AI use of Air

[Mike Parker]

I had a huge post I was working on, but then I got called away and my machine locked, so here is the reader's digest version.

The AI squanders its air units, and hence its PP WAY TOO OFTEN.

A typical turn during the Western Front Campaign will see the Brits and French loose 6 Air points to the Germans and cause 1 Air point and about 10 PP worth of ground replacement damage. So this is 72 PP spent by the Allies and 22 for the Axis, and in addition RARELY if ever does this allow the French to launch a meaningful ground attack which is the reason they are wanting to ground strike in the first place.

In addition once France falls the Brits will launch air strikes from Southern England and Wales into Occupied France against my garrisoning infantry units, taking very high losses for hardly any benefit. Are they seriously contemplating paradrops?!

Anyway the AI should be given some logic to more carefully use its air in the face of determined interceptors. They should also be given the task of trying to gain air superiority or even supremacy by counter-air tactics. That way when they do decide they wish to use their precious air to pave the road for a ground attack, they actually get to make the ground strikes!

[Romdanzer]

I have noticed that effect as well!

What is critical here is what I elluded to in my other post "How is loss-column for air stirke determined? " because it seems to me the determination of which loss-column is used during an air-strike is pivotal in the decision to use an airstrike or not. (Important deciding factor for AI I would think)

Simply put: If your air-strike you intend will use the loss-column 1 then that airstrike is not worth it from a PP calcuation tradeoff viewpoint.
Because 1 strength point of Air costs 12 PP whereas the max. amount of dmg you can perform is like 0.5 * (PP cost per strengthpoint of the unit you are attacking) * (airstrike effectivity). As most land units cost much less than 12 PP per strengthpoint; that makes attacking an infantry div/corps VERY ineffective in fact even so much as with a HIGH PP LOSS from a PP calculation perspektive. (!!!)

The only reason to perform an airstrike in such a case is if that attack on that hex is of primary strategic importance - like attacking Gibraltar, Paris, London or Moscow etc... which is very seldom indeed.

Romdanzer

[cpdeyoung]

In the GPW-Stalin AAR I mention that I had to seed 5,000PP to the Germans who squandered their PP wealth on a long and costly air battle with the British. All to no significant gain, and with a big invasion of the USSR in the offing.

I agree this behavior needs a big review.

Chuck

[willgamer]

Just to pile on...

Since airpower is not really needed to crush Poland, I start the campaign by moving all the Axis airpower to feast on Great Britain warships in the North Sea.

Rinse and repeat with French airpower and soon there's no one else flying until the war USSR starts.

[Romdanzer]

ACTUALLY as I am hinting at in my other posts and also in the thread "How is loss-column for air stirke determined?" I think there might be a bug in the Air Stike air loss column determination routine...(!!!!) i.e the Air Strike air loss columns are on average too low - too much column 1 being used......
 
Such a bug could explain all the large problems the game is having with air strike air losses. And also it would explain the mechanics for the hotfix 1.5 corrections i.e the hotfix addressed the impact of the bug by changing the average losses taken at column 1; but the underlying reason is still there- too much column 1 being used.
 
IF such a bug would exist and be corrected you could maybe in fact even go back to the pre 1.5 hotfix air strike air loss columns!
 
To check this theory we need to know of course though how EXACTLY the air strike air loss column is supposed to be calculated to check and see if the computer is doing everything right and if there is such a bug.
 
Romdanzer

[Tordenskiold]

I do not understand everything you say about losses etc. but I use air attack to make sure that I can soften an enemy unit occupaying a city or an other key position such as my land attack will succeed in knocking it out. This works fine and are crucial to a quick progress in many cases.
A part from that I am not waisting my air power because as you say, it cost a lot of PP's. Air power is to gain a tactical advantage and in that respect I think it's works fine.

[Romdanzer]

Hi Tordenskiold,

Well that in a way kind of points into the same direction - you are essentially confirming the fact that the PP-losses from airstrike are too high to be able to use it too much. As a Human-player you have learnt to restrain yourself from using air-strike too much - as it is too costly. You loose 12 PP for every time you loose an air Strengthpoint....and you are only killing like a couple of PP worth in land units. For using Airstrike ONLY on CRITICAL attacks - that is ok.

However the problem arises that the AI uses airstrike TOO MUCH and can lead itself into economic ruin with this. At the moment a possible strategy for example is too keep rebuilding infantry divs/corps that the AI attacks with airstrikes. You trade off 5-15 PP altogether for the inf-rebuilding for like 30-60 PP loss on side of the AI due to air-losses ..... kinda wierd....economic warfare with "receiving airstrikes"........doesn't feel realistic at all.

Even thought the current air-strike system in-a-way works for human-players - as they learn to restrain themselves with airstrikes. It doesn't seem to work for the AI.

Romdanzer

[Mehring]

Further, a German player can recce for British/French air bases and then easily destroy them. In my experience the loss ratio of such attacks is at least 10:1. The AI does not reciprocate, however.

[Hard Sarge]

if the redo the Airpower tech tree to include ranges for each upgrade level, this would help on a number of areas

lack of range would force the AI to attack only front line targets

counter air would need to be close to the targets under attack, to be of use

naval attack units would have to be close to the coast to be used, so choice of either being coastal based or front line based

HARDer to find and kill off enemy Airfields if range of units is less
(of course, if you are level 2 and the enemy is level 1, it works the other way around)

of the other side of the coin, everything being complained about, is pretty much what happened during the war, sounds just like what the English did from 41 to 43

and I am not so sure the AI is wasting there attacks, most times I do see the French follow up where there airpower is hitting, I have learned to always have a retreat path, or lots of defence air in the area, when I am close to the front line

my attack on Russia kicked off before I was planning on it, and none of my air was in place, the Russian AI worked over a number of my troops for a while, until I was able to bring enough airpower back to help out, and now it is about even each turn