A stupid hunch on that craptastic AI.

[Ducimus]

This is probably going Waaaaayyy off the deepend, and i havent fully experimented to verify this behavior.. but.. its a hunch, and i wonder if anyone else has ever had similar thoughts.

The key is this, has anyone noticed a reduction of the AI's use of active sonar after reducing the active sonar cone? This is central to this stupid hunch of mine. and Admittidly this might be hard to verify because the AI is so unpredictable and wonky to begin with.

Here's my tinfoil hat, pulled it out of my ass, totally unsubstantiated, throw me in a rubber room with a vest with real long sleeves, theory.



- AI first listens passively.

- If sound bearing it recieves is [u]within its sonar cone[/u,] it starts active sonar.

- When active sonar bearing is receieved, [u]THEN[/u] the AI changes course to intercept contact.

So heres the Picture:
http://www.ducimus.net/sh3/stupid_hunch.JPG
Red represents the cone size most of us adjust for
blue represents the default.
Grey line indicates Passive sonar bearing.

Again, if passive bearing is within active sonar, start pinging.
If ping gets a return, change course.
If no ping, continue search.

Thats the hunch.


In everyones bid for realistic settings it could be that we've been nerfing the AI because it needs unrealistic sonar cones due a routine like this to function.

The developers of Ubisoft , im quite certain were not stupid. SH3 took years in development, and a 5 -10 minute google search will show what active sonar cones looked like in WW2, so on that thought, it would almost seem to me that the 90 degree cone, was deliberate.


I know, start throwing the shoes, im probably way off the deep end and i admit it, but its just a naggying feeling that this is whats going on.

Now if anyone expereinces the same behavior CONSISTANTLY regardless cone size, then im just blowing alot of hot air with this post
:rotfl:

[CB..]

sounds logical to me..."borrows tin hat"--

im guessing the AI might not even be that particular regarding the sensors..i'm guessing that it just uses the one with the longest range to find you---then switches to sonar (if the game is that well made) to get depth reading before making a DC run...
i would not be at all surpirsed if it doesn't actually use any sensors to get your depth..and that it in effect simply "cheats" getting depth info directly from the game engine in some manner---
i've been successfully blown out of the water by DD's with no active sonar on them at all..so how did it get the depth right...co-incidence??? how did it know what sort of depths to try? co-incidence?

it may be an assumption to even think the game follows any sort of realistic real world pattern...

but the end of the day the main problem with the AI is that it just doesn't co-operate terribly well (tho i still maintain the AI was great untill summat went wrong after a few hours of play---never to return --those creeping attacks were IMO real not imagined - i spent hours just watching them--as much as i tried to convince my self other wise..either way for me they simply stopped happening after maybe 10-20 hours gameplay never to return)

that and the woe full lack of sensor blindspot after a DC drop- makes the whole gig a bit of a lash up--

mind you i dunno---what you say sounds ok to me.. :up:

[Ducimus]

im almost 100% positive the game "cheats" on its depth settings. When the AI does acutaly attack, it rarely misses with its default settings. Infact, when depth charges are dropped, i acutaly go deeper to get away from that depth. Assuming that the depth charges are "set" at whatever depth i was when they were first launched.

Of course, those depth charges still seem to manage to explode close, regardless of depth change :roll:

[CB..]

im almost 100% positive the game "cheats" on its depth settings. When the AI does acutaly attack, it rarely misses with its default settings. Infact, when depth charges are dropped, i acutaly go deeper to get away from that depth. Assuming that the depth charges are "set" at whatever depth i was when they were first launched.

Of course, those depth charges still seem to manage to explode close, regardless of depth change :roll:

and i agree they are rarely very far out depth wise-- in fact if they just learned to drop the DC's in front of you instead of directly over head- i'd be dead every time..
any sensible AI routine would allow for the time the DC take to reach the set depth--that would in it self make life far more interesting and tactical--and satisfying--

mind you again as default (again once the AI had inexplicably "broken"--i'd stake a lot on that being true by the way) in my game the DD's suddenly just couldn't find you at all---only surfacing would alert them to your presense and that with the game as stock no mods at all--

so you have one group with uber DD's one with utterly dumb DD's with no obvious explanation for the difference in behaviour--

maddening

there are no hidden registry entrys for AI behaviour any one know --i cant see any---older games allowed for the use of registry entrys to customise elements of the gameplay--there's nowt like that with SH3 am i right?

there's summat kooky going on some where--

[Ducimus]

Well heres what got me thinking.

