest or that you have gross lack of knowledge about the game you're making.

[MegaJohnny]

It's true that the pathing is not entirely fixed. But I'm really glad they disabled hull damage collisions. If my ships are going to throttle into things, much better to have them bounce than have the pathing system cost me millions of credits.

[Sam L.R. Griffiths]

@Slashman: I do not work for Egosoft, but your response is phrased in a way that makes it sound like I do... As far as I am aware though, Egosoft did not claim it was fixed but rather improved... there is a distinction but it is not unusual for (at least some) people to read improved as the same as fixed.

[Slashman]

@Slashman: I do not work for Egosoft, but your response is phrased in a way that makes it sound like I do... As far as I am aware though, Egosoft did not claim it was fixed but rather improved... there is a distinction but it is not unusual for (at least some) people to read improved as the same as fixed.

This is likely a language issue. When I said 'you' I was referring to anyone who would make such a claim. And they didn't say 'improved'. There was an interview where Bernd actually said they took all that time and they fixed or solved the pathing problems from X3.

Maybe it was premature, but they did say it. Devs as a whole need to stop making claims like that. It's not specific to Egosoft.

[Sam L.R. Griffiths]

@Slashman: Too true, it is not an unusual problem... the current state of QA in the Software Industry as a whole is a general concern (both as a potential customer and an engineer).

As an engineer myself, I know how it is all too easy to say issue X is fixed but wind up either causing, revealing or exasperating issue Y (or multiple other issues) as a consequence without necessarily realising it.

Arguably, many of the more annoying pathing issues from X3 are not a problem in X-Rebirth thus the exact wording of fixed could still legitimately apply in the context you have mentioned. It may be irritating that other issues have been introduced in their stead but unfortunately such issues are to be expected when overhauling/rewriting complex code to the degree Egosoft did for X-Rebirth.

[Slashman]

Let's hope they do significant work on it for X4 because I'd hate to see a whole other generation of X games marred by pathing issues that we waited years to get rid of in the first place.

[Varek Raith]

I am sorry to burst anyone's bubble but the AI/Pathing in X3 was far from perfect and on balance IMO the X-Rebirth solution is marginally better (still problems but different in nature).

As with X3, to avoid/work-around the more extreme pathing problems you simply leave the area and let the game process the situation OOZ/OOS.

I do agree X-Rebirth still needs improvement in this area but lets not put X3 on a pedestal it does not deserve.

The pathing is just as stupid as it ever was in previous games. Maybe more so.
Watch as pirates constantly crash into the hulls of ships and stations they are attacking.
Or watch the vid posted above.
The only way to know for sure is to have damage collision turned back on.
I bet ship losses would be worse than in previous games.

[Sam L.R. Griffiths]

@Varek: There was more to the problems with pathing in X3 than simply loss of assets due to collisions, in fact I think that was the least of the issues.

The problems with both are not the same, thus to try to compare them in a quantitative way like you suggest would be pointless. In any case, such comparisons are on the most part academic and irrelevant.

We can probably reasonably expect Egosoft to rework the pathing code to resolve known issues but I doubt a total rewrite (or adoption of X3 algorithms) is on the cards.

[Earth Ultimatum IV.]

AI ships should never, NEVER recieve hull damage for collision, in any of upcoming Egosoft's games.
It's a frustration. A burden. And AI will never be good enough to completly get rid of this, so it's a good little insurance.

Playership should get collision damage. Also every object that collides with it.
But that doesn't really matter to me.


Here's one video that shows the improvement in XR's AI:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dt4B4e3i5_0
While in X3, ships simply fly straight towards target, and start avoidance when something's too close - in XR, they calculate the route before they get there, and avoid objects in an arch.
Going around asteroids in X3 took several minutes in SETA, for capital ships, because they kept doing wrong manuevers and returning back. Making capship commanding from bridge impossible (also, lack of hull engineers).

Also, small fighters are much more agressive and capable of dealing much more damage output, due to being able to keep their weapons at target. Not sure why, but it works, and commanding a squad of fighters in combat is fun.




The main thing I secretly dream of for X4 is increased framerate.
While X Rebirth runs well on my not-so-good computer, surprisingly playable and enjoyable, it starts lagging as soon as I start recording a video.
And I'd like to record regularly, with some commentary, to sharp up the verbal english and maybe help the community. But Iam hardly able to do so when recording hammers down the framerate to twenty.

[pref]

We can probably reasonably expect Egosoft to rework the pathing code to resolve known issues but I doubt a total rewrite (or adoption of X3 algorithms) is on the cards.

