AI Cheating Or A Bug?

[Admiral Scott]

Ok, thanks Andy

[RHoenig]

Erik, thank you for your explanation, even if I don´t like what you are saying.

The reason why I don´t like it:

I admit, I am an AI player [:)]. Someday, I might jump into a PBEM, but as of now, I won´t.

So I am playing a strategy game against the AI.

This means to me, the challenge is in formulating a strategy to beat the AI.
In order to do this, I simply _have_ to know the rules.

Can an AI-Japan get resources/Oil... without the use of frighters or an AI-Allies get supplies teleported to island garrisons?
If yes, a blockade strategy goes out the window.

Does the AI get lots and lots of planes for free?
If yes, there is no sense to initiat an attrition air war strategy

A strategy game, where the AI not only does not abide by the rules, but I, as a player, don´t even know which rules applay to the AI and which not, is not a game at all (well, ok, it´s a guessing game)

There were a whole lot of things the allies/japan lacked knowledge of during the real thing, but the basics were very clear:

If you want to get ammo from the factory to the front, you better organize some form of transport.
If you want to replace a shot down plane, a new one has to be build, using various resources.
If you lost the pilot too, you have to have a trained one ready or better start training new pilots pronto!

Without those rules, what´s the point?

(Yes, I am exagerating a bit, but you get my meaning)

As for someone ´playing´ the AI:

All I can say is: So what?

If a customer gets a kick out of playing the AI, what´s the harm in this? He is, after all, only playing the AI, it´s not going to happen in PBEM and if he tries those tricks there, I am sure he will get his behind handed to him

[Erik Rutins]

Hi RHoenig,

I'm not the AI expert on the team, but I can speak to general goals. Our goal is that at least on the Historical level, all the strategies that could work historically and that work against a human player will work against the AI. Where the AI gets help, the aim is to overcome a weakness that it simply can't overcome otherwise (without becoming as smart as a human) and the end result should be to put it on par with a good human player, not in a different category.

It looks like there may be an issue with air replacements that is making an attrition-based strategy difficult now and we are investigating and discussing that, but apart from that I don't think there is another problem area in terms of effects on strategy. I would caution against jumping to conclusions or making assumptions, we really did try to keep the AI cheats to the minimum required and I believe that historical strategies will work in the vast majority of cases against the AI.

Regards,

- Erik

[NAVMAN]

Erik,
Since I purchased UV back in 2002, I have seen discussions like this, principally dealing
with air-to-sea combat results, as they pertain to human(allied) player vs Jap(ai) and
some really bizarre results. Most of the time, players have observed, and supplied,
screen shots, to document their frustration at the poor,seemingly twightlightish zone
results, US carrier aviation obtains. I have refrained from commenting because of the
endless rationalizations which come forth explaing these surreal results. Last night,
I played a WITP game and also an AE game. I attacked w/ well over 100 bombers
from PM in WIPT and a large number of cv based planes in AE. I averaged three(3)
hits. I don't know the code, but something does not seem "kosher" here. Can you put
this one to rest by telling us:1)does the human(allied) player get a "built-in" degradation
of capability regardless of the quality of his forces, and 2)If not, why these results
which seem more than just "one-off" happenings.
Thx

[Erik Rutins]

ORIGINAL: NAVMAN
from PM in WIPT and a large number of cv based planes in AE. I averaged three(3)
hits. I don't know the code, but something does not seem "kosher" here. Can you put
this one to rest by telling us:1)does the human(allied) player get a "built-in" degradation
of capability regardless of the quality of his forces, and 2)If not, why these results
which seem more than just "one-off" happenings.

The AI uses the same combat code as the human player. I believe on the harder levels it may get some combat bonuses, which is the same as it was in WITP, so nothing changed there as far as I know.

[NAVMAN]

Erik,
Thx for a prompt and concise reply.

navman

[John Lansford]

I've got subs watching Palembang, Miri, Balikpapan and the other oil producing bases captured by the AI.  I've parked the subs in those bases to insure I find any tankers loading oil at those locations.

It is late March 42; some of these bases have been occupied by the AI since January.  I have yet to see more than one or two tankers in these ports, total, and haven't found any TF's headed for those bases by my sea based subs or by Intel.

As I pointed out earlier, right now there is an "11th Division" sitting in Koumac, just north of Noumea, obviously not in the Chinese Theater.  I continually see full strength carrier strikes against land based targets, repeatedly for over a week, against some fairly heavy AA defenses, yet the # of planes never seem to drop.  When I launched a 3 CV ground support airstrike missions against a single SNLF at Makin, my carriers were soon out of fighters after just a few days of combat.

I disagree on the AI knowing where the fighter escorts are; I just moved a fighter squadron to Horn Island after Bettys from Rabaul had hit the base over a week.  The next turn the Bettys returned and were mauled by the fighters; they returned the next day and got hit hard some more, and the third day after as well.  Meanwhile PM has had nearly all its fighters withdrawn yet the Bettys aren't going there.

I can accept a few tweaks and perks given the AI since I expect it to be not nearly as creative and imaginative as a human opponent, but at the same time I want to play a campaign with historic limitations and benefits ON BOTH SIDES to see how my running of the war differs from what actually happened.  If there's too big an advantage (high plane production, no need for oil shipments, etc), what I consider a traditional strategy simply won't work.

