How is the AI?

[comrade]

ORIGINAL: Widell

ORIGINAL: comrade
I very much like this idea, coz it's a) simple b) generic. It may work in a way that if the check fails surrounded unit level is reduced by 1. If check fails for lev 1 unit - it surrenders. Apart from the factors you mentioned, I'd add city supply value and an air superiority for the hex with the besieged unit (higher supply and ability to reinforce from air would make the siege last longer).

Agree, and to add to this idea, you may want to store the impact of the different values in one of the files so they are easily moddable later on.

Like i said in the other thread, everything in this game (except the map, which is a binary file) is stored in csv files, and you can be sure that next patches will stick to this good practice.

[DD696]

My experience with the game so far is that the AI will only defend cities. There appears to be no effort made at establishing a frontline or making use of river/terrain defensive positions (unless they are within one hex of a city). As a long time wargamer since the sixties, this lack of a defensive strategy concerns me. The game appears to be based on city defense/offense AI routines and I feel that this should really be improved upon and addressed.

[Widell]

ORIGINAL: comrade
...you can be sure that next patches will stick to this good practice.

[&o]

DD696: Can you perhaps provide a few examples of games which base their AI routines on other basics? Would be interesting as a reference even if I'm not at all involved in this, or any other game programming.

[DD696]

Take a look at War in Russia or Second Front, War in Europe or any of the old SPI games (or AH games for that matter) - old wargames to be sure, but ones that attempt to create a line of defense that is not based on simply a few points on a map. If only the cities are defended and a great many hexes of open space in between them, then it is all too easy to surround them and defeat them - especially with the new changes the developers have stated they are implementing with the next patch.

I feel fairly confident in stating that in most modern (within the last 100 years or so) military campaigns a contiguous and active line of defense is imperative if you wish to defend against an enemy. Leaving great gaps in a defensive line would be frowned upon by the commander of the theatre. Look at World War I or World War II - you just cannot leave gaping gaps of a great many miles in the line if you wish to survive contact with the enemy.

Or am I simply too realistic?

[AZKGungHo]

Does the AI do this on all fronts? Or just the Russian front?

I can see a few gaps in the Russian Front, as it was so large that there were many sections lightly held. But if the AI does that all the time, then I think there's a MAJOR problem here the needs to be fixed before I'll buy it!

[Widell]

ORIGINAL: DD696
Take a look at War in Russia or Second Front, War in Europe or any of the old SPI games (or AH games for that matter) - old wargames to be sure, but ones that attempt to create a line of defense that is not based on simply a few points on a map.

OK, let's hope these games are looked into by the design team if/when they take on this task.

ORIGINAL: DD696
If only the cities are defended and a great many hexes of open space in between them, then it is all too easy to surround them and defeat them - especially with the new changes the developers have stated they are implementing with the next patch.

Without having bought the game yet, I agree, I guess this becomes very obvious in Russia where there's lot's of space without cities to defend for the AI. In more densely populated areas, the issue is maybe smaller?

ORIGINAL: DD696
I feel fairly confident in stating that in most modern (within the last 100 years or so) military campaigns a contiguous and active line of defense is imperative if you wish to defend against an enemy. Leaving great gaps in a defensive line would be frowned upon by the commander of the theatre. Look at World War I or World War II - you just cannot leave gaping gaps of a great many miles in the line if you wish to survive contact with the enemy.

Well, no one will disagree about what history and reality shows us, but it may be hard to represent that reality in a smart way as implemented via AI programming [;)]

ORIGINAL: DD696
Or am I simply too realistic?

No, definitely not in your critique of the AI implementation, but the question is if the designers are willing to look into the AI algorithms, and if such changes are possible in a near future? The AI behaviour is a huge source for discussion in any game, but since this one seems to be very heavily tuned to Human vs AI, it is a very important topic for this game indeed.

ORIGINAL: AZ Gung Ho
But if the AI does that all the time, then I think there's a MAJOR problem here the needs to be fixed before I'll buy it!

