V1_rocket_b2 request waypoint
 

Hello,everybody here!
There was a winter map named v1_rocket_b2
the story line:Winter 1943. In a daring attempt to fight the axis with it's own weapons the allies have managed to capture a v1bomb. Now the allied forces must escort a Lorraine37L carying this stolen v1rocket into an axis rocketbase, steal the rocketfuel and launch the rocket deep into Axis territory.
Here is a link to it: http://69.93.98.218/downloads/etmain/v1rocket_b2.pk3

If someone whoever have a spare time waypointing for v1_rocket_b2, i'll really appreciate it!:clap:

Re: V1_rocket_b2 request waypoint
 

Yes I remember doing a Bobots1.03 waypoint on this map, enjoyable but big. Took another look, did a walkthrough, should be better in Fritzbot with or without lever controls I think. Looks like there are 2 TOIs available for special scripting requirements and a few that could be reassigned if needed. That means that the bots can respond based on the position of the half-track-V1 from the spawn to the train-yard as well as the position of the V1 rocket rail-cart. Teams should be 10-13+ I suspect but final testing will determine that.

Now I have no real time for a few weeks, but if nobody takes it on by December I'll see if I can post a playable WIP for Christmas. Please note: I am not promising to take any new waypoints all the way to release status anymore. So you would have to play test it and provide feedback. In the meanwhile if you want something to do, try writing up a strategy file (description of stages of game play and defensive positions).

Re: V1_rocket_b2 request waypoint
 

"So you would have to play test it and provide feedback. In the meanwhile if you want something to do, try writing up a strategy file (description of stages of game play and defensive positions)."
Okay,i'll try as soon as i can.
Looking forward to hear from your good news about playable WIP for Christmas.
Thx in advance,TomTom!

Re: V1_rocket_b2 request waypoint
 

First function test is showing some issues. Allied engrs seem to only fix from behind the Lorraine supply tractor. If they are beside it they act like if they think it is fixed and needs to be escorted. I am going to try adding a parallel one way path centered on the vehicle to force a rear approach like in saberpeak. Beyond that I would have to investigate the related bsp entities.

The 2 stage bridge TOI only triggers re-building if dynamited twice (total destruct) and only triggers dynamiting if construction completed ("bridge reinforced"). I would need a lot of script resources (say 3-4 fake TOIs) to fully communicate the bridge state to the bots including the 2 of 4 states when it can be crossed. I looked at fueldump but in that map the bridge is less consequential to the match play so I guess that is why the bridge dynamite actions seem to remain inactive. One workaround might be to change the script to completely destroy the bridge with just 1 dynamiting so as to speed up the rebuilding.

Because of the problems giving the bots knowledge of when the bridge is half built and can be crossed, along with no other quick way for the allies to get to that side of the gate I have decided to do a very class based defense initially so that axis bots don't vacillate between camps and roams on different sides of the bridge. Axis engrs and medics on one side, Fieldops, soldiers the other, with cvops in reserve. Likewise Allied engr-support camps on the far side will be dependent on the state of the bridge.

Re: V1_rocket_b2 request waypoint
 

Did some more bridge testing (trying to find a way to script to set the state of an added func_construct to a constructed state) then went back to re-confirm my observations from the earlier tests and found I had some of them wrong. The engineers will respond correctly to the half-built / half-destroyed states. That only leaves the other bots and the aiscript to deal with. I think one fake construct for the half-built state may suffice.

The problem with the lorraine repair is not so pronounced in normal teams and play, I may just have to deal with it in some locations.

I think I can share the fake construct of the lorraine positions with the closed state of the door to the fuel. So I figue 3 TOIs, 3 fake constructs, 5-6 func explosives and the two door lever (4 trigger multiples and 2 target script triggers) could suffice (18 scripted entities!). If that proves too many to be stable then the levers will be sacrificed.

