Unintelligent Japanese AI (also published in War Room)

[tocaff]

Yes, we learned that painfull lesson in Nam.  I was just referring to the actual combat.  All wars are long periods of boredom and short sharp encounters with the enemy.

[xj900uk]

On some of the Pacific Islands,  the Japanese were very good at make-shift booby-traps,  home-made mines,  + the odd sniper up in the trees even amongst Islands that were supposed to be 'clear' and swept of Japanese.
Also,  don't 4get the 'no surrender' policy of the Japanese.  Their troops kept on holding out in the Phillipines way after the official end of hostilities - their commander dismissed all messages from Tokyo that the war was over as 'crude American propoganda'.  In fact,  most of them didn't surrender until the following year,  1946.  Some held out until the 1970's,  three coming out of the jungle and finally laying down their arms in 1974.  However,  the record has to be on one of the Phillipinian islands,  where two Japanese (both well into their 80's) were reported to be holding out in early 2005...
One wonders just how many refused to surrender and either took their own lives or took to the jungle to carry on guerilla tactics...

[pasternakski]

See, this just shows how good the Japanese AI design is in UV! Even after you bust up Kido Butai, it still sends bombardment groups to blast your hard-won new bases, even though your carriers and LBA shred them unmercifully on their way home (you never see them coming; this as a result of some unwritten coding rule, I guess).

Any aircraft surviving sinking or disabling of a Japanese AI carrier will fly against you as LBA to the last pilot and plane. All Japanese AI merchant shipping will seppuku piecemeal attempting to reinforce, resupply, or evacuate forward bases within range of your LBA thirsting for ways to improve their experience ratings. Japanese AI Zeroes will fly and fly and fly until they are (fittingly) at zero morale and infinite fatigue, losing as many or more aircraft for operational reasons as they do to Allied pilots. Japanese AI ground units will bombard you, bombard you, and bombard you, even when they have no guns to bombard you with (not to mention ammo). If you don't kill 'em, they'll never stop. And so on...

If you could figure out a way to get the game to keep going, I'll bet the Japanese AI would continue fighting at least into the 21st century (or until Toyota becomes the world's largest automaker, which I believe to be one of the hidden Japanese AI automatic victory conditions we have not yet seen in operation).

Now, how's THAT for yanking a meandering thread back on topic? HAH?

[xj900uk]

[font=arial]Hmmm,  hadn’t thought of it like that.  Perhaps you do have a point,  about the AI IJN never surrendering.  Yes,  they always do seem to keep on coming well past the point of honour or Bushido and the USN is mowing down as fast as they keep on coming…[/font]
[font=arial] [/font]
[font=arial]However,  I do believe that my original point is still valid,  that the IJN AI is not that intelligent (it is persistent,  I grant you) and squanders some of its best resources (particularly shipping) trying to move heavy forces into places like GG,  which I grant you is a reasonable base to hold because of its strategic position,  but then can’t move overland anywhere & then waste even more resources trying to reinforce or resupply.  Far better to send a small garrison unit in by FT to take the base then a few air support units & an engineer or pioneer unit to build up the airport,  or at least support a few floatplanes on search.  But 000’s of excellent combat troops which could have been used to march on PM overland from either Lae or Buna?[/font]

[decaro]

You always seem to have an insider's knowledge of UV, so what version of UV are you playing at: 2.5?

[pasternakski]

The only reason I know anything at all about UV is that I've been around from the beginning and played it extensively with very sharp, good players who taught me a lot (often the hard way).

I have since moved on to other nonsensical pursuits, but I still see the occasional HtH game popping up on the computers the wargaming club I belong to have available for such purposes.

We patched UV to 2.5 because of the two new display features it offers (ground unit assault values on the orders screen and defensive mine numbers on the base screen) and because it seems to clean up a lot (not all) of the nonsense left over through v. 2.3 and definitely added in those awful beta patches in the 2.4 series (particularly the "disappearing aircraft" thingy).

What would bring me back to UV? Retrofitting of the WitP database editor (there is so much I would have liked to do with that on both sides). A somewhat expanded map allowing for more flexible play in 1943 (it gets a little tedious having no new worlds to conquer). Improved AI (but what game can't you say that about?). Revamping of the "ship commitment" nonsense (I suggest making this part of the initial setup, ship by ship, air unit by air unit, ground unit by ground unit in a way compatible with the database editor). Some consideration of the needs of other theaters for forces (including the ability to build historical events - like Midway - or ahistorical ones of your choosing) into your scenario. More refinement of the game system (for example, surface combat graphics and presentation, but especially WitP retrofits, like user-settable bomber strike range limitations).

I know. "Numbah 10. Nevah happen, G.I."

Oh. the "advanced UV" purportedly under development? I dunno. I'm not optimistic from the little bit of information that was given in the announcement.