Well, technically, it's not a problem if it is WAD, but the implementation of the AI may not meet our expectations of a WWII game... Subtle difference maybe, but important to understand in the perspective of what can and will change in future patches.

[darrellb9]

ORIGINAL: DD696

My experience with the game so far is that the AI will only defend cities. There appears to be no effort made at establishing a frontline or making use of river/terrain defensive positions (unless they are within one hex of a city).

In addition to this another thing I've noted is that the AI doesn't seem to make any preference based on the VP or PP value of the cities. In taking Yugoslavia I found all the Yugoslav forces clustered around Sarajevo and only a single unit in Beograd and one in Split which are the 2 VP cities you need to get Yugoslavia to surrender. Seems more weight should be given to VP and high PP cities by the AI, in that order.

[DD696]

I stated in another thread that they have a real "diamond in the rough" here - the sheer size of the game, a viable production system, nice use of ground units, and nicely thought out. Having much of the data user modifiable is a huge plus in favor of the game. However, the AI simply does not hold up to the flavor of the operational and strategic flow of World War II. If this can be upgraded so that lines of defense (and offense) become viable then this game will be one of the great ones. Simply battling for the next city with no thought given to gaps in the line is not going to give this game the status that it should deserve.

Of course, if it were adapted for PBEM it could excel without a good AI. The problem with that, for the huge majority of us, is that we are AI players and prefer to spend our time actually playing the game than sitting and waiting, perhaps for days, for a turn to arrive.

All this is for the developers to decide. All I can do is give an answer to "How is the AI?".

[Plainian]

Well the viable production system would be more viable if there was a production delay built into the system, so you 'ordered' units rather than intantly produced them but I'll admit that saving PP's or whatever achieves much the same effect...although I prefer the former system.
 
I do however agree that the 'play on my ownsome brigade' may have ruined the game. I suspect that a lot of things done in the game are designed so that progamming an AI will be easier -
 
- reduced number of units (see comments about OOB's in other threads)
- supply being tied to cities only (is this why the number of cities looks to be low?)
- missing islands (Malta and Cretes port)
 
Possibly I'm totally wrong here?
 

[comrade]

Thanks for all opinions we're following this thread very carefully. I can assure you that the AI will be constantly improving in next patches.

1.20 (which is coming very soon) among many new features and fixes will have an improved AI garrisoning algorithm (In 1.19 AI can unexpectedly abandon important city)

We're considering implementing more advanced AI (using lines of defence, not only "points of defence") in the following patch, i.e. 1.21, though can't promise for 100% yet. 

There are also some rumors about PBEM [;)]

[dave74]

Sounds great, especially the PBEM bit !

[JMass]

ORIGINAL: dave74

Sounds great, especially the PBEM bit !

Quote! [:)] [&o]

[Widell]

ORIGINAL: comrade
Thanks for all opinions we're following this thread very carefully. I can assure you that the AI will be constantly improving in next patches.

1.20 (which is coming very soon) among many new features and fixes will have an improved AI garrisoning algorithm (In 1.19 AI can unexpectedly abandon important city)

We're considering implementing more advanced AI (using lines of defence, not only "points of defence") in the following patch, i.e. 1.21, though can't promise for 100% yet.

There are also some rumors about PBEM [;)]

That is great news! Keep up the good work!

[Plainian]

ORIGINAL: comrade

There are also some rumors about PBEM [;)]

Well that has me almost reaching for my Credit Card as well! [:)] Will the PBEM include a proper/full Replay type option or will it be something similar to CEaW?
If its the former then I can start typing in my credit card number.........

[comrade]

For the time being it will be a simple solution, so no replay options. This is because we'd like to include this in 1.20 and we don't want to push back the release date. 

[Rob Brennan UK]

<creak> - Crusty wallet opens

<shuffle> - humm donor card , driving license , ah credit card !

<wait> , if patch is good I'll type the number in

This game has some great prospects and I'm loving the idea of PBEM too.