Don't think anyone expects X3 pathing to be adopted. They changed the game objects considerably, AI has to cope with that.
The roid in Aldrin comes to mind - wonder how that AI would fare with XR stations.

Still the result while playing should be at least on X3 level (as for most that was barely acceptable). X3 is a more simple world geometrically, with more varied and precise ship commands. This means that with some care the pillock could be used and its pathing corrected if needed.
As XR lacks the commands, has a more complex geometry, it needs much better algorithms and better object data management for pathing just to be on the same level as X3.

The original design was clearly very poor (ships had to fly through eachother and stations, just to make the game 'playable'). Don't expect thay can just patch that mess. In 3.1 it was still far from acceptable - not sure what they could achieve without substantial changes (affecting the engine perhaps). Seems like the original concept was not capable to handle the sandbox gameplay. For me it seems it was designed so that the plot could be finished and thats it.

[ezra-r]

AI ships should never, NEVER recieve hull damage for collision, in any of upcoming Egosoft's games.
It's a frustration. A burden. And AI will never be good enough to completly get rid of this, so it's a good little insurance.

Playership should get collision damage. Also every object that collides with it.
But that doesn't really matter to me.


Here's one video that shows the improvement in XR's AI:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dt4B4e3i5_0
While in X3, ships simply fly straight towards target, and start avoidance when something's too close - in XR, they calculate the route before they get there, and avoid objects in an arch.
Going around asteroids in X3 took several minutes in SETA, for capital ships, because they kept doing wrong manuevers and returning back. Making capship commanding from bridge impossible (also, lack of hull engineers).

Also, small fighters are much more agressive and capable of dealing much more damage output, due to being able to keep their weapons at target. Not sure why, but it works, and commanding a squad of fighters in combat is fun.




The main thing I secretly dream of for X4 is increased framerate.
While X Rebirth runs well on my not-so-good computer, surprisingly playable and enjoyable, it starts lagging as soon as I start recording a video.
And I'd like to record regularly, with some commentary, to sharp up the verbal english and maybe help the community. But Iam hardly able to do so when recording hammers down the framerate to twenty.

I find myself agreeing with you a lot lately.

It was a tough campaign of stalking I had to start in the beta forums against Egosoft (I'm exagerating) stuff in order to get shield bump damage removed. As good "squareheaded" Germans they were kind of fixaheaded towards keeping bump damage for AI, not sure why, but in the end we won the battle. (lol)

I had some sort of a discussion with someone when Bernd asked about what could be improved for X3:AP and TC and I suggested to remove bump damage because AI would collide, specially fighter ships, every chance they could get, and someone I don't remember who, denied it saying that it had been fine in his game, I had to just retreat before such amount of irrational denial, anyways, your description of how AI works in X3:AP/TC is quite exact and reminded me of it, it's a pain.

One of the reasons I stopped playing AP/TC was precisely that I could use no wings with any satisfaction, first they would not fly in formation, they would do so like angry swarms and then you just had suddenly stop and most of the times one of the ships in your wing would just crash and die against your "butt". Sadly the one mod that addressed this issue properly making ships rebound without damage, would sooner or later freeze my game and the author denied it had anything to do with him despite trying the game only with his mod, just my luck

I dearly hope we don't ever get to see bumping damage in AI from any Egosoft game. It ruins, it frustrates and adds nothing, not until they get to make perfect AI with on purpose ramming tactics that is, which probably won't ever happen.

[Varek Raith]

Here's one video that shows the improvement in XR's AI:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dt4B4e3i5_0
While in X3, ships simply fly straight towards target, and start avoidance when something's too close - in XR, they calculate the route before they get there, and avoid objects in an arch.
Going around asteroids in X3 took several minutes in SETA, for capital ships, because they kept doing wrong manuevers and returning back. Making capship commanding from bridge impossible (also, lack of hull engineers).

Also, small fighters are much more agressive and capable of dealing much more damage output, due to being able to keep their weapons at target. Not sure why, but it works, and commanding a squad of fighters in combat is fun.

So why do fighters constantly smash into station/ship hulls?
I see it all the time when doing Incoming and Cartel attacks.
And that vid posted with two ships bumping each other continuously at a gate. Why are they doing that?
See, there really wasn't much improvement at all. Just turned off collision damage. Which is fine. Just stop pretending that the pathing is in any way better than previous games. It isn't.
I'll also note that the vid you posted is from before the game's release.

[pref]

While in X3, ships simply fly straight towards target, and start avoidance when something's too close - in XR, they calculate the route before they get there, and avoid objects in an arch.

This reminds me when i last attacked a fighter group (v3.1).
It had a drostan and quite a few others ships, so i spent some time to prepare well for the fight.