Besides, Matrix is increasingly becoming a "retailer," not a "designer." They almost never seem to be able to finish anything they have undertaken on their own anymore (need I mention EiA?). All you seem to get is "Matrix and Moktada al Sadr are pleased to announce that Matrix will allow Digital River to sell you 'Fatwa - the Sixth Generation - Death to America, but Keep Them Oil Dollars Coming'."

[DuckofTindalos]

ORIGINAL: pasternakski

All you seem to get is "Matrix and Moktada al Sadr are pleased to announce that Matrix will allow Digital River to sell you 'Fatwa - the Sixth Generation - Death to America, but Keep Them Oil Dollars Coming'."

Ooh, that sounds like a fun one![:D]

[decaro]

The reason I asked what version you were at was because some of us had real problems patching 2.5 on top of 2.3; I don't know what happened w/players stuck with the disasterous 2.4 updates.

A fresh install of 2.5 on my 2.0 seemed to do the trick; I played thru 3 scenarios of increasing length w/o trouble, but now I'm noticing some spurious problems playing "Yamato's Prophecy."

Apparently there's something different in the coding for each separate scenario, which may explain why only some problems popped-up in some scenarios, but not in every one.

I understand that in large software projects, a master designer/code writer would delegate routine tasks to subordinates so that one person wouldn't have to write a million lines of code. But I didn' t think UV had as much code as WinXP!

v. 2.5 was a large (comprehensive) patch that is still something of a mystery to me. In retrospect, I think I should have bought WitP when it was briefly reduced to $50.

[pasternakski]

ORIGINAL: Joe D.

The reason I asked what version you were at was because some of us had real problems patching 2.5 on top of 2.3

Sorry, Joe, I haven't been much help because I have never played any of the scenarios other than the full campaigns, 17 and 19 (and they are completely full of sh1t in many respects).

I have seen posted problems with the shorter scenarios, and I fully believe that they are fraught with problems that have never been addressed.

It's a sad commentary on what many of us believed would be a great game.

[decaro]

UV at v2.3 had some concerns, but I didn't think it was so full of (code) problems that Matrix needed to do the disasterous 2.4 series. In retrospect, was simply having readable assault/mine numbers really worth all this trouble?

That begs the question: if UV at 2.5 is still "fraught with problems," why buy the (proposed) special edition of UV? Or, as I suggested in an earlier post, do we all convert to WitP? I don't recall reading that the big brother of UV was having any problems, which is odd as I assumed it was all the same code/game, just in a larger ocean.

Maybe I'll play around w/2.5 and then uninstall/re-install it back at 2.3 and call it a day; I can't recall any game I've ever re-installed more than UV, but I keep going back to it despite my collection of more visually enhanced software simulations.

[DEB]

UV at v2.3 had some concerns, but I didn't think it was so full of (code) problems that Matrix needed to do the disasterous 2.4 series. In retrospect, was simply having readable assault/mine numbers really worth all this trouble?

I think the main trust of the 2.4 patch series was to eliminate the "disappearing aircraft" problem. The WitP features added were just a bonus.

That begs the question: if UV at 2.5 is still "fraught with problems," why buy the (proposed) special edition of UV?

Why indeed!

Or, as I suggested in an earlier post, do we all convert to WitP? I don't recall reading that the big brother of UV was having any problems, which is odd as I assumed it was all the same code/game, just in a larger ocean.

I am not sure, but I think WitP has some different codes due to extra/new features. Transferring some of these features caused some of the 2.4 series errors if I recall past posts correctly.

Not too long ago Mr Wood ( Matrix Games ), advised me that some other reported errors were being looked at/corrected. I am not sure if the intent here was a further patch (!!) OR to clense the game prior to the production of the"special edition" UV.
I suspect the latter.

Any chance of a further UV patch Mr Wood?

By the way, to go back to the original subject of this string of posts, the "Japanese" AI attacks Gili Gili ( and some other sites I presume ), because they were historical sub objectives. GG for instance, is a target for ops in both Flat Top & Carrier for that reason. Historically though, the overall operation failed due to the battle of the Corel Sea.

This prompts a thought. Has anyone noticed any "odd" moves by an "Allied" AI?

[pasternakski]

ORIGINAL: DEB
the"special edition" UV.

It was called "advanced UV." What that means, old chap, I haven't a "klew."

the "Japanese" AI attacks Gili Gili

One of the very few things you can change with the scenario editor, if you care to fiddle around with it.

This prompts a thought. Has anyone noticed any "odd" moves by an "Allied" AI?

Aren't they all?

[decaro]

I don't recall any aircraft disappearing w/2.3; that problem appeared w/2.4, hence the 2.41 series of patches, which never solved the disappearing plane problem until a chance discovery that led to the comprehensive 2.5 fix.