One other observation, Axis Fieldop bots are not smart enough to know that air support refuse to fly through tunnels ROFL

Re: V1_rocket_b2 request waypoint
 

hey,TomTom.Glad to see u and your first WIP for v1_rocket_b2 before Chrisma!
i have test it just now,have to make a little suggestion here for u.i hope u like it!
first of all,of course,i would like to see actions around bridge become more comfortable for axis or allied after bridge testing once and again.but please pay attention to some other aspects like forzen river.At begining of defense main entrance,i noticed axis always jump into the river during the fight,then it costs much time for axis to got a way to return to the ground.
in my opinion,u would better to refer to look into waypoint files for transmitter which made bots could not fall to the river from the constructable bridge.i think if make sure axis or allied don't have to worried about falling to the river during the fight near the bridge,meanwhile axis engineer prefer defending the main entrance with weapon to dynamiting bridge,the fighting of main entrance will be more exciting and better.
As to allied,attacking the main entrance,allied engineers go forward to the main entrance while some others invade into the base through the rear path cross the river,right.but actually the action of rear invaders capture the flag had not happended?maybe u have set the flag action actived after main entrance breach.but personally as long as the allied captured flag,their respawn engineer can dynamite on the main entrance inside and that will be easy for allied to escort the tank.
After the tank had reached the depotyard,allied go for the flag or just stick at depotyard instead of stealing or deliver,i suspect key actions have not been included in this version of WIP,expecting to see that in next version as soon as possible!
and i have another suggestion:Once the tank reached the depotyard successfully,made the flag owner allied permanence.i'm surely axis have to strong their defense line like using mg42 or camping on the top of the base near the fuel while we will watch that allied go along three tunnel ways to the fuel base.oh,that will be great fight waiting for us!!ROFL
Well,i will make more suggestion about improving WIP after testing once and again if have spare time,i hope next version will be release as soon as possble.
keep up your work,man!!:thumbsup:

Re: V1_rocket_b2 request waypoint
 

Hey xgzoq thanks for your input. Sorry to disapoint you but I am a few days at least from first WIP so what you must have tried out was 0.01 which is TEST. Just a partial waypoint for evaluating vehicle escort-repair-destruct and some pathing (specifically the bots on ice cause it is difficult for them). So at this stage of test all axis bots are attracted to any roams, camps and vehicles on the allied side. That will be changed shortly (and later on the fight for the fuel will be added). It is important that the bots be able to get off the ice quickly because bots that are fighting do not remain at a camp nor do they follow nodes. Now in this map any axis bots that come under fire in front of the gate will pursue their attacker if they are within bot sight and will likely pass on to the river. The only way to stop them going to the river would be to put up invisible walls (fakebrushes).

Yes I will eventually try to support inside dynamiting. However getting bots spawning at both spawns will take additional script resources and I do not get to chose what class or bot spawn where. Indeed the class order of respawning may mean it will be impossible to split a class between spawns. Now it would be easy to just make all the bots spawn inside when the allies capture the flag but I think you would like the attack to be 2 sided. This is where a strategy description is useful (attached file describes a possible first stage only).

I was thinking of class limiting the flag recapture to axis cvops at that point since they should also do the command post. Then if the axis have the flag they would defend the fuel and the tunnel entrances. If they lose the flag then the axis fall back to heavily defend the fuel and lightly defend the tunnel exits/launcher area.

Update; OK I found a spot for the new scripted team_WOLF_objective between the depot and initial house spawn. And it looks like a mix of classes including one in three engrs will respawn at the depot with the rest at the initial spawn (assuming all the team respawns at the same time, otherwise it fills the first 4 in the old spawn then the next 6 in the depot then splits the next 2 after that...).
And I now have all the scripted entities done, all path nodes and fixed objective actions placed. So if you have favorite camps or strategies now is the time to say since defining the action groupings is next on my To Do list. (Routing will be delayed until initial testing is completed but should be roughly defined in the strategy file before then)

Re: V1_rocket_b2 request waypoint
 

Ok first WIP posted. Find the link Here then follow it to the bottom of the next page. (I will move the file to its own directory later so use the 2007 projects page if I don't link it on the main page.)