Then before they got in range the drostan killed the whole group in one shot somehow (including itself). Was kinda disappointing after expecting a nice battle.
They just approached in a straight line, without any sensible formation and collected all the missiles from the drostan.
Then i spent a couple of hours trying to wreck a station using 7-9 capships without success. Having the skunk kill it with a weight on the fire button was quicker afterall. And at least i could do smthg else meanwhile..
Then it magically regenerated to 20% as soon as i left the sector.
The capships couldn't damage it even OZ - pathing was so bad they couldnt get near the station even with collision off.
Then i just gave up on this game..

Edit: before i forget, this whole thing had to happen because the pathing on my station assigned miners always flew them into this hostile station (even OZ), so i lost any miners assigned to my stations on the first trip.

[Sparky Sparkycorp]

The Drostan probably fell foul of the same bug I've reported a couple of times for the Katana/Daito. Those two ships will often detonate their V Crusher salvo in their faces' with their Pulsed Masers

The Drostan has one of those as well...

[pref]

As they were out of weapon range (6km or more iirc), i doubt it was the same issue. Or they start firing way sooner then it makes sense. Though i did not see/hear any laser shots - not that i had much time to observe anything

[CBJ]

Let's just clarify a couple of things about pathing here, because there seem to be some misconceptions. Disclaimer: I'm not the "pathing guy" so a) I'm not defending my own work and b) I don't have all the fine details.

Games up to and including X3AP did not have any kind of "pathing" AI to plan a "route" from A to B within a sector. Ships could be given a destination and they would fly towards that destination in a straight line. If something got in their way then they would turn and fly away in a random direction and then return to flying towards their destination, again in a straight line. The method for determining whether something was "in the way" was basic at best, with essentially just a detection range to play with. Increase the detection range too much and ships would spend most of their time flying in random directions trying to avoid things; decrease it too much and ships would keep crashing into one another. All ship movement used this same system, including for situations such as "dogfights", and it was extremely limiting. There was nothing much that could be done to improve this, partly because as a single-threaded game there was no time for more complex calculations for the hundreds of ships that needed to be processed.

With XR we clearly needed to take a completely different approach. One major difference is that pathing calculations can run on a separate thread, partially freeing it up from the usual frame-by-frame cycle. This allows much more complex calculations to be made and means that ships can now plan a route, and as part of that route can fly paths that are not just straight lines. However, the flipside to that is that the environment they are flying in is also much more complex. While ships in X3 have no option but avoid other objects by a huge distance in order not to bump into them, ships in XR need to be able to fly close to other objects, for example, in and out of the complex spaces created by station structures. As a result, there still has to be a trade-off between making the pathing system "intelligent" and preventing it from affecting performance. Turning off collisions between certain types of objects is not a "solution" to some kind of "failure" of the pathing system, it's a performance optimisation to ensure that pathing calculations don't slow the game down too much. Of course it's not perfect, and of course we'd like to improve on that, but it's not a case of trying to hide an underlying "problem" as some people keep claiming.

Regarding the video of the ships colliding repeatedly at the gate, yes it's amusing, but when you analyse it it's not as trivial to solve as some people seem to imagine. If you consider two people trying to pass one another in a narrow corridor, and how they often end up going in the same direction several times before they manage it, you will see why. They usually only solve the problem by some form of direct communication, for example with one person indicating to the other the side on which they should pass. The AI pathing equivalent would be communication between pathing tasks for different ships, which is obviously possible, but trickier to do in practice for a variety of reasons. Similar explanations apply to other scenarios where the pathing is not as good as we'd like, such as small ships hitting station hulls; they are trying to fly through complex spaces, and sometimes the pathing just doesn't get it quite right, for example some calculation isn't accurate enough, or the logic isn't able to handle some odd "corner" scenarios. Despite the glitches, this is fundamentally "better" than X3, where flight close to the surface of other objects was not even possible.

In X3 there was no way to solve the problems that were reported because the pathing system had been operating at the limit of its capabilities for a long time. With XR there are clearly some things that are not as good as you, or indeed we, would like them to be, but there is plenty of scope for improvement within the framework that has been created.

[pref]

there is plenty of scope for improvement within the framework that has been created.

Good to hear, thanks.
wish it was easier to get some info out of you =)

[ezra-r]

thanks for the answer @CBJ

About this:

In X3 there was no way to solve the problems that were reported because the pathing system had been operating at the limit of its capabilities for a long time....

Which makes it even more puzzling wondering why Egosoft hasn't disabled Bumping damage for AI in any X3 games all this time.