You'd agree that ELITE's are the most consistant in behavior, most aggressive, and usualy the ones that would cream you no?


Ive acutally had this hunch for awhile. Orginally i was modding my game leaving the sonar cone as default, only fiddeling with a min range, and then tried to add for more inaccuracies within the depth charges and hedge hogs themselves.

That was awile ago, and i forgot why i was doing it that way.


Over the last couple weeks i went back to fiddling with sonar. Made the cone 70 degrees, increased the min distance.. all the semi realistic stuff that mos of us do. Well, in my game ive added quite a few elite DE's.

You know.. those dreaded buckleys?

I have 3 ship convoys escorted wtih two elite DE's in the carribean after 42. Out of 4 convoy attacks, i had only ONE close call. All the other 3 attacks resulted in me silpping away without so much as one depth charge being dumped anywhere near me.

Thats when i remembered this hunch of mine that i forgot about.

[caspofungin]

i' not so sure...

i've set up my ai_sensors file so that at silent running, i'm impossible to hear unless the escort is w/in a couple of hundred yards. nevertheless, i can start getting pinged when the escort is 1400-1500m away. of course, that doesn't mean the ai isn't cheating...

w/ respect to the ai getting the depth automatically -- maybe. but also consider the possibility that the info it gets from hydrophones isn't limited to bearing only (as irl) but gets bearing, elevation, and range -- allowing it to pinpoint your position in 3d space.

[caspofungin]

also, re what cb said -- i agree completely -- it's probably got more to do w/ the coded ai routines than the sensors themselves.

[CB..]

:yep: it's a problem which ever way you approach it---on the one hand we definitely want some sort of dangerous response from the escorts-- on the other we don't want to killed every time----the area in between being ignored and being killed every time by the DD's is fairly small with not that much room for maneuver-- definitely using the crew rating entrys to see how any set up changes under different crew ratings has to be a good solid way to go---a overly uber set up might actually be spot with the crew rating reduced to 2 say--or vice versa---

problem tho with getting constistent results is well long term anyway -consistency can be just a tadge dull? swings and round abouts all the way

it may be that the design philosophy was wrong--(LOL definitely borrows tin hat here!!) in that the AI is trying to sink u-boats--- instead of trying to prevent the sinking of merchants which involves slightly different tactics i reckon..
i'd much rather gameplay wise be beaten off a convoy attack by the escorts-- having failed to sink any shipping -- perhaps heavily damaged only able to limp back to port---then get four or five ships then get blown out of the water after a ten hour DC attack---

neither is perfect but gameplay wise the reduction in tonnage achieved by the first out weighs the potentail realism of the second---

so get the sub submerged --keep the sub down till the convoy is safely out of range then return to post--based on the idea that whilst the escort is concentrating on you another sub could be approaching from a different course--this isnt true of course as we have no wolfpacks-but no harm in having the DD's behave as if it were true---after all with the less than realistic numbers of escorts in the game for convoys having two thrids of your defensive force attacking one possible target for many hours whislt the convoy travels over the horizon virtually unprotected isn't perhaps the best way to get the job done-----that was my ad hoc feelings on possible tweaks to the escort behaviour--

if we can get the escorts to reduce the tonnage achieved by the player -- while keeping the player alive but damaged perhaps so he can try again (at least most of the time) --then the reduced tonnage results should make playing the game seem more realistic--


PS cheers Caspofugin---wonder if it is the hydrophone like you say

[HEMISENT]

Here's a thought. If someone could figure which settings or combination of settings make the AI absolutely, positively dead nuts accurate then perhaps use a set of settings which give so-so accuracy we now have parimeters. Plug these perimeters into SH3 Commander Randomized events.CFG and set it up for whatever odds you like. The result will be that the dead nuts accurate AI will appear at a random time unkown to the player.

Anyhow, just my two cents worth.

