Bots For Et is not a dream, but in few times a reality....

([RW]Tiger) #21

Final version?

Well, we hope for a beta version in the end of this year, with some other versions later, as our programmers work or study a lot, i think a final version in 1 or 2 years, to have a really good bots.

(Dawg) #22

Cool stuff.

In the demo the bot runs off the ledge. Have you considered how the bot will decide if the jump would cause damage? Always avoid or will it ‘weigh’ the damage against the objective importance? Just a thought…

Dawg

([RW]Tiger) #23

In fact, our programmers make a lot of generations of bots which learn way and of course how to jump or other things, so bots which make the way good or very good are keep the other are eliminated.

Always avoid or will it ‘weigh’ the damage against the objective importance?
=> what do you mean, i dont understand.

(Dawg) #24

What I mean can best be displayed by example.

Bot-A is an engineer and he is on a ledge overlooking the objective. Bot-A can either run to the stairs and then proceed to the objective or he can jump from the ledge to the objective. If he jumps he will suffer some minor damage but it will reduce the time to plant dynamite by several seconds. So, if Bot-A is severely injured, he must take the stairs or he will die when he jumps off the ledge. But if Bot-A is uninjured, jumping down is clearly the better option.

Another scenario. The fastest route that Bot-B can take to his objective runs across a section of ground that is covered by an MG nest. He could take an underground passage that is less likely to be defended. Could Bot-B recognize this difference and act on it?

AI is fascinating but extremely difficult to implement… Keep up the good work!

Dawg

(thore) #25

when saying a final version could be expected in one or two years you really
shocked me - but the more i appreciate you first developed bots to be soldiers.

one couldn’t count on soldiers other than just begging they’re fighting as good
as hell. i mean a fld ops is expected to give ammo or block passages by the
use of support fire, a medic is expected to heal and revive… engineers are
going to build something. not the soldier - he just has to fight. that might make
me think you’ve picked the most simple class to start coding your bots… but
how do you make them decide which weapon to choose??

AI is fascinating, so keep up the good work and don’t be shy to show us
some pre-releases :wink: :moo:

(diaper eater) #26

what exactly are bots

([rD]MrPink) #27

computer players.

([RW]Tiger) #28

As we are at the begining of the AI, we cant say exactly how bots will react from this situation or this situation, it is impossible, not because i dont want to tell you, but because we have no alpha version right now and so that i cant say you Bots will react.
We want bots to impress us, so wait that the Bots AI will be make for soldier and to see them to know how they will react… Be sure we want our bots to be Humans killer, to make the Bots a reputation, to be a AI revenge :stuck_out_tongue:

but
how do you make them decide which weapon to choose??
=> You will choose in game wich weapon for soldier you want.

By the way, in our beta version we think that bots will ask for amo and medic. Soldier class will be finish and an other class will be.

(Irrelevant) #29

I think they meant:

Will your bot be able to decide whether to use a grenade, pistol, or knife instead of its main weapon? This would be necessary if they are using a Panzerfaust.

This raises another point. I think you may have to reprogram large amounts of the bot to cope with the different weapons. For example, an MG-42 is used very differently to a Panzerfaust.

(TIHan) #30

how exactly do u get a bot to be put in a game that doesn’t support bots?

([rD]MrPink) #31

This has been done with plenty of games. Quake 2 never supported bots but it has them. It works with another program running in the background and I believe it makes the game think that players are connected and sends the data to the server as if they were connected. I have even seens bots where you could change the “pings” of them.

(*[SfS]*OpTeRoN) #32

I just don’t understand how the bots interact together while there is no one playing. It’s like it generates a real “world”.

Matrix! woo!

([rD]MrPink) #33

99% of the time someone is playing. But when no one else is around I assume the would act the same as if someone was around… I’d just like to see how confused an engineer gets after it wins the warmup, or if warmup damage is off :slight_smile:

([RW]Tiger) #34

This raises another point. I think you may have to reprogram large amounts of the bot to cope with the different weapons. For example, an MG-42 is used very differently to a Panzerfaust.

=> That’s why each class will have its own IA, so that bots react correclty. It need time. We will “explain” bots how to use weapons, but use weapon so that bots use them very good. Goal is not for us to have bots wich make head shot each time bots shoot or move all the time with the same way.

I just don’t understand how the bots interact together while there is no one playing. It’s like it generates a real “world”.

=> ???

(3emetype) #35

That was done by CoBraLorD & fretn for RTCW :
http://rtcwmods.d-e-sign.be//intermediate-advanced/botspawn/index.html

Bobot is a mod. So we can add what we want. Do you want giraffes to be added ? :slight_smile:

([rD]MrPink) #36

Make goats that eat your helmet and are invincible!!!

(TIHan) #37

why not? :smiley:

by the way… i looked at the code thing of bots… i see its written in C or C++ … i’m trying to learn C++ now… i started about a week ago with the program and a book… i can make a basic program thats so basic it only runs in dos and u type some numbers then viola lol… and i read about basic variables and stuff… but what exactly does

qboolean

mean? i havn’t looked it up in the book i have,… i just want to know from expierence

([RW]Tiger) #38

I think, we will make bots with a french humour, like each time bots will kilkl you bots will tell you some great words : “Killing you was too easy”…

May be some humans players wont appreciate this humour :stuck_out_tongue:

(Irrelevant) #39

From experience of similar things, the way that’ll probably work will be:

#ifdef C_PLUSPLUS
   typedef bool qboolean;
#else
   typedef char qboolean;
#endif

Because C doesn’t have a ‘bool’ type, it needs to to check whether you’re using C++, and use a typedef.

There’s probably also Q_TRUE and Q_FALSE or something, because C lacks true and false too. (Well, the C99 standard has them, but most compilers use C89, which doesn’t.)

(TIHan) #40

well i have the latest c++ which is Visual C++ .NET Standard Version 2003 … would this have all the qboolean stuff in it? bool and stuff? lol