Do you play against the AI?

[Joel Billings]

I picked up on the interest in the AI thread and decided I'd post a poll. How do you best characterize your experience with the AI.

[m10bob]

Thanks, Joel..

[DrewBlack]

its rubblish!!!

Woudl never call it an Ai!!!! that implies intelligence, which it DOES NOT HAVE!!!

Joel ive said it before, I would pay good money ( lot of good money) for any sort of Ai in this game... i love it but the Ai is none existant... even something on the lines ofGBWII Ai would be great. Something please[:(][:(][:(]

Drew

[Brady]

IMO, The AI is only realy suited to acting as a training aide. The real joy of the game is from PBEM.

[niceguy2005]

Joel I voted for the option of " I only played the AI when learning, wouldn't touch it now"

Which isn't 100% true.  I do still occassionally play the AI, but its mostly when I'm experiencing PBEM withdrawl symptoms.  By the way, the AI was thoroughly enjoyable while I was learning.

I think creating an AI that would challenge an advanced witp player (without cheating too much) would have to be one of the toughest jobs on the planet.  That said, the main reason I don't play the AI more is that, while the AI actually makes some fairly strategically sound choices, it also does really dumb things in terms of game management.  Right at the top of the list is running the KB out of gas.  It does this constantly.  Another is fragmenting units into hopelessly small groups all over the map.  If the AIs game management could be improved I think it would be overall tougher.

Just my thoughts.

[Terminus]

ORIGINAL: DrewBlack

its rubblish!!!

Woudl never call it an Ai!!!! that implies intelligence, which it DOES NOT HAVE!!!

Joel ive said it before, I would pay good money ( lot of good money) for any sort of Ai in this game... i love it but the Ai is none existant... even something on the lines ofGBWII Ai would be great. Something please[:(][:(][:(]

Drew

"rubblish"? [8|]

[Banquet]

I only play against the AI.

I wish the AI were better but I'm a pretty inept player so it makes a reasonable opponent if I 'let it off' some of it's more stupid moves

[wild_Willie2]

AI is nice to kill some time, but most off the time it is BAD (it has some clear moments though).......
 
The AI is 50% REASONABLE and 50% totally MORONIC.......

[RUPD3658]

Keep in mind the sampling pool. 100% of the owners of the game who do not visit the forums must play the AI exclusively. I am sure they out number those of us who post here.

[VSWG]

ORIGINAL: niceguy2005

Joel I voted for the option of " I only played the AI when learning, wouldn't touch it now"

Which isn't 100% true. I do still occassionally play the AI, but its mostly when I'm experiencing PBEM withdrawl symptoms. By the way, the AI was thoroughly enjoyable while I was learning.

Same here. The AI isn't really that bad, but there's no going back after your first PBEM.

[Nomad]

Only played against the AI the first couple of weeks to learn a bit - then PBEM.

[VSWG]

ORIGINAL: RUPD3658

Keep in mind the sampling pool. 100% of the owners of the game who do not visit the forums must play the AI exclusively. I am sure they out number those of us who post here.

Not entirely true, you can play PBEM against friends or relatives (Feinder / Knavey, IIRC). Lets say 99%...

[/nitpick] [;)]

[AW1Steve]

ORIGINAL: RUPD3658

Keep in mind the sampling pool. 100% of the owners of the game who do not visit the forums must play the AI exclusively. I am sure they out number those of us who post here.

[:D] And a few of THEM is US. [:D]

[Rainer]

I cannot commit myself to a PBEM game, for a variety of reasons.
Therefore playing against AI is my only option.
I'm doing this since the day WitP has been released, and I have great fun doing this (Allied against Japanese AI). I only play scen 15 at level Very Hard, and I leave the British and Chinese Forces in the hands of AI.

I see AI handle especially the British Forces (Land, Air Sea) fairly poor, so the British make no real progress in Burma. It looks like the AI script handling that area is faulty. A lot of LCUs are moved quite meaningless back and forth (without any interaction by the Japanese). LCUs based in Karachi every couple of months start to walk towards Malir. When they reach Malir they turn around and march back to Karachi. They are doing this since (about) mid 43 and never came beyond Malir. Same is true for some units in Madras. Really looks like an error in the script.