[Salvadoreno]

CB.. Your destroyer aggression mod. How new is that?? I wanted to try it out but i enabled NYGM TW. How will this interact with nygm??

[CB..]

CB.. Your destroyer aggression mod. How new is that?? I wanted to try it out but i enabled NYGM TW. How will this interact with nygm??

it's very old Salva' and not with-out it's own problems..was never really even intended to be a mod at all--i have zero idea about it's compatibility with any large scale set of mods---i'm fairly sure it won't cause a crash but beyond that zip...make absolutely sure you make back up copys of the NYGM files before you over write them with mine---so you can revert again if you don't like it--the backs ups that i supply with the mod are from the stock game--important to note that before you install--allso i don't do realism mods i do gameplay mods so no tales of woe regarding realism please--it is what it is full stop-- :up: you might hate it -you might think it's useless --you might find it..well fill in as appropiate--


Hemisent... i reckon that sort of thing is a great way to go for those folks who use SH3 commander at least --has to a good addition..getting the parameters right is still a big issue tho...

[Ducimus]

I think we can toss the tinfoil hat. I renabled all sonar cones back to 90, and i really havent noticed much of a difference.

AI is just stupid. What is odd how its universally dumb, and yet, theres an occasional elite that can pound the crap out of you.

[caspofungin]

Here's a thought. If someone could figure which settings or combination of settings make the AI absolutely, positively dead nuts accurate then perhaps use a set of settings which give so-so accuracy we now have parimeters. Plug these perimeters into SH3 Commander Randomized events.CFG and set it up for whatever odds you like. The result will be that the dead nuts accurate AI will appear at a random time unkown to the player.

Anyhow, just my two cents worth.

easy -- commander already changes the values for the lost contact time. set it up so the sim.cfg has the hydrophone and sonar settings rem'd out (w/ the ; ) -- the effect is ubersensor.

[gouldjg]

Guys, I have exams in 3 weeks so am very busy and will be out of the loop for a while. Its good to see some ai chat back on the scene CB. This time I think we all know the hardcore issues unless a miracle arrives.

I really wish I was not so tied up but thats life. Anyway, I just wanted to say,

Should any of you come up with a new set of ranges to plug into sh3 commander randomisation, I have already written most hex placements for all current sensors. http://hollywoodchaos.blogspot.com/2006/04/my-current-hollywood-settings.html

It does not have to be a drawn out process as I did it. I wanted probability based settings so went this way however there is a way to get it shorter and simpler for any randomisation. Just PM me and I will try and show how.

I will be starting the whole file in three weeks time but that is not to say nobody can use it to produce models now (they may be better and I am no expert). I only created the file so we all can abuse it to suit our requirments.

So if you have kept tract of the randomisation notes made by Jscones, you may want to set up a decent test file specifically for the DD. Even if not random, it allows faster changing of the settings.

Anyway See you all in three weeks,

[Ducimus]

Another dumb thoguht.


Lets say you make an HK group in the editor, and to save time, you select "GENERIC Destoryer Escort". I once heard that "generic" entries use the AI_hydrophones and AI_sonar in the AI_sensor.dat instead of all the specifically named hydrophone or sonar sets that have much better stastics, i never put much thought into that, but now i have to wonder if thats true.

[CB..]

Another dumb thoguht.


Lets say you make an HK group in the editor, and to save time, you select "GENERIC Destoryer Escort". I once heard that "generic" entries use the AI_hydrophones and AI_sonar in the AI_sensor.dat instead of all the specifically named hydrophone or sonar sets that have much better stastics, i never put much thought into that, but now i have to wonder if thats true.

makes sense ---as this offers an opportunity to have radically different destroyer sensors for different aspects of the gameplay it has to be used to the fullest extent--

yes if you use the mission editor to add ships it shows that generic vessels are avialable for each country (if you do not see them available for a specific country then copying the cfgs from the roster folder into the countrys roster folder will give you the choices there aswell__i think it's the cfgs you need to copy might be the entire vessel folder one or t'other any way or both lol)

it's better than even money the generic ships use the generic sensors.(dead cert in my book)...so it's an ideal way to get different HK behaviour from the normal convoy escorts---bags of room for realism experiments there--


it's a shame you can't have different lost contact times for either one--that's the only drawback-- for my money you want a short sharp shock from the convoy escorts--rinse and repeat-- till convoy is safe-- and something a lot more prolonged and deadly from the HK's--

:up:

[Ducimus]

well i ramped up the generic sensors. Still testing.

