[mellenthin]

I think most anyone who has played these games singleplayer would agree that the AI is extremely boring to fight, they don't seem to function as a commander.

Has anyone made an AI mod that makes the AI more effective? Is it possible?

I don't mean making their soldiers stronger, if I want a harder game I just don't bring as many men, I wonder if the AI can be made smarter.

I like playing multiplayer a lot more but every multiplayer campaign I have started begins to crash after the first five games or so.


By the way, nice mods   so far I have played Gold, Sword, Juno and Scheldte. They are very impressive.

[Spinlock]

Not only is the AI not moddable, but the developers working with Matrix are unable to improve it with having access to the games source-code for several years.
The guts of CC is notorious for being a mess of spaghetti.

[mellenthin]

It's amazing how great this game would be if multiplayer was stable, with all the mods it's like playing a new game ever time I start a campaign. But it get's tiresome fighting the ai.

[Sapa]

[davidssfx]

Picked up TLD a short while ago, and noticed a big difference in AI (from CC3, I haven't tried CC5).

They are up on their feet and moving towards Victory Locations, which is better than crawling … and defending from reasonable locations (for the most part anyway). Of course this is driven by Victory Location placement, etc ... but still, it works. Tanks seem to get mixed up more than infantry, since they can get stuck around impassable objects, but AT guns usually set up with above average Line of Sight.
If you start TLD as the attacking Allies, with max difficulty settings ... it should be challenging, at least the first time through.
Try and keep units surviving through more than one battle ... that will give you more to think about. The strategic map adds another layer of strategy for both the human and AI to consider ... planning routes, supply, support. That has to count for something.
I like Close Combat AI, and more so in TLD, especially considering it's not set on a direct rail ... like so many other games that force a player down a preset route, (a road, path, hallway) and then have AI respond as you pass by. So, CC is more dynamic from that perspective, and therefore more demanding for AI to respond realistically to.
Close Combat AI is complemented by moral and fatigue factors ... adding another dimension of realism.

Certainly not human like ... but then again, AI is pretty complicated stuff.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artificial_intelligence

CC isn't going to pass the Turing test  

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turing_test

but maybe CC could be spiced up a little with one of these algorithms.  

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Temporal_difference_learning
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reinforcement_learning

I started thinking of CC like the game of chess ... it is what it is ... a good strategy game. Chess players must be more content though I guess ... since they aren't always looking for the next mod or remake. Just joking  

[Therion]

One of the main problems is that the AI doesn't see many things that players see. For example it can't fire at potential ambush points (could be marked on map just for the AI), it can't fire at muzzle flashes (could be marked on map - so that both the player and the AI could return fire - Firefight AI actually uses area fire against sources of enemy fire - player's soldiers do it too.) it doesn't "know" good places for ambushes and places to useful capture that aren't VLs (could be marked on map just for the AI).