Deciphering the AI system

Any technical questions for Waterloo go here!
Post Reply
Didz
Reactions:
Posts: 40
Joined: Fri Sep 12, 2014 5:35 pm

Deciphering the AI system

Post by Didz »

This is an extension of a debate which has been raging for some time on the Steam Forum, without really making a lot of progress. What I'm hoping to do is add a bit more understanding of how the AI system in SOWWL works to the .pdf and video already produced by Mitra. (see Links below)

http://www.norbsoftdev.net/forum/waterl ... rial#71184

What I'm looking for are people who are interested in gaining a better understanding of how the current AI system works, and/or, have the skills necessary to decipher some of the coding used by the game to manage the AI behaviour.

Mitra has already defined the four key components of the AI system as:

1. Stance
2. Divisional Strategy
3. Tactics
4. Take command

'Tactic's' and 'Take Command' seem pretty clear as Mitra says that the only Tactic available to the player is the ability to set a 'Tactical Destination'. So, basically the 'Move to' command issued via the Command Map, Mouse Pointer or Courier Message. The AI is then bound by that instruction to try and move to that destination.

Likewise 'Take Command' is described by Mitra as turning the AI Off, so as far as I can see it's just an On/Off switch, and once it's off the AI plays no further part in a units behaviour. Although, there may still be some involvement of the AI in a units close combat reactions and so there may be some detail to explore as to what impact 'Take Command' has at battalion; Regiment and Battery level.

However, the real guts of the AI system seems to be driven by the Stance Table and the Divisional Strategy options that are linked to it. Mitra's refers to the later as Schema's, or Tactical Schema's, and the AI appears to select for the 60 schema's available according to the Stance selected by the player, or the AI commander, and the 'Style' of the commander (which I think means his personality). I assume that Aggressive commanders are more likely to select aggressive tactical schema's.

If anyone is interested in helping me unravel these mysteries please post below.
Post Reply