A suggestion

[bo]

Just a suggestion for Wastelands programmers for your new Pacific game because it is probably too late for this one [TOW ] when the AI is on the attack allies or axis the attack should be made with high effeciency units with good power, not low level 1's and 2's with low effeciency. EG: when the German AI attacks in France its front line is mostly low level poor units which cause little damage. When I am the allies[human] I have to let the AI handle France so the Axis AI has a chance at winning, if I control France as a human the axis AI cannot beat France and that is without any help from British units. A solution would be have all the powerful panzer units blow open the holes then have powerful army units mop up and then have low level units occupy taken territory. We humans do that why cant you have the AI do that?

Bo

[SeaMonkey]

Unfortunately bo, the higher the games complexity the lower the AI competence. As ToW seems to be rife with an incompetent AI I would expect that SoP will have a likewise similar AI efficiency, but good enough for learning the game mechanics and that is about par for the course with this genre.

The real beauty of games in this strategic scale is the mano on mano characteristics which are exceedingly fulfilling, that's why I have been a big proponent of a friendly UI which allows the PBEM turns to flow rapidly.

[bo]

ORIGINAL: SeaMonkey


Unfortunately bo, the higher the games complexity the lower the AI competence. As ToW seems to be rife with an incompetent AI I would expect that SoP will have a likewise similar AI efficiency, but good enough for learning the game mechanics and that is about par for the course with this genre.

The real beauty of games in this strategic scale is the mano on mano characteristics which are exceedingly fulfilling, that's why I have been a big proponent of a friendly UI which allows the PBEM turns to flow rapidly.

Agreed Seamonkey, nothing against PBEM which I do not play and may never play, but what I said above is why cant the AI use the more powerful units then using inferior units or at least get the inferior units out of the way for the more powerful ones, it sounds to me like an easy solution yes, no, maybe, or am I wrong in my thinking.

Bo

[Tomokatu]

You may need to be an AI programmer yourself to understand this one.
The major question which pops into my (inexperienced and untrained) mind is "How is the judgement of "more powerful" to be made in any particular case?" There's considerations of armour vs infantry, the number of units already intended for use in that attack, (bonus for three or more). The choice of the most powerful (and appropriate) also depends on movement limits and making a list of priorities of attacks in that turn. (e,g. I've only got one armour unit within range of three attack sites. Which attack is the one that absolutely, positively must have the best chance to succeed?)
 
I think that answering the question is a lot harder than asking it.

[bo]

ORIGINAL: Tomokatu

You may need to be an AI programmer yourself to understand this one.
The major question which pops into my (inexperienced and untrained) mind is "How is the judgement of "more powerful" to be made in any particular case?" There's considerations of armour vs infantry, the number of units already intended for use in that attack, (bonus for three or more). The choice of the most powerful (and appropriate) also depends on movement limits and making a list of priorities of attacks in that turn. (e,g. I've only got one armour unit within range of three attack sites. Which attack is the one that absolutely, positively must have the best chance to succeed?)

I think that answering the question is a lot harder than asking it.

You are probably right about asking the question Tom but I watched the AI closely and it uses too many low powered units 1power 2power etc instead of using powerful armored divisions and corps, actually Tom the low level units get in the way but for some reason that I cannot fathom it seems like a unit is a unit to the programmers EG: in France alot of 1's and 2's surround an imbedded enemy unit and it takes forever to take that position and usually the unit surrenders after 4 or five turns. We as human players would never do that I mean never. I use my most powerful units to take tough placements and use my low level units to occupy the captured position, WHY cant the programmers do the same thing with the AI? Even if it takes an extra move to get the more powerful units into position, I dont mean to offend anyone but right is right and wrong is wrong by anybody standards.

Bo

[AH4Ever]

The various post I've read seem to indicate that the AI spends it PPts badly and that it now favors purchasing more divisions than it used to. Sorry I can't refer you to any specific titles.

You might already know this but setting up the AI with an advantage in PPts will make it more challenging.

As for improving the AI, I think we should realize there is really no such thing as Artificial Intelligence. We are really playing against the collective smarts of the programmers transferred into the scripts they create which attempt to account for as many variables as the consider necessary.

I would suggest you give PBEM a try, once they fix it. I wasn't sure I would enjoy it myself and it is a little more involved but there is nothing like bumping heads with another head that has a naturally intelligent brain tucked inside it.

[bo]

ORIGINAL: AH4Ever

The various post I've read seem to indicate that the AI spends it PPts badly and that it now favors purchasing more divisions than it used to. Sorry I can't refer you to any specific titles.

You might already know this but setting up the AI with an advantage in PPts will make it more challenging.

As for improving the AI, I think we should realize there is really no such thing as Artificial Intelligence. We are really playing against the collective smarts of the programmers transferred into the scripts they create which attempt to account for as many variables as the consider necessary.

I would suggest you give PBEM a try, once they fix it. I wasn't sure I would enjoy it myself and it is a little more involved but there is nothing like bumping heads with another head that has a naturally intelligent brain tucked inside it.

You make sense as always AH, about the AI we know it is a wrong word to use for a scripted variable, and I think your misunderstanding me about this game, the AI in this game makes me feel like I am a good commander which I know is false, why should I play PBEM and all my shortcomings come to light when even you could beat me[:D] NO THANKS!

