Massively improved AI for monsters

[mince pies]

In the first Diablo games I don't think I saw ONE example of decent AI regarding the monsters. If they were melee then they would just hack away at you until either you or they died. If they were casters then they would just cast spells at you and/or resurrect minions. No strategy involved whatsoever, which made the game a bit repetitive in some aspects.

What I'd like to see in DIII is a massive improvement to the AI of monsters. We've already seen examples of this in the demo; the skeletal shieldmen being at the front while the archers are at the back. This far beats the strategy of monsters from the first two Diablo games by a long shot.

An example of what I'd like to see is if a melee monster has been damaged and has low health he could go into a frenzied rage with increased attack speed and higher damage (similar to what we seen with the Thousand Pounder in the demo) or it could use a stun/knockback attack on you so it could run, and possibly steal a stray health orb to heal itself ;) Of course this would be a very rare thing as we don't want all the monsters just picking up health orbs as soon as they drop.

An example for casters could be to cast a spell that would deflect an incoming spell back at the caster, for example the Witch Doctor's Fire Bomb spell. Or it could cast a prison around a health orb if it sees you running to grab one (similar to Diablo's bone prison in DII).

Does anyone else agree that there should be a massive improvement to the AI of monsters? :)

[visom]

In the first Diablo games I don't think I saw ONE example of decent AI regarding the monsters. If they were melee then they would just hack away at you until either you or they died. If they were casters then they would just cast spells at you and/or resurrect minions. No strategy involved whatsoever, which made the game a bit repetitive in some aspects.

What I'd like to see in DIII is a massive improvement to the AI of monsters. We've already seen examples of this in the demo; the skeletal shieldmen being at the front while the archers are at the back. This far beats the strategy of monsters from the first two Diablo games by a long shot.

An example of what I'd like to see is if a melee monster has been damaged and has low health he could go into a frenzied rage with increased attack speed and higher damage (similar to what we seen with the Thousand Pounder in the demo) or it could use a stun/knockback attack on you so it could run, and possibly steal a stray health orb to heal itself ;) Of course this would be a very rare thing as we don't want all the monsters just picking up health orbs as soon as they drop.

An example for casters could be to cast a spell that would deflect an incoming spell back at the caster, for example the Witch Doctor's Fire Bomb spell. Or it could cast a prison around a health orb if it sees you running to grab one (similar to Diablo's bone prison in DII).

Does anyone else agree that there should be a massive improvement to the AI of monsters? :)

Well in D2, the monster with the best AI (in my opinion) is bloodraven, sure she's a challenge when fighting because she's smarter than the other monsters, but she sure is annoying as heck.

I don't mind having a smart AI monster, but I don't want it so that all the skeletal archers and spell casters to be like bloodraven, I hate having to chase them down every time I get close to them.

[mince pies]

Don't all the archers/casters run away when you get close to them?

[visom]

Don't all the archers/casters run away when you get close to them?

If you're talking about D2, then no lol.

Whenever my barb gets close to the archers and shamans, they usually don't run away. Like the shaman just pull out their knife and start slashing me, while the archer just remain stationary.

The only monsters that I could remember that does hit and run tactics are the saber cats (half cat half women) that throws spear and poison potions.

[Vertigo X]

The archers in Diablo 1 were annoying as deleted! Those were the ones who would always run! Even some of the melee guys would run! ARRGGHH!!

Some of the archers in Diablo 2 would run, but it was limited and much less annoying.

As for your suggestion, there's only so much they can do. It's not like it's a FPS where there's elevation changes and things to hide behind.

[visom]

The archers in Diablo 1 were annoying as deleted! Those were the ones who would always run! Even some of the melee guys would run! ARRGGHH!!

Some of the archers in Diablo 2 would run, but it was limited and much less annoying.

As for your suggestion, there's only so much they can do. It's not like it's a FPS where there's elevation changes and things to hide behind.

Agreed.

There really isn't much that blizzard can do to improve AI. The best they can do is smart placement of monsters (skeletal archer hiding behind skeletal shieldmen, is a perfect example).