I also saw, especially in 1942, several Japanese (AI controlled) Carrier Task Forces attacking Port Moresby, and it was quite clear these TFs were out of fuel and - more important - out of planes. They never retreated or took any other means to replenish (as far as I could see). Thus the Japanese Task Forces were - way too easily - beaten and sunk. The major factor seems to be that those TFs were not replenished, and the AI routines don't realize those TFs were not combat ready anymore.

If ONLY two those issues mentioned above, and especially the second one, would be somehow improved the fight Allies against Japanese AI would be a lot more interesting, tougher and way more challenging than it is now.

Edited for spelling and clearification (hopefully).

[Joel Billings]

Just for your info, Gary spent countless hours trying to improve the AI. The fact that the game takes so long to resolve was just one limiting factor. I can't count the number of times we found KB out of fuel and passed saves to Gary, only for Gary to try and fail to improve it. We also noticed problems in Burma that he was never able to fix. I think the routines just got too complicated and the AI had too many things it was trying to do that contradicted itself and Gary couldn't keep them all straight. Trying to improve the WitP AI would be a daunting task.

By the way, my guess is that 80% of WitP buyers play AI only. I am currently playing 3 PBEM games of War Between the States with testers. I love PBEM when I can find time to do it, espeically for games that I really understand as only human players can really surprise you. However, I don't think most people have the time or inclination to play PBEM, and as much as I like PBEM, the vast majority of my gaming (and testing) is versus the AI.

[Buck Beach]

While not completely content with the computers abilities (for those who can't even stand to it being referred to as AI - how silly it is only a term),  I sure have a lot of fun playing it. 

I don't think it would take to much to make it much better, but, that's easy for me to say, not knowing anything about programing or the complexity of the issue.  A simple thing like don't run your KB Death Star to a point of having no endurance and then trying to limp back to the original home port for replenishing (if I'm wrong here someone will let me know).  Also having a better supply and fuel replacement system and not rat holing the transports.

I don't expect much improvement and am quite content with the price I paid and the enjoyment I am getting.

Edit: Damn my post brings things to bare that are already surfaced.

[Rainer]

Joel, I'm not complaining. The game is great as is.
Just tried to point out where I would start with the screw driver if I could.

One thing I did not mention before: we (at least those who saw Gary's comments at the time PacWar was released) know how much Gary tried to take care of a balanced game MAINTAINED over the whole period of war time. And I think he succeeded both with PacWar and with WitP.
Quote Mr. Grigsby "... to keep the Allied player at his toes ...", and with WitP the Allied player is "at his toes" until the very end. Even against AI.
Great game.
Great support.
Great community.

[JeffroK]

The AI is competent enough to play against at the very hard level, at least for 18mths. How many PBEM have got that far, without one of the players making a clanger. Of course a PBEM player can spend hours on reviewing his moves and selecting the best strategies.
 
I would love to see the AI improved, but it has to have a variable attack strategy and to react to Allied moves.
 
Joel, can you reword your poll, Who plays mainly AI, Who plays mainly PBEM

[Mobeer]

Play only against the AI, since I do not get to play regularly.

I'm playing one game as Japanese, now in April 43 and another as the Allies, now in December 42.

The Allied AI has done some good things:
- started out ok
- held Singapore for much longer than historically the case
- repeatedly stopped my attacks on Akyab by sea and by land
- used British carriers well to sink BB Kirishima
- launched counter offensives in China that caused me considerable problems

But the Allied AI also:
- left ground units to be isolated
- attacked my convoy at Lunga (good idea) from the west rather than the south east (bad idea), leading to the loss of two carriers to land based air and Japanese carriers arriving the next day
- sent CV Wasp on a suicide mission against Lae (reminded me of Pacific War AI in doing this)
- sends new carriers to attack Johnston Island (giving away their position), then heads onwards on certain doom at Tarawa
- failed to change carrier task force orders when forces detected or aircraft losses sustained, which cost CV Hornet, 1 British CV, CVL Hermes
- sends warships around with inadequate ASW escort

The Japanese AI I have seen less of but it:
- attacks reasonably well
- captured Singapore and Bataan faster than I could
- captured Northern Burma which I failed to do
- repulsed two invasions of Midway (badly executed by me)
- recaptured Munda in mid-1942

But the Japanese AI also:
- leaves ships in harbours than can be bombed
- loses a lot of aircraft on minor engagements

[Mobeer]

double posted somehow