Strategy is not complete nor implemented so there are still camps that can be added. There are no routes yet so don't expect bots to use alternate entrances/exits. Ramp deliver defense is sparse, deliverer support non-existent, and bots will still be fighting for the flag so their focus will be divided at the end. Bots ignore the door controls cause they are just low priority roams (I might use alt-roams later, but do not plan on anything like fake steals that would be overkill).

Please report back any engr bots zombied beside the tractor carrier. I have mostly solved the problem with a special path from behind but there maybe splines (run_xx messages in console) that are problems as the carrier moves by more than 1 at a time. Don't worry about any node connection warnings (anticipated). I have not seen any no goal message for the last 3 test games but they may be possible nonetheless. Thx for your help.

Re: V1_rocket_b2 request waypoint
 

i have tried out newly first playable WIP.yeath,allied bot could won the game after steal and deliver action supported now.thx TomTom!:thumbup:
but i think it will be necessary to improvement on many aspects.
let's talk about the fight for main entrance.during the match,we can see some cases that not expected.
1.the allied prefer chose rear way into the base and not constructed allied side mg42 until the tank crossed bridge or further while the axis always cross the river to the allied side to attack madly even spawnkilling!so u can see the tank was laying on the road far from the bridge or near bridge but 10min left only.
2.the allied engineers escort the tank near the bridge and prone to construct bridge while axis at the main entrance defending at other side of bridge.allied usually failed to construct it completely,even a lucky one did it,axis engineer dynamited on it at once.then some strange happened axis still jump onto the river to dynamite after the bridge destroyed completely?
3.allied really like to go for rear path to capture the depotyard,but it seemd that i havn't seen allied respawn at depotyard well as u expected and after a while axis reseized the flag.allied engineers kept on chosing dynamite at main entrance inside. but 9 of 10 times failed if just one axis engineer roaming in the base.
so i have to make conclusion that the strategy for allied using rear path to blow main entrnace earlier than regular ways was not practicable method.:(
Fortunately,i got another plan:Only activate rear path for allied engineer if allied pay attention to mg42nest and the tank that cross the bridge under the main entrance and allied engineer tried to dynamite at the face of main entrance failed many times.Of course,i don't object to the rear path for allied cvops to capture flag if u can make sure the flag respawn do function well for allied.
Well,let our views transfer to main chapter on the map.i was afraid that i had seen allied engineers sticking at depot calling:"escort vehicle!" after the tank reached at depot successful?
after tank reached at depotyard and the electric train ready to go to the ramp.the allied always go to the depotyard through shortcut instead of tunnel ways while axis owned flag.the allied often crowded at the door which only way to outside and easy for axis to kill one by one.until last min of the match they kept on fighting for flag sometimes!:|
when allied owned flag,axis forced to strengthen defense,but it seemed impossible for axis engineer which roaming outdoor to construct the radar mg42nest when he tried in vain to climb up the ledge near the nest?even if mg42 constructed,never seen any axis use it?the fuel lightly defense maybe too weak if the axis repawned at depotyard and some allied lucky sneak into the fuelbase.
So my suggestion is coming out:when the train go for the ramp and axis still owned flag,Active lightly fuelbase defense.split the respawn,one or two axis repawn at depotyard while more ones at main bunker ready for defending in the tunnel and nearby the fuelbase;when axis lose flag,Active heavily reforced defense as well as lightly defense:split respawn,one or two near the radar the others at main bunker,need do more defense into the fuelbase like landmine planted,fuelbase mg42nest,sniper at top of the mountain near the fuelbase or so on.BTW no matter whether axis lost flag or not the axis main bunker mg42 should be first considerble defend spot.
The switch of front gate for bots using near the fuel was a pretty idea!but i'm afraid no allied noticed that.
Actually allied attacking to the fuelbase needs to do more improvement and strengthen.
oh,if i think of some idea for allied attacking,i will share with u if i'm free time.:chef:

Re: V1_rocket_b2 request waypoint
 

Thank you for the feedback.
in reply:
1 - In order to focus the allied bots on dynamiting the gate I reduced the priority of constructibles (like the bridge and mg42). That way the dynamite is at least as high priority as the bridge but unfortunately the mg42 is reduced to a priority similar to planting mines. But that should be OK since the bots don't need the fixed mg42's in this map and the allied mg42 is very vulnerable. I can always turn off the construct of the mg42 earlier so it does not get built when the gate is blown but then again for now I just like to think the bot is acting a little like an XP whore and building it for the engineering XP.
As for the axis the class defense strategy is not properly implemented yet so a few bots may be crossing at that point that should stay nearer the spawn.

2 - Are you sure the bridge was totally dynamited? It take 2 dynamites and if the second is laid after the first one blows there is only a narrow edge left to dynamite. So far I have observed the axis dynamite that narrow edge reasonably well, but I will monitor it in future. As to the Allies they will have difficulty now building the bridge since the axis bots will seek to own that area to prevent the tractor getting to the otherside. I may assign more axis camps inside the tunnel reducing those at the tractor, however the tractor is a magnet for all bot classes (though with different priorities).

3 - The rear dynamite can still be practical but the allied engrs likely need support camps (current there are just a couple of medic roams).
Making the bots change strategy after a set number of dynamite plants is a very interesting idea and can be done in the script file, but it would require another func_explosive entity to signal the aiscript when to change. Now this map already has a lot of scripted entities, so to be safe I will leave this idea for much later when everything else is complete.
The spawning in the depot will happen but as I tested only when the bots respawning exceed 4. I can likely change this but it will affect the number spawning for the bridge adversely. I think I will leave this for later when balance testing starts.
As I said NO routes have been added, I want the bots to be more predictable until we can be certain that their current behavior is correct before adding the random element of routes.

Thank you very much that is exactly the sort of feedback I need. I had not time to verify that path with bots yet, will try to fix it ASAP.

Correct I made it a non camp mg42 action. Later when I force the allies to run to the ramp to support the fuel carrier that is when I should change the action to a fixed mg42 camp.

Agreed but it takes another scripted entity so I first want to be sure things are stable first.
These already exist, but more will be added (except mines - over 10 total can crash FritzBot ET). Initially I want to keep the number of camps smaller until the strategy definition is done. The bots chose camps at random, they do not consider things like too many defending one spot and not enough the other spots, so too many camps can actually weaken a defense if not careful ( It depends on team size and classes)

They won't as I explained, but when I do the routes then bots that do not get fired on may open/close the door (TBD). Beyond that I would have to make the allies zigzag always when running for the open wall.

Re: V1_rocket_b2 request waypoint
 

Update: Still working on it when I can xgzoq. Dealing with the truly bad weather this fall is reducing the time I have to work on these waypoints.

- I have fixed the path to the radar mg42nest construct.

- And I have been testing positions for alt-roams for routes. This allows me to check other difficult paths (e.g. getting on top of the fuel bunker roof). In static testing using alt-roams at the rocket fuel room door levers work well. However the success rate will depend on whether they are fired upon (bots stop following routes if they fight along the way). I expect the axis will be more successful in closing the door than the allies will be in opening it because the axis can get to the inside switch protected from being attacked.



RESPAWN DISTRIBUTION:
I have been testing positions for team_WOLF_objectives so we can have the teams split their respawns in 2-3 places. Best combinations so far;

Case 1: When Axis have the depot flag and Allies have the main entrance(gate) spawn.