[phool]

Enemies in D2 don't have enough options to increase their AI without increasing annoyance to the player. In d2 all monsters could really do to 'improve' AI is dodge ranged attacks, run away from melee, run away when health is low. If individual ranged mobs ran from your melee whenever you got close, while the rest of their group continued to attack, it would increase difficulty, or at least slow you down, but I really doubt you'd find it an improvement. If D2 was patched so pit fiends simply refused to enter hammer paths and inferno'd from safety, the playerbase would just rage (see introduction of AoE flee in GW, and that wasn't at all hard to deal with).

Well in D2, the monster with the best AI (in my opinion) is bloodraven, sure she's a challenge when fighting because she's smarter than the other monsters, but she sure is annoying as heck.
Blood raven doesn't really have good AI, just won't keep still (and isn't vulnerable to being locked in hit recovery) with pretty high health which can slow down killing her.

An example of what I'd like to see is if a melee monster has been damaged and has low health he could go into a frenzied rage with increased attack speed and higher damage

This has nothing to do with AI.

I'd like to see better AI implemented as long as it leads to deeper gameplay. Melee bodyblocking a barb from reaching a ressurector for example, which gives the barb an incentive to use leap, a stun, howl, taunt, a speed buff, etc, not just smash through the middle always with the same skill.

[stillman]

Yeah, I made a thread about this and everyone took it as me bashing d3. Lets face it, the AI in d2 was very poor. The AI in d3 doesn't look much better.

Why do you guys say there is only so much Blizzard can do? Are you kidding? This is not Nintendo. They can make remarkable improvements.

The monsters in d3 look very slow, mindless, don't feel pain, and all of them are naked. They look designed to be harmless meat.

[Lyrs]

You can usually break AI into three groups:

1. Offensive - Attacking
-AI examples here:
--Scouting: monsters don't bunch up and stay static. They wander around an area and report back to the main group or call back
--Monsters recognize and remember advantageous locations

-Damage Preferences:
--Fast, but low dmg monsters will make way for the heavy hitters.

-Attacking coordination
--Monsters attack using formations or in coordination. Instead of mobbing, monsters may attack using a sphincter formation or send one group to flank the players.

2. Defensive
-Choke points: Monsters recognize and use choke points or advantageous areas. When pressed too hard, they will fall back to these areas.

-Monsters have various forms of attack and will utilize them if the other option is useless. Souls will stop shooting lightning if it no longer does dmg and instead use another attack.

-Monsters recognize formations and placements. Range will move behind melee.

3. Miscellaneous
-Actions that give monsters a form of activity:
-Monsters will eat corpses to regenerate hit points or increase their own power.
-Monsters will play around with the environment such as knocking over walls, chopping down trees, and perform other means of chaotic activity

[mince pies]

There really isn't much that blizzard can do to improve AI. The best they can do is smart placement of monsters (skeletal archer hiding behind skeletal shieldmen, is a perfect example).

I'm pretty sure Blizzard could implement all of the things I have suggested very easily into DIII

[slickr]

In the first Diablo games I don't think I saw ONE example of decent AI regarding the monsters. If they were melee then they would just hack away at you until either you or they died. If they were casters then they would just cast spells at you and/or resurrect minions. No strategy involved whatsoever, which made the game a bit repetitive in some aspects.

What I'd like to see in DIII is a massive improvement to the AI of monsters. We've already seen examples of this in the demo; the skeletal shieldmen being at the front while the archers are at the back. This far beats the strategy of monsters from the first two Diablo games by a long shot.

An example of what I'd like to see is if a melee monster has been damaged and has low health he could go into a frenzied rage with increased attack speed and higher damage (similar to what we seen with the Thousand Pounder in the demo) or it could use a stun/knockback attack on you so it could run, and possibly steal a stray health orb to heal itself ;) Of course this would be a very rare thing as we don't want all the monsters just picking up health orbs as soon as they drop.

An example for casters could be to cast a spell that would deflect an incoming spell back at the caster, for example the Witch Doctor's Fire Bomb spell. Or it could cast a prison around a health orb if it sees you running to grab one (similar to Diablo's bone prison in DII).

Does anyone else agree that there should be a massive improvement to the AI of monsters? :)

It really depends, generally yes, though you have to admit that a zombie, skeleton or an abomination wouldn't have brains to think, it will just keep on attacking you straight until you/it dies.