Except for a brief visit re PT patrol numbers, Mike Wood hasn't graced this forum, nor has he responded to any questions since the 2.5 update. So forget about any further UV support. Just like the end of a Warner Brothers cartoon, "That's all, folks."

I guess we should just be grateful that Matrix has put up w/us for this long.

[DEB]

I don't recall any aircraft disappearing w/2.3; that problem appeared w/2.4, hence the 2.41 series of patches, which never solved the disappearing plane problem until a chance discovery that led to the comprehensive 2.5 fix.

Quite right, apologies for the oversight - mixing up my 2.3 & 2.4.

Except for a brief visit re PT patrol numbers, Mike Wood hasn't graced this forum, nor has he responded to any questions since the 2.5 update.

You must have missed the following two posts!!

1. Re: Feedback on v2.50 (final beta) - 1/26/2007 10:08:43 PM

Hello...

Will fix today.

Bye...

Michael Wood

quote:

ORIGINAL: DEB

It would be nice to get the Flying/Grounded Sub. problem in Sc. 11 fixed so it can't occur again! See Bug Reports & Problems : 11/4/2005.


2. RE: Further Bug & possible upgrade - 1/26/2007 10:10:28 PM


Hello...

Will fix today.

Bye...

Michael Wood

quote:

ORIGINAL: DEB

Noted from recent post:-

Also there is a bug whereby any ship in a port that is captured "warps" back to Tokyo or PH instead of being scuttled

This is ridiculous !! . Surely this NEEDS fixing!

Also noted, same source:-

Aircraft in UV do not drop torps against ships in port. Only introduced in WITP I'm afraid.

Given this happened at PH ( hence WITP I presume ) why was it missed in UV.
Can this not be patched in ?

The bugs & errors known/reported to date must be worth a new patch by now ( aside of the 2.50 patch )! PLEASE !!

So forget about any further UV support. Just like the end of a Warner Brothers cartoon, "That's all, folks."

You may well be right; but if so, the point of the above replies would appear to be a "clensing" of the known errors in preperation for the "advanced" UV that has been promised. It should not be too difficult (or time consuming ) to incorporate any of these corrections into a new "basic" UV patch.
One can but live in hope.

[decaro]

Those posts go back to January and concern the final beta for 2.5; here in the colonies, it's already April.

Except for the "bugs reported" section at the top of this forum, I haven't recently seen anything of import from Monsiour Wood because Matrix has thrown us our last bone w/2.5; does anyone seriously expect another comprehensive UV fix/patch in this lifetime?

Re Inteligent AI: I'm finally realizing something re UV's "intelligence"; I bet many still playing this game play PBEM, therefore AI behavior isn't a concern for them. I wonder if the beta testers for 2.5 were testing only UV's PBEM.

I don't own WitP, but I would assume that it's massive scale makes for larger files to up and download, which probably doesn't make it as popular for PBEM as good old UV.

[decaro]

It just occurred to me that by 1944, brand-new Japanese pilots were assigned to "special attack squadrons" (kamakaze) and didn't need a great deal of training for their one-way, one-time missions!

[decaro]

don't 4get the 'no surrender' policy of the Japanese. Their troops kept on holding out in the Phillipines way after the official end of hostilities - their commander dismissed all messages from Tokyo that the war was over as 'crude American propoganda'. In fact, most of them didn't surrender until the following year, 1946

It just occurred to me (again) that suicide bombers in Iraq -- including their Asian role models, the kamikaze -- don't exactly surrender either.

[tocaff]

Cultural differences between peoples are that hardest thing to understand because the biggest error committed is to judge another culture by your own.  These cultural differences can be caused by any # of factors and it doesn't matter what brought them about, accept that they are there and what they are.  The Japanese had a different sense of duty than the Allies and this was a cultural thing.  Some cultures place a different value on life and some are very willing to die in the fight against their enemies.  Travel to a different continent, live there for years as I've done and then you begin to truly grasp what I'm talking about.  You can be as strange in your beliefs and mannerisms to somebody as they are to you.

[decaro]

I've spent six months "peacekeeping" in Bosnia in addition to lengthy forays into Germany and the Middle East, and quite frankly ritual suicide/kamikaze attacks/homocide bombings and the like are more than just cultural phenomena.

Maybe it's my own personal prejudice, but people who willing kill themselves and others for either their emporer or All'ah need to be stopped by any means available, and in UV there are "virtually" many means at my disposal.

[tocaff]

The point that I'm trying to make is that if you live like the locals and with the locals you'll see things differently than as a visitor.  I'm not arguing about if it's crazy to be willing to commit suicide for the emperor or religious reasons.  I'm trying to say that viewed by your standards another culture will have a skewed look.  I'm not saying who or what is right or wrong, just judging by a set of standards developed in your culture won't do justice to another culture with a different set of social, religious or whatever standards.  I believe that extremism by anyone or group is not good.