Adding Bots to Multiplayer!

[Neo_Mapper]

Well the idea is basically, "how to defend the firbases you set?"
I see a lot of times firebases being placed somewhere and left alone. This would NEVER happen in real life and this is project reality, isn't it?
Well... but you cant force players defending a firebase. This would be horribly boring. Thats where the Bots come into the action. They would spawn at the firebase, sit into the MGs and anti air which is there. It would simulate a manned firebase and a 1337 UBER Sniper would have to think twice, how to knife a firebase...

Two questions came now up into my mind:
1. Is it possible to add bots who just stay at the firebase and dont go on uber solo missions with the spawning hummves?
2. Do you like the idea? Feel free to discuss ;D

[Sanke]

I don't think its codeable and bots take up player slots iirc so you would have to take away slots just to defend a firebase.

I like the idea but then I don't.

The best way to defend one is to make a barbed wire square then put some sandbags down to get out and then you can only leave, but not enter.

[Neo_Mapper]

na you dont have to take playerslots away... Its possible to increase the the playerslots of a server over 64p... its just not possible to connect for more "real player" than 64. SO you would have a Server with 80slots, but only 64joinable

[Panzar]

Hey Mapper, Your from the GTA:MP Clan right?

Anyways, I'm pretty sure this is co-op, practically, a 64 slot server with x number is invisible bots, its possible as its already..in effect in vBF2..AiX

[EOD_Security-2252]

Yeah, you'd have to do co-op for this. Also, civilian bots in INS are more necessary than Defensive bots for FBs. Defending isn't that bad a of job, people should get over their excess of adrenaline/testosterone and defend the FBs, no matter how boring.

[Sanke]

Defending isn't that bad a of job, people should get over their excess of adrenaline/testosterone and defend the FBs, no matter how boring.

Well the thing is we all enjoy having fun rather then talking about random stuff and shooting someone every 15 min.

[Deer]

Idea itself is awesome, would be nice to have like 80 players and 48 bots Makes it more realistic too because bots will always do most realistic stuff if they are programmed to do so, unlike players

This means that even the boring (but realistic) tasks such as defending some valuable spot, could be done by using bots, so no human dies to boredom ?

[Neo_Mapper]

Hey Mapper, Your from the GTA:MP Clan right?

No, I played Multitheftauto (if you mean this with GTA:MP) but i wasn't in any clan there

This means that even the boring (but realistic) tasks such as defending some valuable spot, could be done by using bots, so no human dies to boredom ?

Yes. Sure you can defend the firebase when it is being attacked and you can also sit into the MGs, because the Bots will just hop out and wait until they can get in again...


Also a second problem could be solved. Mainbase attacking... The AAs and TOWs would be manned all the time, so you couldn't just fly over the main base with your "UBER 1337 A10" and kill a the "noobs", who are waiting for there choppers.
But before this can be done, it would need a lot of work on the AI of the bots. So they only act like this.

I still hope, that it is possible =)

[zangoo]

I dont think it would be that hard to code or anything, There is a ton of tweaks you can do to the ai. And like stated before you can have a server with 255 players, Just not anymore then 64 real life players. And lag, it shouldnt lag as most computers can run bf2 with 64 bots so i dont see a server having any issues.

[Outlawz7]

Oh really? I can play most PR maps fine, but playing BF2 co-op or AIX with 48 bots drops my FPS to 25 regardless of the map. And it isn't RAM, it's the CPU, the more bots you have, the more computing your CPU needs to do for each one. BF2 wasn't really made for single player tbh, I know in NovaLogic's Delta Force/Joint Ops you could have 256 bots in a co-op map, then again you needed to make scripts for all of them, so they knew what to do while in BF2 the bots think on their own.

[llPANCHOll]

KEEP THE BOTS OUT OF PR!!

[DeltaFart]

If you want bots come play PRSP

[Sanke]

The only problem is I could see people camping the bots because they suck and are extremely stupid.

[Mora]

Bots can be changed to be used on base defenses and things like that but i don't really like the idea of having bots on multilayer.

[Clypp]

I love the idea. Bots can defend the uncappable main bases too in replacement of the dome of death.

I would like to see a proof of concept created for this idea.

[akatabrask]

Hmm, in regular AAS and C&C i don't think the idea would fit in especially nice, as someone said "raping bots" - yes they are not the hardest to kill.

BUT as someone stated earlier: to use bots as civies on insurgency would be kinda nice, I have actually been thinking about that a long time, and afaik theoretically it is possible with the bf2 engine, just make the navmesh cover the area where civvies is supposed to live, making them roaming freely and seamlessly around the area, and limit them to some bot specific kits.
The only thing they need to bother about is not engaging (or flocking) around the enemy's, rather staying away, only walk - except when gunfire is heard, then they run away from there, and not to use vehicles.

[EOD_Security-2252]

Hey I really like that idea about bots defending the uncaps. There could be like SAWs and other LMGs set up in those guard towers around the bases and the bots could hold there. On the other hand, you could put the bots a bit further from the base (like the dome of death on Ramiel like extends more 200+m from the uncap), and it could be like a bot-manned checkpoint.

[DeltaFart]

sanke, you would be very very suprised...I got my butt handed by them yesterday

[wooly-back-jack]

hey bots would do me out of a job!
I like to establish a FB and defend the area around it as I know FB's are a healthy distraction for the enemy.
Sometimes it will be quite boring then all of a sudden it all kicks off
If it is quiet for a good while I will let my squad wander I won't punish them too much.
Good example of this was on [T&T] tonight on Muttrah.
At first I was struggling for squad members so invited some smaller squads to join mine and they did, we built a FB then when a few of them got itchy I explained I didn't mind what they did as my main objective was to get the FB up and running.
A couple went back to their squads and I thanked them for helping me out.
My squad then filled up a bit and the new guys seemed happy enough defending the general area (they downed a few choppers and one was sniper and did his own thing for a bit but never went too far from us).
When our tickets got to about 120 and I was satisfied the choppers were sick of coming our way we went hunting down enemy squads as a group.
I don't like the idea of everyone being bunched up on the same part of the map, I would much rather keep things safe at the back for a while for the rest of the team. It may seem boring to some, and I have to admit some people who join my squad must think 'wtf? unorganised squad!' and leave but I don't mind that as I end up with a great bunch of guys who know what we are all up to.

[PeterLorre]

Try this command line +AI