For a respawn of 12, 1/2 the axis respawn at the depot, 1/3rd at the ramp bunker and 1/6th at the radar near the fuel. Or for a respawn of 4 50%(2) at the ramp bunker 25%(1) at the depot and 25%(1) at the Radar near the fuel. (Specifically in a respawn the 1st 2nd 5th 12th players/bots are at ramp bunker, 4th 10th at radar and 3rd 6th 7th 8th 9th 11th at the depot) Since 4 bots respawning is much more likely than 12 I think this is a good mix. Unfortunately I can't make the bots choose camps based upon where they respawn.

Case 2: When axis lose the depot flag to allies

For a respawn of 12, 1/2 the Axis respawn at the ramp bunker and 1/2 at the radar. For a respawn of 4, the axis respawn 75% at the radar and 25% at the ramp bunker. (specifically 1st, 2nd, 4th, 7th, 9th and 12th are at the Radar and 3rd 5th 6th 8th 10th 11th are at ramp bunker)

I still have to test splitting the allies between the main entrance and depot spawn.



Timeframe: I will not have any WIP updates this weekend but will try to get one for next weekend if the weather quiets down.

Re: V1_rocket_b2 request waypoint
 

OK decided to throw in everything in WIP 0.03 to test out whether it is stable.
That is there are 23 scripted entities, 648/1024 nodes, 139/256 actions, 11/16 action tests and just 7 routes so far. I have not had time for extensive testing so I would appreciate being informed if anybody experiences memory problems on older machines with less RAM.

Vehicle notes:
You may note some allied bots standing around or going in circles behind the carrier. That is because I chose to turn off the vehicle support only at one place currently. Before the bridge I want the Axis to damage the carrier and own the area around it so I leave the vehicle active. The side effect is the allied engrs will likely repair it before finishing the bridge and other classes may stand behind it taking a break from fighting. When the carrier finally arrives at the depot I do not immediately turn on the steal but give each team 10 seconds to regroup. So I leave the vehicle on for 15 seconds while it unloads to keep the bots happy, with the side effect that the allied bots may run in circles behind it during those 15 seconds (I may decrease these delays later). Oh and by the way I have surrounded the fuelcan with a fake brush so you human cvops don't steal the fuel too early and ruin the bots fun. I know it is Christmas and it would have been nice to wrap it in a box model but I tried that and the fuel did a David Copperfield when the box was removed.

Other notes:
There may be a few "no valid goals" msgs still (saw none for the past three games). There are a few more camp actions that can be added but I wanted to leave them out till I got other opinions. You will note that there is a strong ramp defense/flag offense by the axis making it hard to deliver the fuel, but not too hard to steal it. The bot sight is a bit high IMO for the deliver but I don't want to decrease it much or it will affect the play at the start of the match. I have done no campaign nor balance testing yet (balance likely favors Axis).

That is all the presents you will get from me this week so ...

:angel: Merry Xmas to y'all:santa: and good fight. :angel:

Re: V1_rocket_b2 request waypoint
 

Happy New Years,TomTom! :santa:
Doing test many times with 20bots or 24bots even 28bots,i have never experienced memory problems or others,but so far i can't promise whether it will be happened on other one's machines.

