Cybran T2PD having problems targeting and not firing at targets in range

TheWeakie

It feels like the target priorities are way too specific in most situations and thats what fucks it up. ML's and GC's are the perfect example for that when they sometimes have 1/6th of the supposed dps just cause they are doing acrobatics trying to find their targets.

Wonder what it would look like if u only have a few basic priorities set up and nothing too specific

Jip

@thewheelie said in Cybran T2PD having problems targeting and not firing at targets in range:

It feels like the target priorities are way too specific in most situations and thats what fucks it up. ML's and GC's are the perfect example for that when they sometimes have 1/6th of the supposed dps just cause they are doing acrobatics trying to find their targets.

Wonder what it would look like if u only have a few basic priorities set up and nothing too specific

That is something I'm looking into to. The basic priorities should be as simple as possible so that the user knows what to expect. I'll be making the target priorities of all point defenses the same, for example.

arma473

@thewheelie said in Cybran T2PD having problems targeting and not firing at targets in range:

It feels like the target priorities are way too specific in most situations and thats what fucks it up. ML's and GC's are the perfect example for that when they sometimes have 1/6th of the supposed dps just cause they are doing acrobatics trying to find their targets.

Wonder what it would look like if u only have a few basic priorities set up and nothing too specific

If you use the "Advanced Target Priorities" mod and giving the GC a priority of "units," would that make all combat units equally targeted and ignore everything else (until it has no combat units left to target)?

Or would it still prioritize some types of units over other types?

arma473

@jip said in Cybran T2PD having problems targeting and not firing at targets in range:

I'll be making the target priorities of all point defenses the same

But we may want a slow-firing PD like oblivion to have different priorities than a Cerberus. A Cerberus would clean up LABs nicely, and do pretty well against light arty, compared to an Oblivion.

Jip

I think it is more relevant to provide a consistent behavior between the factions. You can always tweak your turrets priorities using a UI mod like advanced target priorities.

Lunyshko

Btw id like to highlight that loyalists are no longer reverting tmls. For about 5 games ive been noticing that loyalists do not reflact tmls.

Jip

@yellownoob said in Cybran T2PD having problems targeting and not firing at targets in range:

Btw id like to highlight that loyalists are no longer reverting tmls. For about 5 games ive been noticing that loyalists do not reflact tmls.

I'll look into this. You can also make an issue on Github:

https://github.com/FAForever/fa/issues/new/choose

Or report issues in the #game-bug-reporting channel on the official FAF Discord.

jcvjcvjcvjcv

@jip said in Cybran T2PD having problems targeting and not firing at targets in range:

@thewheelie said in Cybran T2PD having problems targeting and not firing at targets in range:

It feels like the target priorities are way too specific in most situations and thats what fucks it up. ML's and GC's are the perfect example for that when they sometimes have 1/6th of the supposed dps just cause they are doing acrobatics trying to find their targets.

Wonder what it would look like if u only have a few basic priorities set up and nothing too specific

That is something I'm looking into to. The basic priorities should be as simple as possible so that the user knows what to expect. I'll be making the target priorities of all point defenses the same, for example.

Well, the user doesn't expect to turn the turret for 90% of the time while taking fire from everything else on the other side.

I think this whole messed up target priorities thing is why I see less and less and less successful T4 land attacks. Although the buildtime thing also helped with that.

Maybe that is also why it seems the Sera T4 bot is used more often... as it's dead weapon doesn't suffer from the same problems, hehe.

Jip

Well, the user doesn't expect to turn the turret for 90% of the time while taking fire from everything else on the other side.

I think this whole messed up target priorities thing is why I see less and less and less successful T4 land attacks. Although the buildtime thing also helped with that.

Maybe that is also why it seems the Sera T4 bot is used more often... as it's dead weapon doesn't suffer from the same problems, hehe.

I think you're correct - the overly complicated target priorities can cause units to not actually do damage for a long time. As an example, a monkeylord that tries to attack a brick to the south and then a brick to the north while all of the remainder of the army is tech 2. All of the tech 2 will be skipped.

Same why the colossus can no longer walk and fire - it tries to aim at tech 3 units that, by all means, can end up behind him while there are a lot of valid targets in front of him.

Sadly, this is a balance team matter. If it were up to me I'd simplify all the target priorities to 4 - 6 elements, maybe even less in some situations. Allow mods like ATP and the snipe mode to take care of the rest.

Jip

The problem described in this topic is fixed with this pull request which is live on the FAF Develop game type.

Yet another reason to play FAF Develop , besides the other reasons to do so:

Improved mass fabricator behavior and visual indications
No more notoriously slow ASF battles, and a general performance increase all around
various small UI related fixes

We're in dire need of people play testing on FAF Develop to gather data. The game type can be chosen by the host when creating a game. All players that join that game will download the correct files accordingly. If you have feedback, bug reports or just want to say hi to the game team - use the #game-bug-reporting channel of the official Discord server.

For any moderator: you can can close this topic.