[factotum]

I think part of the attraction of Diablo is killing large numbers of monsters, though...just look at the Barbarian's antics at the beginning of the gameplay trailer; that's what most players expect from a Diablo game! The difficulty of the game comes from having to survive when you get swarmed by a bunch of locust-like Flayers or what-have-you, not trying to out-think the AI. If you start making the monsters too intelligent then I think you run the risk of turning it into another game entirely.

Having said that, there are obviously some changes that could be made to fix the more obviously cretinous behaviour of monsters and hirelings. The most obvious thing would be more intelligent target selection--e.g. the monsters should go after the more fragile players first, rather than spending all their time trying to smack through the armour of an Act 2 Merc who's pretty much immune to anything save a short-range tactical nuke!

[Sein Schatten]

Do you really want a better AI (regarding ranged)? I don't.
I find it too annoying to run after archers and near death mobs the whole time. You really only have 3 options for running:
1. You are slower. This means you (melee) will never catch near death and archers. They will pester you until you transit to another map.
2. Equal speed. Either you whack them during the running or you will never catch them.
3. You are faster. You will eventually catch them after time.
All this means is, you will aggro more mobs on the way and, depending, the runner might alert more mobs even if you don't run after him.

I also think that the shield skeletons don't have an improved AI. They just use some skill, similar to Urdars using their stun skill.
Good AI is what Lyrs just posted.

[Wirt]

IMO there can be a lot improved and it will add to the fun, as long as it is a better implementation then every enemy having me run after it for the last hit. Formations like described above by others, groups spreading to avoid AOE attacks etc.
But also, and don't flame for naming something that is also in WOW, the addition of an aggro-system. That way, playing in groups would be a lot more fun than just sending in the tanks and the rest goes nuking. I want the enemy to actually try and kill that weak mage in the back first.

Greetz,

Wirt

[Funkopotamus]

If you're talking about D2, then no lol.

Whenever my barb gets close to the archers and shamans, they usually don't run away. Like the shaman just pull out their knife and start slashing me, while the archer just remain stationary.

The only monsters that I could remember that does hit and run tactics are the saber cats (half cat half women) that throws spear and poison potions.

The skeleton archers don't run but the corrupted archers do.

[phool]

Do you really want a better AI (regarding ranged)? I don't.
I find it too annoying to run after archers and near death mobs the whole time. You really only have 3 options for running:
1. You are slower. This means you (melee) will never catch near death and archers. They will pester you until you transit to another map.
2. Equal speed. Either you whack them during the running or you will never catch them.
3. You are faster. You will eventually catch them after time.
All this means is, you will aggro more mobs on the way and, depending, the runner might alert more mobs even if you don't run after him.

I also think that the shield skeletons don't have an improved AI. They just use some skill, similar to Urdars using their stun skill.
Good AI is what Lyrs just posted.

1 and 2 (b). You adjust to the situation by using any of a wide variety of options available to you, adding an extra dimension to gameplay - instead of simply bashing everything until it dies, you are sometimes encouraged to use snares, stuns or skills like taunt and charge.

[iroll]

I see very little suggestions in this thread that makes for FUN A.I. Smart doesn't mean fun. It'll get old fast when you chase after a monster because it's damaged. Remember the froggies from Act 2 and beyond? Those were absolutely NOT fun, and has the properties of a lot of things you are suggesting here. Better pathfinding? Yes. Dodging all my attacks? No thanks

[Kaeros]

I'd just like to see some better enemy formations. I'm not too concerned with the way monsters individually react to things.

I'd like to see a necromancer enemy that surrounds himself with a protective ring of zombie monsters.

I'd like to see regiments of skeletons, with shield-carriers in the front, melee-skellies flanking in from the sides, and archers in the back.

I'd like to see some class of enemy that fights and travels in unison with a partner. Two ogres chained together, for example, that will go into a rage once they see their mate taken down.

Flocks of demon birds that swarm around a nest.

Etc..

[poltergeist]

I'd like to see regiments of skeletons, with shield-carriers in the front, melee-skellies flanking in from the sides, and archers in the back.

Didn't they show something kind of like this in the trailer? I know there were shield users and archers behind them, but whether they were placed that way or oriented themselves, I have no idea.