Bo

[SeaMonkey]

Come on Bo, shortcomings? Who of us is without a multitude, we are after all humans, doomed to commit a plethora of mistakes, so what? Its a fricken game! The only game I'm really concerned about winning is the one called "Life" and in the end I'll lose that one too, cause I'll die.

Its all about perspective, presently I'm a winner in the "big" game and I won't be allowed to lose, but wargaming is about head to head action, as it is in real life, don't you want the most accurate simulation? Luckily with this "wargame" you can pick up the pieces and try again, its a good exercise in the "lessons of life" also, dealing with failure, the elation of seeing your strategies play out.

You'll never get the greatest fulfillment unless you test yourself, you must risk to reap....and all those other cliche' s, believe me its a blast and it really where its at. Find someone who plays like you do, the best challenge and then play people who are really good, the ones that study the games, you learn lots. Keep a number of games going if you've got the time, I've had as many as 4 going at once and some of the people I play with I have been doing so for years, builds good gaming relationships.

You'll go through a number of people before you identify "your crowd", many will resign, many will just quit playing and you'll never hear from them again, but that's kind of how it is, isn't it......IRL!

[Tomokatu]

why should I play PBEM and all my shortcomings come to light when even you could beat me

I'm finding that in my pbem against edelweiss. He's handed my nuts to me once already and seems to be in the process again. However, the game's stalled at GT21 and I'm waiting a reply in Tech Support.

[bo]

ORIGINAL: SeaMonkey


Come on Bo, shortcomings? Who of us is without a multitude, we are after all humans, doomed to commit a plethora of mistakes, so what? Its a fricken game! The only game I'm really concerned about winning is the one called "Life" and in the end I'll lose that one too, cause I'll die.

Its all about perspective, presently I'm a winner in the "big" game and I won't be allowed to lose, but wargaming is about head to head action, as it is in real life, don't you want the most accurate simulation? Luckily with this "wargame" you can pick up the pieces and try again, its a good exercise in the "lessons of life" also, dealing with failure, the elation of seeing your strategies play out.

You'll never get the greatest fulfillment unless you test yourself, you must risk to reap....and all those other cliche' s, believe me its a blast and it really where its at. Find someone who plays like you do, the best challenge and then play people who are really good, the ones that study the games, you learn lots. Keep a number of games going if you've got the time, I've had as many as 4 going at once and some of the people I play with I have been doing so for years, builds good gaming relationships.

You'll go through a number of people before you identify "your crowd", many will resign, many will just quit playing and you'll never hear from them again, but that's kind of how it is, isn't it......IRL!

Seamonkey did I not hear there was trouble with the PBEM game, maybe I am wrong, everything you said above I feel is right on, but my son stopped playing PBEM because players got a little nasty when you did not answer them within hours of their game turn to him, I dont need that and I like to play at my leisure and when I am in the mood, I remember when my son talked me into playing Call of Duty on the internet multiplayer mode and I fought him on this until I tried it and have been playing and enjoying it [other than the constant hacking] ever since, sometimes as you know by reading my posts I can be stubborn and ornery.

Bo

[SeaMonkey]

There you go, I started with my son, playing SC1, then both my nephews, an excuse to staying in touch, if you need one......and you do in this day and age. What do you think I gave out as Christmas presents, yepper...SC!

I even bribed my relatives, $50 a game if they could beat me!

All you got to do is get it straight with people right from the start, I tell them it may be a week between turns, I've had a game last for 18 months,....... so what....I got other things to do besides gameplaying, this is low priority stuff....I don't practice conspicous self gratification.

So just let your opponent know where you stand, how things will unfold, you'll find people that play at their leisure also, you'll find your crowd. You can cultivate them. Plenty of times I've helped rookies learn SC, guiding them through the strategies, holding back on my best moves, trying "way out" strategies, I'll even lose to them on occasion, so what, its great fun making the games last till the midnight hour.

Damnit Bo....have some fun!

[Tomokatu]

bo revealed:

...stopped playing PBEM because players got a little nasty when you did not answer them within hours of their game turn to him, I dont need that...

 
bo, there's a solution to that - play against ADULTS!
That's people who have similar concerns in RL and who understand the old adage of "going along to get along".
Of course, it also helps to include that condition in pre-game discussions so that all players start on the same page, but you have to discuss house rules anyway, so there's a perfect opportunity.
 
One game I have, but have never had the chance to play by pbem is Space Empires (originally by Malfador, I started on V2, now have V4 - it's up to V5 but I don't need 3D) There are a lot of player mods available and it's quite leisurely as far as time between turns goes. I'm playing a large galaxy scenario against 15 AI empires (wiped out 8 or 9 of them so far) but I haven't played a turn in 3 months, not since I started on WWII:ToW - I played one Grand Scenario of WWII: RtV but ToW is far better (and V1.6 is better than 1.5 too) but that's just to illustrate that I, too, can let a game sit part-way through and pick it up later.
 
The only RTS game I bought  (I saw Doom II and Duke Nukem but never bothered) was/is Medal of Honor:Pacific Assault. That's sitting partway complete as well, because I enjoyed it enough to go back and buy the earlier ones, which I shall also return to as the mood strikes me (I'm a good sniper!)