[Time Traveller]

Erik, thank you very much for the clear replies. That's all I was asking for. I don't like all this secretive garbage. It's hard to know what to believe unless someone from Matrix clarifies. Before I shell out another $60, I want some straight answers about AI cheats/bonuses. According to you, It appears that the AI high aircraft replacement numbers may be a bug.  It also sounds like on historical difficulty levels the AI gets no major advantages. Based on these statements, I may yet purchase WITP AE. [:)]

[Time Traveller]

ORIGINAL: Andy Mac

Yes and production will cease if resources or fuel do not reach the HI.

This is great to know. An important feature indeed. Thank you very much for clarifying. [:)]

[oldman45]

I restarted since the patch, and frankly I have seen great changes in the AI. Of course Andy needs to be burned in effigy for the script that I am now up against......[;)] I digress.

It was hard to restart, because 42 sucks playing against the AI waiting for troops and ships to arrive from the UK/US. Once things start rolling its good, but its a long wait. I think the AI gives a good fight, and it has tricks up its sleeve that have kept me off balance.

For those of you concerned about its(AI) bottomless supply of aircraft, I played to nov 43 prior to the patch and I learned two things, as the Allied pilots get more exp and better planes, the Japanese start loosing planes in droves. Why you ask? The training program for the Japanese cannot keep up and it shows in a huge way. You can tell when you run into a squadron that moved from china and has exp pilots. Also, getting the heavy bombers doing night time raids on the major airfields will eventually shut them down or allow you to switch to daytime raids, then the game is over for that field and you can do an invasion and secure it.

Sound strategies do work, isolate where you plan to invade, pound it with planes and ships, drop the troops and move on to the next location. (wait till you can do an APA/AKA invasion) [X(]

In closing, just have fun with the game!

[BigJ62]

Maybe you are looking in the wrong place.

ORIGINAL: John Lansford

I've got subs watching Palembang, Miri, Balikpapan and the other oil producing bases captured by the AI.  I've parked the subs in those bases to insure I find any tankers loading oil at those locations.

It is late March 42; some of these bases have been occupied by the AI since January.  I have yet to see more than one or two tankers in these ports, total, and haven't found any TF's headed for those bases by my sea based subs or by Intel.

As I pointed out earlier, right now there is an "11th Division" sitting in Koumac, just north of Noumea, obviously not in the Chinese Theater.  I continually see full strength carrier strikes against land based targets, repeatedly for over a week, against some fairly heavy AA defenses, yet the # of planes never seem to drop.  When I launched a 3 CV ground support airstrike missions against a single SNLF at Makin, my carriers were soon out of fighters after just a few days of combat.

I disagree on the AI knowing where the fighter escorts are; I just moved a fighter squadron to Horn Island after Bettys from Rabaul had hit the base over a week.  The next turn the Bettys returned and were mauled by the fighters; they returned the next day and got hit hard some more, and the third day after as well.  Meanwhile PM has had nearly all its fighters withdrawn yet the Bettys aren't going there.

I can accept a few tweaks and perks given the AI since I expect it to be not nearly as creative and imaginative as a human opponent, but at the same time I want to play a campaign with historic limitations and benefits ON BOTH SIDES to see how my running of the war differs from what actually happened.  If there's too big an advantage (high plane production, no need for oil shipments, etc), what I consider a traditional strategy simply won't work.

[Andy Mac]

ORIGINAL: RHoenig

Can an AI-Japan get resources/Oil... without the use of frighters or an AI-Allies get supplies teleported to island garrisons?
If yes, a blockade strategy goes out the window.

No some key nodal bases get small amounts of supply and fuel but not Oil or Resources and this is the same as stock btw

Does the AI get lots and lots of planes for free?
If yes, there is no sense to initiat an attrition air war strategy

The Ai does get boosts to aircraft production at higer difficulty levels but tied to factories i.e. a factory may produce 2 planes on very hard where it only produces 1 on historical - cut off oil/resources HI etc and it produces 0 on all difficulty levels.

There is another situation where the AI can get free aircraft but that should be limited and we are investigating why it appears out of kilter but we all need to take a deep breath and realise we added a lot of new aircraft and added a lot of complexity to aircraft upgrade paths and the AI is a moron and needs some help to make it all work

.

[Top Cat]

Just sent my save file to you Erik.

Don't think it's just a display thing as the AI actually has about 25 squadrons of P40E's at full strength, B17 squadrons have recovered most of their strength etc.

Pearl Harbor is defended by about 200+ fighters.

Glad it's not WAD!


Cheers
Top Cat

[BigJ62]

It's an upgrade bug not a production bug.

[Valgua]

Thank you Erik for the clarification. 

[Top Cat]

Did this bug get fixed in the v1.00.95 patch?

Like to get back into my AI game soon!

Cheers
Top Cat

[Kwik E Mart]

darn....too bad the dev's squashed the idea of the AI cheating excessively....i was ready to rename it Tiger Woods!

[BigJ62]

yes

ORIGINAL: Top Cat

Did this bug get fixed in the v1.00.95 patch?

Like to get back into my AI game soon!

Cheers
Top Cat