All of your suggestions do sound cool. Monsters that behave the way you would expect.

[Wormnet]

What I'd like to see are mobs being able to move out of danger and minions retreating to their masters for healing.

[Sein Schatten]

Didn't they show something kind of like this in the trailer? I know there were shield users and archers behind them, but whether they were placed that way or oriented themselves, I have no idea.


That doesn't mean anything. ;o) For all we know this is a scripted encounter with defined AI to show off. Do you think a lot of work goes into the AI when actors remain on the screen for 3 seconds to get gibbed into meatpieces? That is waste. Remember, D3 is fast paced. No enemy, except bosses are alive for more then a few seconds. What good is an awesome AI there?

[sicilian]

1 and 2 (b). You adjust to the situation by using any of a wide variety of options available to you, adding an extra dimension to gameplay - instead of simply bashing everything until it dies, you are sometimes encouraged to use snares, stuns or skills like taunt and charge.

Problem with this is it turns the game into a tactical RPG, not an action RPG. In Diablo 2, CC was always more of a luxury, or only the necessity of certain builds. If you make it required, you'll lose the satisfaction of mass destruction IMO.

Besides, NOTHING was more frustrating in D2 than getting a unique zealot down to 1/10 life and then having it run like an olympic track medalist to god knows where! I want my drops dammit!

[NKlint]

If they're going to run away from you at least drop that heavy unique axe so you can run faster to avoid dying. Like tripping your hiking buddy or throwing a juicy steak at a charging bear.

[Matora]

We've already seen a change in behavior in the AI of monsters. The Thousand Pounder becomes more aggro after reaching less than 1/2 health and there's also a skeleton mage raising other undead to fill the ranks (also mentioned on the D3 site) from the front.

I think something different would be monsters casting more defensive spells on themselves and comrades or using the environment to their advantage as well.

[phool]

Problem with this is it turns the game into a tactical RPG, not an action RPG. In Diablo 2, CC was always more of a luxury, or only the necessity of certain builds. If you make it required, you'll lose the satisfaction of mass destruction IMO.

Besides, NOTHING was more frustrating in D2 than getting a unique zealot down to 1/10 life and then having it run like an olympic track medalist to god knows where! I want my drops dammit!

Encouraging use more than one skill doesn't stop it being an action rpg. CC shouldn't be necessary everywhere, but there should be hard parts of the game which mean there are consequences for completely disregarding anything that isn't entirely offensive. Agreed on the zealot.

[5zigen]

D1 had much better AI than D2...

AI, if nothing else, adds flavor to the game. Mowing down a bunch of meandering zombies, while entertaining, isn't entirely gratifying.

Having enemies that use different tactics. Some that spread out, some that try to surround you, some that group up, enemies that fire roughly in unison, etc these things would make the game more interesting to play than just having enemies that walk toward you once you're on the screen.

[sicilian]

D1 had much better AI than D2...

AI, if nothing else, adds flavor to the game. Mowing down a bunch of meandering zombies, while entertaining, isn't entirely gratifying.

Having enemies that use different tactics. Some that spread out, some that try to surround you, some that group up, enemies that fire roughly in unison, etc these things would make the game more interesting to play than just having enemies that walk toward you once you're on the screen.

While I'm pretty sure you just described BOTH Diablo 1 and 2, I think you may have the right idea here.

Instead of enemies that run AWAY from you, let's have enemies that recognize when one of their allies is in their way. If there are already three demons pounding at you in front, the ones in back shouldn't just stand there like a poor man's phalanx and wait their turn. They could circle around to the back and try to cut off escape.

Then the idea of using multiple skills to survive is a little more enticing, because you use things like leap, stun, hamstring, etc, to keep yourself free, rather than to prevent an enemy from fleeing. Keeps everyone in the fight, which is more fun.

I also think the addition of the Dark Vessels might be a precursor to some of these things. In the video, the Barb wanders across the cultists and has free reign to take them down. If there was a circle of them positioned, say, behind a massive group of Berserkers, the Barb would have to leap, or find a way to take down enough Berserkers to create a seam quickly. That type of thing would be an example of challenging but not frustrating AI.