During test on matching around main entrance i have still notice some issues
Allies side:at beginning,most of allies escort the tank while few ones go to water entrance.That's fine.
but when tank near the bridge which not built yet,more prefer chosing back path and less maybe go ahead.allies engineers outside hurry to dynmaite main entrance when biridge half-bulit,but they always failed meanwhile allies inside the base never owned flag for long time,it led to allies couldn't protect dynamitable inside or reforce the allies outside through axis main entrance respawn point in time.
Once tank cross the bridge under main entrance,almost no one cross bridge to protect tank,only some allies engineers tried to dynamite plant or so,then u can see our poor engineers still kept on trying to blow main entrance or repairing tank lonely after failed once and again.
it was worse that allies could turn back to repair the bridge by jumping into frozen river instead of ready to plant dynamite at main entrance when bridge complete destroyed suddenly.so after a long time,main entrance blow and tank into the tunnel.allies should be won but time not enough sometimes.:(
Axis side:at beginning,it was not easy for axis go outside from the exit above main entrance;they also stuck on the hill under allies mg42 construct point for a while;it seemed that they more like jumping river than do something else.meanwhile u can see some axis defenders stand do nothing inside main entrance nearby until allies invaders inside approached them.
some stranges still happened that axis engineers tried to plant dynamite on bridge even if the bridge destroyed fully,u often watched axis engineers jumping into frozen river to try to get the dynamitable which fell into the river but not planted yet.more strange was allies cvops in disguise tried in vain to satchel on bridge which not exist!!:ohmy:
(Plz check the pics in detail on attachments)
Here is some advices for main entrance:
i think more than enough for axis defensive around main entrance,if above stuckage issues fixed and dynamiting on bridge corrected,that will be ok.
its high time to do something for allies attacking main entrance.i really dislike that most allies go inside but few engineers struggle against more axis outside even if tank cross bridge.
Now I will adjust my plan a bit which i had mentioned a few days ago:
1.Allow few allies like cvops to use rear path for flag or satchel.
2.Only allies engineer may go water ways if tank just cross the bridge under the main entrance.
3.No matter whether flag owned by allies,allies should be focus on the fight outside such like backing up construct bridge or so. setting some allies panzer action or so on the hill near the bridge will be useful.
4.A top priority should be allies other class back up their engineers to dynamiate at main entrance outside
5.and the dynamitable should be protect by other allies class nearby until main entrance blow when tank cross bridge.
6.Disable axis dynamite plant on half-built bridge or even bridge fully will be helpful,of course.

Well,let's see match around the fuel.
I'm afraid allies hardly won on this big map when 15vs15 and the allies offensive should be strength for making sure allies by themselves can win even if much more axis defensive.
1.Escort tank to the depot is easy for allies.when tank reach the depot and axis tried to reclaim the flag,allies should use mg42 near the door to outside in the main entrance.that will be a bit useful to prevent axis reaching the flag.
2.Allow allies cvops always satchel the axis mg42 near radar1 even mg42 at water entrance,it will disturb axis engieers'defensive at least.
3.In my opinion,since defensive at ramp become smaller if axis have flag,do not immediately turn on recapture flag by allies but give alliesteam 30 seconds or more delay when a allies got the fuel.i mean if axis respawn at depotyard naturally decrease the num of axis defensive near ramp and this is a good chance for allies with fuel to the deliver easily quickly.
4.And once allies got fuel,they have two choices:
chosing the shortcut to ramp,the allies should more covering fire the one with objective nearby,such as fieldops call airstrike at axis respawn exit outside,medic behind the objective-man,cvops sniper at enemy near the ramp or panzer aim at any axis far from;
chosing the tunnel way,some allies should protect him not only follow him to the railtrack but strike at axis main bunker from another direction like the fuelbunker or nearby.
5.BTW,it would better to avoid many allies and the one with objective blocking near the exit of tunnel,it always led to all of them killed soon,u know.
6.I believe that spreading out axis defensive is a good idea when allies tried to the deliver but axis too heavy. that's it for allies so far,maybe i will need more thinking about allies later.
As to axis defensive,the allies stolen fuel too easy but deliver too hard.For balance we need more defensive in the fuelbunker but less defensive near the ramp.
1.my suggestion is change some action which used to defend the ramp to defend the fuel,such like move the moveable mg42 action to the fuelbunker or remake action for fuel.
2.the fuel mg42 should be more use.
3.let one axis keep in the fuel room maybe a good idea or hiding axis in some room on the second floor.
4.Once allies got fuel and escape from the bunker.made axis using the radar1 mg42 more often and some panzer waiting on the upper of the main bunker near ramp,others go for the tunnel.that way will be better for balance.

