V1.4.0 Spam, Spam, Spam, Spam, Spam, Spam, Spam, Spam...

[Otto Halfhand]

Since the advent of EF and probably before that the incidence of A.I. call-in Spamming has been a bugaboo. Some spams are annoying but fun SturmTrooper/Hetzer or Stuh/Hetzer spams for example. The large incidence of NI and LW spams is bad for EF. During a recent 2Wherx2Sov game I witnessed the following Wher: Stormtrooper Spam/Geshutzwagen spam - OK. Sovs: me/NI spam. By the end of the game there were 17 NI squads on the field, 1 StIngenery and Ingenery and conscript squads. Most of the time NI were not reinforced although by the end of the game this started to change. Another game had 10 or 11 LW squads. I didn't actually count them.

What does this mean for Ostheer? Jaeger spam - OK; Wespe spam!  SKdfz/263 spam  or random foreign volunteers!  Really guys this sounds like a game killer.

 Speaking strictly in accordance with the game design parameters EF DevTeam has set up.
 What options does the DevTeam have to deal with this problem? Perhaps the Gestalt mind of the rest of the EF Community can come up with some viable solutions?

[Cranialwizard]

No offense to you but if I see another one of these god damn threads about AI spamming...

This is a well and widely known issue about the AI and has been mentioned dozens if not HUNDREDS of times. It is a hard-coded bug with the AI and it's natural tendency to spam doctrinal units, especially when on a losing battle.

Soviets spam for a different reason, when armory upgrades are in production and they complete current units in production become obsolete. Say I have Guards in production but my Shock Guards Upgrade finishes before the Guards hit the field. I have to cancel my Guards, otherwise the production for that building is stuck. The AI can't cancel build orders.

If AI spamming is such a problem then my honest suggestion is to play PVP. You'll get much better competition rather than an AI to where you can practically predict it's moves.

[GodlikeDennis]

Actually someone made a fix for the AI spamming doc units problem recently. Robotnik is currently looking into it for integration into EF.

[Seeme]

To be honest, the title is the only reason I looked at this topic

Didn't you say Robotnik fixed it this patch?

[Dzierzan]

No, he did not fix it. I hope that he will fix it future, cause this is annoying when AI is spamming.

[pariah]

As i have said several times before, why can't the devs put a max cap on call-ins only for the A.I. players?

To be honest, the title is the only reason I looked at this topic

Same here.

[Cranialwizard]

As i have said several times before, why can't the devs put a max cap on call-ins only for the A.I. players?

Once again I reinstate that I do not think this is possible. You can't just make the AI have these limits and not players. It would upset PvP balance if you hardcapped or put popcaps on call-ins.

[pariah]

I honestly can't see why it would be so hard. A.I. players work quite differently to humans, anyway. It seems like a rather simple thing to do to me. Could 1 of the devs please clarify this?

[Desert_Fox]

And...what about play against people instead AI? 
No AI = No call-in units spam. 

Major

[Cranialwizard]

I honestly can't see why it would be so hard. A.I. players work quite differently to humans, anyway. It seems like a rather simple thing to do to me. Could 1 of the devs please clarify this?

The AI may play different but it uses the same armies as you and I with the same reward units and the same doctrines etc.

[pariah]

We have seen in the past that the A.I. has special things that humans don't. A call-in cap could be another 1 of those special things.

[Otto Halfhand]

I honestly can't see why it would be so hard. A.I. players work quite differently to humans, anyway. It seems like a rather simple thing to do to me. Could 1 of the devs please clarify this?

The AI may play different but it uses the same armies as you and I with the same reward units and the same doctrines etc.

Serious Question: What does the AI spam when playing as RMC rewards faction?

Upper Class Twits response: Suicide Highlanders.

[Jeff 'Robotnik' W.]

the ai is not set to play as the RMC yet since allowing it to play as them causes AI errors. it is something im working on

[Otto Halfhand]

BlackBishop explained in another thread that the reason Nashorn call-in had FP costs was because the Reward Unit was superior to the vCoH Unit. Makes a lot of sense. It seems that The DevTeam is willing to change the rules if it makes for a better mod.
In a different thread he suggested that the cost of the Nashorn needed to be high to prevent T3 Marder deployment times from being delayed (or circumvented).

Post Merge: June 23, 2011, 05:23:47 PM
   1. It occurs to me that adding an FP or muni cost to EF call-ins MAY help control AI spams.
   2. AI always has a bonus in MP production . Check the end of game stats. Typically on Hard the AI factions receive 25-33% more MP during the course of the game. Not necessarily so for FP or muni.
   3. Presumably the AI spends its MPs ASAP; purchasing new units in preference to reinforcing existing squads. ob.cit. The 17NI squad game Had 1-3 squads at effective strength throughout most of the game. Only when MP production slowed to a trickle did the AI start to reinforce low strength squads.
   4. Adding a FP cost to EF call-ins may act to put a effective hard cap on AI call-ins.  If the AI starts to spam Nashorns but doesn't have 90 FP when 500 MP is available it won't produce a Nashorn. Presumably the AI will spend available MP on something else. (This might even break the spam cycle for that type of unit).
   5. Adding a muni cost to EF call-ins Would work in conjunction with muni-maintenance rules. We have all seen muni production drop to a trickle even with good map control.
   6. People can adapt to this kind of change very quickly. AI? To test these ideas it would be necessary to have a dedicated patch, (no other changes). If it doesn't work the next patch rolls back the test case.

[Dann88]

This thread is not a random-words game about 1.4 patch?