normal MOW and HORRIBLE unit AI

[Smeagolthevile]

I dunno if im just used to assault squad but the AI for units in the normal MOW campaign is HORRIBLE.

I set up a Mg set it to fire on enemies and it just lets them walk up to it and throw grenades. It happens with all my units to the point I have to put the game speed on slow motion to micro EVEY SINGLE UNIT to fire.

Am I just missing something here?

[Sneaksie]

Make sure they are not in hold fire or only return fire mode.

[RevolverAce]

units have a line of sigth. so if you turn off "fog of war" you dont really know when your guys see the enemy. also make sure to dont put them on hold fire or return fire.

But I agree that AI isnt good in the Men of War series. I would like to see units having morale kinda like CoH. now the will just run into your MG fire.

[Taikis]

But I agree that AI isnt good in the Men of War series. I would like to see units having morale kinda like CoH. now the will just run into your MG fire.

Or when crossing a minefield they keep running forward until everyone is a red cloud.

[Validuz]

Indeed. AI should be the main focus of this company imho. Their gameplay is awesome, gfx is fine, and the ammount of content is okay.

AI is the only thing dragging the game down... (except the abysmal voice acting, but that's only for SP so what'ev ;) )

[WeeBee886]

lol, the amount of content in the game is amazing and the AI is excellent. But the game is geared towards heavy micromanagement -- micromanagement is, in fact, THE ENTIRE GAME -- which means that your units will die if you don't manage them well. That's precisely what makes the game fun and intense.

Also, units in CoH do not really have morale. Play the tactical side of a Total War game and you will see what a morale system looks like.

[TheKillingTele]

You would see in MoW forums people saying that they have the best AI in the world,

And then when they look at CoH they cant deny that there AI is FAR SUPERIOR to that crap they call "Infantry Artificial Intelligence".

Seriously, you can hate CoH all you want but its the best game in my books simply because of the graphics, the little details, and how hard the game gets as you progress (because its not as easy as you think)

There is a reason MoW has direct fire control, because there AI sucks at shooting them selves so they put a lazy way to make there game not go down the drain.

[kane1]

You can't play MoW without experiencing some kind of AI bug. Whether it's guy's running out in the open to be slaughtered or vehicles getting themselves stuck or running over friendlies. It's still a great game. You might want to try FoW it's more squad based.

[Squid3d]

There is a reason MoW has direct fire control, because there AI sucks at shooting them selves so they put a lazy way to make there game not go down the drain.

And the reason Relic added direct control in the last CoH expansion is ?


:P

[TheKillingTele]

And the reason Relic added direct control in the last CoH expansion is ?


:P

Unfortunatly the bullet physics for MoW are etchy while there are no bullet physics in COH, though you can see tracers and all sorts of things,

the only physics used for determining if something hits is the tanks and there shells (or AT Guns)

luckily there is no direct control fire in multiplayer its just for fun in single,

There is one thing buggy about the game and that is the fact when units choose to simply stick there heads out to get sniped by a sniper when I didnt even ask for that,

also why is it so hard to implement squad control like in COH?

why am I forced to move all my men individually to cover while in COH i can just move one squad and they will all move to cover.

whats the point of the "squad leader" in MOW if he isnt organizing his men?

I know men of war is a very 'basic' game for its time, and I do not blame the developers for that, but I hate to see people keep on saying "MoW is better then CoH in all ways",

Agreed MoW is more realistic but does that make it more fun? Maybe for you, but I have my own opinion on that.

[Squid3d]

WeeBee pretty much nailed it. MoW is about micro. pure and simple. the AI, for most part is head and shoulders above CoH. both game suffer pathing issues (as do all rts titles, sadly) but, from a soldier perspective you'll get decent responses to actions *if* they are allowed (move at will basically)

your soldier won't pop his head up and get shot if he's prone. and with a known sniper in the vicinity, why would you be anything else ?

If you select a group of soldiers you'll tend to get an indication of available cover...how is this different to CoH (apart from graphically of course) ?


In MoW, never will you see vet2 def pios standing toe to toe with a rifleman squad in the middle of a field...diving inbetween each others legs like some bizzare game.

I couldn't disagree more when you call MoW 'basic'. it's concepts and excecution were/are a revoloution in the rts genre.

I absolutely love CoH AND MoW. not everyone can accept them as being different sides to the same coin.

[Smeagolthevile]

lol, the amount of content in the game is amazing and the AI is excellent. But the game is geared towards heavy micromanagement -- micromanagement is, in fact, THE ENTIRE GAME -- which means that your units will die if you don't manage them well. That's precisely what makes the game fun and intense.

Also, units in CoH do not really have morale. Play the tactical side of a Total War game and you will see what a morale system looks like.

You can micro all you want, but when you have fronts over the entire map and are being attacked at the whole front it is IMPOSSIBLE to micromanage every single unit at the same time, completely impossible, so dont throw that 'learn to micro noob' ♥♥♥♥ at me.

[WeeBee886]

Ever played StarCraft? Those StarCraft players have to micro every single unit at the same time, and guess what, IN THAT GAME IT REALLY IS EVERY SINGLE INDIVIDUAL UNIT, whereas at least in MoW we get squads for chrissake.

Not saying I'm a great player but tactical action games like StarCraft and Men of War require a high degree of skill. It isn't for everyone.

[Squid3d]

The amount of micro needed for SC2 is usually vastly exaggerated :P

SC2 is primarily about macro (although you can micro that )

I'm probably stating the obvious here but, if getting attacked from multiple fronts then the pause/speed menu is a godsend. Also realizing that sometimes soldiers have to give their digital lives in the course of duty (or a misclick)

:D

[Smeagolthevile]

Did you just compare men of war to Sc2?

Here is the MOST micro I needed in Sc2 when I did the beta (since the first day mind you)

Select half my zerglings, move right, select other half, send right. Wait for enemies to come, select all zerglings, attack center.


Here is an example of the BAD AI

Doing the one mission for allies where you have to kill all MGers, get into the truck to the airfield then sneak in. well the MOMENT my guys get off the truck they start firing at the enemy even as it tells me not to fire at the enemy, no chance to stop them from doing it.

Also, slowing and speeding it up is fine but if you ever do that on a fairly basis you will find that you can NOT play multiplayer anymore because you end up relying on it.

[Squid3d]

I only compared it to sc2 in the fact that MoW is probably more micro oriented.

i can't recall the mission you are talking about but, if you have to put them in the truck then surely you have a chance to have them hold fire ?

I've always used the speed options in sp. it's never affected my multiplayer in any shape or form. but then again, i tend to use it when its' just too much to handle real time. that very rarely happens in multi...well, unless you match against Instinct that is.