Generally speaking,allies can win but really heavy fight anywhere,your the WIP work well,thx for your chrismas gift for me and anybody love ET,cheers!!!:thumbup:
keep up your work,hoping to see more balance version soon!!

Re: V1_rocket_b2 request waypoint
 

hello,TomTom,how is going on?anyway i really hope to see your reply soon!!

Re: V1_rocket_b2 request waypoint
 

Sorry xgzoq I was working on other things for the last 10 days. I have just back to looking at v1rocket. You are right about the axis bridge dynamiteing the bridge after it is destroyed, don't know why I never saw them do it before (basically a typo in the aiscript, and one in the nav). Over the next week I am going to focus on improving the play up to the main gate being blown and ignore the rest of the map for now. Since the allied mgnest construct is such low priority I have added mobile mg42 and panzer camps on the allied side to help protect any allied engrs outside the gate. I don't think that I will have them camp beside the engrs outside the gate, they would be too vulnerable. Only the medics should stay close to the engrs and they are tasked with that on the inside (though those actions may need improvement).

Re: V1_rocket_b2 request waypoint
 

Update:
i) "stuckage issues fixed" (There are now 4 jump down points)
ii)"dynamiting on bridge corrected" (typo corrected)
3. 4. 5.Allied Soldiers camps (panzer and mg42) aimed at Gate from far side to support engrs. Also one sniper. By not being on gate side they can't be wiped out with an air strike and the camps don't have to be turned off when the bridge is destroyed. On inside Medics roam to support engrs (might add a medic camp)
6. Side effect of fixing the typo means that Axis will not likely dynamite a fully built bridge all the way back to its totally un-constructed state (2 plants needed). Without another fake TOI all I can do is delay disabling the dynamite-action a few seconds after the first dynamite blows. But this delay may mean bots will plant dynamite at a fully blown bridge on occasion.

I am currently experimenting with disabling the tractor(tank) and the inside dynamite depending on the bridge, tractor position and flag ownership. The intent is to stop the Allied engrs wasting time on the tractor and the water route. However I still think that the inside dynamite is the more likely to succeed. The CP is a problem because its priority is can only be set at the start of the map, and making it a priority distract the engrs (who seek to dynamite it/construct it instead of the bridge/gate). Turning the CP priority off will affect the whole match especially later on because the team that owns the CP recharges fastest. I may have to adjust the team make up to give the allies more engrs if I can't come up with a good combination.

Re: V1_rocket_b2 request waypoint
 

Just so you know I am still working on it when I have time. Saw a couple of places where actions groups were not being activated resulting in no goal errors. Unfortunately I just accidentally over wrote the aiscript again so I will have to try to figure out what I had changed in that file over the last 4 weeks or less before I can get back to testing.

Re: V1_rocket_b2 request waypoint
 

0.04 posted to my site. I think I have squashed the bugs but please report any bad behavior.

Better fight at main gate and fuel, new deliver point, Command post priority decreased to focus on gate. Extra allied medic for better engr support and deliver. There are about 30 new actions, 5 more routes and dozens of nodes so it is getting a bit full. See the readme for more details on changes.