Not promising so far, i always tend to have better luck by lowering the noise factor.

[Wulfmann]

I just posted the below in a new thread before I saw this one. easier to just copy and paste. It is in line with but also in addition to this subject.

PostPosted: Mon May 22, 2006 5:01 pm Post subject:
I noticed something very wrong with AI depth charge drops

I was testing my new RND and decided to see if my theory that the fall of the DCes is directed at player’s U-Boat no matter what the angle of approach from the attacking escort.
I found a perfect example so allowed myself to not take evasive action to see if I was correct.
The DE was off my port bow as I made 3knots at 220 meters. It crossed my bow at zero and was at a constant distance. It then was reported closing at 17, closing at 30, closing at 77 and closing at 100 degrees at which I heard the sounds of DC splashes. It then was moving away at 200. Now if you can picture a drop over me 220 meters nearly 700 feet above me and I am moving at 3 knots.
At 3 meters per second it should take 70 seconds for the DC to reach me. If it is dropped on my position I would have moved more than 350 meters in 70 seconds. That is four lengths of my boat. Since the drop occurred while the escort was going from 100 to 200 degrees relative to my direction that would mean he was dropping slightly behind my center. Even if the DCes fell straight down with no momentum from the moving escort I would not be where they fell. I would have had to have been completely stopped and they would have had to drop straight off the escort to hit me behind the conning tower.
Yet, they landed directly on top of me.
That can mean, assuming I am not mistaken and it would be wrong to assume that but still possible the DCes are dropped with knowledge by the game to where it knows I will be and defies the change in position almost like if it drops where you are it hits you. That can’t be right and I have tried to access this but the fact is my position and direction relative to the escorts's position and direction are correct. They are known facts (to me) that made this an easy to analyze situation
That means that every time you hear a drop it will hit you at the correct depth (on escorts of 2-3-4 rated crews at least) even if you are moving in a different direction for the path of the cans.
The only way that will not happen is if you alter course each time irregardless of what your position is relative to the drop. That makes it hard to figure as practical solutions can be worse than turning toward the should be explosion area.
Since I did that last night for 51/2 hours changing course with every drop it can work but that is not only not real, historically, but not fair for a game, not sporting mates! (The relaity is more the concern, though!)
One of the things real U-Boats did was actually stand still. More times than not they withstood all day long DC attacks and lived to tell the story.
Why can't we?
I don't want stupid AI either. But somewhere in between is there a possible solution to this?

How can we change that?
I am unfamiliar with how Depth Charges work and what it would take to modify them and even if we can modify the drop rate and explosive results can we modify the way they can be dropped with deadly precision?

Can someone speak up on what we can do and how DC are configured and what options we have for modifying them? Correcting this would be a big leap forward in hisorical reenactment!

Wulfmann

[Ducimus]

I am unfamiliar with how Depth Charges work and what it would take to modify them and even if we can modify the drop rate and explosive results can we modify the way they can be dropped with deadly precision?

Most of your depth charge woes have already been fixed. Its quite easy. D/L some of TIme travellers tools.

You can adjust drop speed. I think its at 3 M/per second (by way of comparision i think HH's are like 6 or 7 MPS)

You can adjust depth percision. Meaning if you enter a depth percision of 20, it depth charge will randomly detonate anywhere within 20 meters of its intended depth. The default on this is FIVE.

You can adjust min/max radius, this effects the kill zone of the depth charge. For example alot of ppl use like 4 and 15, default is like 4 and 40.

Then theres explosion range, this effects the distance at which you can feel the depth charge . (screen shakes and such)

[mike_espo]

Hey Ducimus, am I wrong in assuming that unless the AI "hears" something, it won't ping?

If so, that is unrealistic. Just finished a book: U-boat Killer by Capt Donald Macintire, He drove a H class DD in WW2 Killed 5 U-boats.

He goes on to say that they always used ASDIC, not Hydrophones for detecting U-boats.

Is it asking too much to change the code so AI can ping on a Huff Duff or Aircraft sighting?? :hmm:

[mike_espo]

i' not so sure...

i've set up my ai_sensors file so that at silent running, i'm impossible to hear unless the escort is w/in a couple of hundred yards. nevertheless, i can start getting pinged when the escort is 1400-1500m away.

How is that possible??

[Ducimus]

Hey Ducimus, am I wrong in assuming that unless the AI "hears" something, it won't ping?

If so, that is unrealistic.

I was thinking out loud with a tin foil hat trying to figure out what the AI does. Realism has nothing to do with it. Just a wild guess at the unfathomable and mysteriously dumb AI.

[caspofungin]

Hey Ducimus, am I wrong in assuming that unless the AI "hears" something, it won't ping?

If so, that is unrealistic... they always used ASDIC, not Hydrophones for detecting U-boats.

there's real life, then there's this game.

re getting pinged at 1400+ m -- it does happen. i'm not sure if the initial detection is by hydrophones or if pinging starts at a certain level of "suspicion" -- ie the same sense that drives the escort to where you fired off your torps...

either way, it does happen. pretty cool, too. increases in volume as they get closer and closer, suddenly there's silence and you know you're under the beam of the asdic and the dc's aren't too far away... :up:

[Wulfmann]

I am unfamiliar with how Depth Charges work and what it would take to modify them and even if we can modify the drop rate and explosive results can we modify the way they can be dropped with deadly precision?

Most of your depth charge woes have already been fixed. Its quite easy. D/L some of TIme travellers tools.

You can adjust drop speed. I think its at 3 M/per second (by way of comparision i think HH's are like 6 or 7 MPS)

You can adjust depth percision. Meaning if you enter a depth percision of 20, it depth charge will randomly detonate anywhere within 20 meters of its intended depth. The default on this is FIVE.

You can adjust min/max radius, this effects the kill zone of the depth charge. For example alot of ppl use like 4 and 15, default is like 4 and 40.

Then theres explosion range, this effects the distance at which you can feel the depth charge . (screen shakes and such)

OK, I giess I am not as unfamiliar as I thought. I have these tools and use them but only when I can ascertain improvements.
Making it easy is worse than too hard. It is my hope some curve that mimics realistic conclusions if not actual means of reaching them can be had or at least more than now.
I will check my DCs to see what I can do starting with your siggestions.

Wulfmann

[Wulfmann]

Before I re-edit the DCes and try them can one of you "experten" inform me as to the sim and sensor files in the configuration folder.
Which refers to the player boat and which is for the AI?
Wulfmann

[Ducimus]

AI_sensors.dat - everything related to escorts

IE,
Active sonar, passive sonar, visual, radar, etc.

ON a side note, an entry of XXX_XXXXP - the P i beleive is for Passive... meaning hydrophones. An A on the end means Active, as in active sonar.
Also the active sonar will have a 90 degree arc and passive like 135 degrees.

Stare at it long enough you'll figure out who's who.

Sensors.dat - generally speaking everything related to you.
Your visual range, your RWR, your radar, etc.

[Wulfmann]

D, I look at the Hex editor opened files for ai_sensors like a calf looking at a new gate!
I have done a lot of Hex editing in flight sims so wonder why this looks so different but it does or perhaps I just need familiarization with the terminology (lacking!)
The text file in the CFG folder for sim and sensors does not actually do anything regarding this discussion?

Wulfmann

[Kpt. Lehmann]

Good thread gentlemen! :up: :up: :up:

[Ducimus]

Ideally you want TimeTravllers, "SH3 Mini Tweaker". Id give you the homepage link, but i can't find it, and the D/L sticky is missing its information. Im pretty sure that somebody on the fourm knows the address though.

[Kpt. Lehmann]

Ideally you want TimeTravllers, "SH3 Mini Tweaker". Id give you the homepage link, but i can't find it, and the D/L sticky is missing its information. Im pretty sure that somebody on the fourm knows the address though.

TimeTraveller's Website http://www.delraydepot.com/tt/sh3.htm#crushdepth

You can find it there. :D