Re: V1_rocket_b2 request waypoint
 

hey TomTom,long time no see!how have u been!
yes,thx for many changes on the 0.04 version indeed!but not enough espeicailly on initial attack at the entrance outside,i'm afraid.
here are my recent test result with 12vs12(3 engrs,3 medics,2 feilds,2 cvops and 2 panzers per team)
on the initial attack at gate:
1.about the bridge
i thought the allies camps(such like mg,panzer even artil)outside should be helpful with constructing the bridge,although this way kept allies field and soldiers on the battlefiled outside more frequently than before,it was no use to cover allies construct the bridge.in fact,we still always see allies engrs had difficulty with construct and kept struggle agaist the enemy at other side of bridge.sometimes,allies other classes went towards to the construct point,but they just gather around even disturb engr's job instead of covering fire or so.to my confusion that a cvops with disguise ever attemped to replace engr's position??(detail pics below show u all)
and to my surprise that when bridge fully destroyed,allies engrs never plant dynamite outside until they rebuilt the bridge again by cross the river even if they didn't have to do so as they stay inside safely?!
turn to axis side,it seemd that bridge dynamite bug fixed,but i don't care about that,now you must know that the bridge always blown in time had responsible for lacking of enough time for allies to win later.
so far my suggestion to the bridge is just don't let axis engr dynamite the bridge at all!don't waste of your time to deal with the bridge.as u can see,allies have much trouble with construct the bridge as axis defensive at the bridge heavily such like mg under the gate,panzer aim at the construct even artil.even if not,any of them could hit the allies engr with high accuracy on the upper gate easily.
i'm sure the fight'll be more exciting after axis dynamite bridge banned!
2.then let's talk about the gate
if there is nothing wrong with my memory,the change should be including:One new dynamite position for allies hidden corner plant outside.unfortunately,hardly see this new change happend during many tests.in fact,i just cought a allies engr attemped to go for the new position once.and he failed undoubtedly because he did nothing but just standing the corner with the dynamitable?maybe u should adjust some action or else,anyhow this will be helpful to blow the gate easily,i guess.
and to my disappointment that no matter whether the tank under the gate or not the allies prefer to try to dynamite the gate from inside more often then before even if the backway is more dangerous.its boring that allies engr still insist on for the inside of gate after they failed too many times.:( occasionally,allies medic lucky protect them until the inside gate blown,but we always see allies medics killed before the engr approach the gate.
i know the inside-plan can success,but the outside-plan must be more easily for allies to blow the gate,u know.why don't u try it?
well,i'm tired,maybe give u some advices for the fight around the fuel next time,but i really hope the next version for allies easily blown the gate firstly!
and hope to see your reply soon as well!

Re: V1_rocket_b2 request waypoint
 

Thanks for all the feedback and help
.
I know what you say about building the bridge, but IMO when I play engr I have difficulty surviving building the bridge so I expect the bots to have difficulty too. The one thing I might do is add an in-line camp to protect the engrs but the only way to ensure it would be filled would be to remove other camps. and if the camp was anyplace near the construct crates it would draw artillery fire on to the engrs.

The 0.04 waypoints showed very good balance in 9 vs 9 (i.e remove skywalker from the included bots file) in 32 games a ratio of 6:5 axis:allies. So any major changes like disabling the dynamite will impact that. But if you want to tryout your idea I have attached alternate aiscipts (see the readme as to how to use). BTW I almost never put 2 bot field Ops per team they are too efficient at gaining XP making a long map like this very difficult for the attacker.

I have noticed an occasional bot coming under fire at the crates and lying down, Odd as there are no nodes or non-engr action to explain why, so it is most likely related to taking fire at an essentially dead end in the nav, possibly the bot has selected a node down on the frozen river and is reacting to the jump down. Anyway I have now added some more nodes to possibly add a camp so we will see if that changes things.

I did not fully test the new dynamite position. I know the engrs will go for it and the axis can defuse at it, but the allied engrs I monitored always got killed before they got around the cement buttress. I'll do some isolated testing to see if the action position is too close to the wall for planting etc.

The inside dynamite is going to be the most successful (it is for me too). Axis can't mine it and they don't get much Xp camping inside. So if the axis engrs are all outside or the respawn too long that is when the allies win. The outside plants are too difficult to depend upon. Bots don't have the same team play as humans. Really bots play like single players, you only think that they play as a team when they randomly all go to the same spot. So the medics supporting the engrs inside is really a combination of randomness and limiting the available actions available to them. A medic bot will only follow you if you are badly wounded, if you are healthy they could care less about the dynamite plants or the match. Unlike team fortress and some other quake games fritzbot bots don't obey "follow me" instructions. Good Waypointing is about providing enough actions so you don't know where exactly the bots will show up but not so many that they won't randomly mass attack on occasion.