Fury Games has now signed with Matrix Games, and we are working together on the next Strategic Command. Will use the Slitherine PBEM++ server for asynchronous multi-player.
I've never seen an AI capable of making the decisions the AI does in this game. Look at how it manages D-Day in a way a good player would. The planning, research, construction, logistics that went in to organizing these attacks is really impressive. You'll have to look long and hard to find a better AI than this in a Strategic game. I'm not aware of any.
I read the blog post Iain gave here. I'd say if you want to know more detail about the AI it is a must read.
I'm playing the 1939 Campaign as Allied. It took Germany until November 25 to conquer Poland. It seemed to me that the AI did a good job of cycling units in and out of position when making important attacks (I.e. against Warsaw). It seemed to not do a very good job in figuring out how to bring Poland down. By comparison, I played 5 times as Germany and conquered Poland in 2 turns 4 times, 3 turns once.
Germany was in good position to invade France by late March, 1940. I held on to France until early August. I thought the AI diffused it's initial strikes a bit too much, not creating a breakthrough when it might have. To be fair, I did a pretty gamey thing by placing the entire French navy (including its Med fleet) on raiding duty against the Norway convoys, as well as some RN units. That cost Germany a number of MPP. I also sent an extra British Corps to France, in addition to the BEF.
Now that Germany has French ports, we will see how the AI handles the Battle of the Atlantic, and the war in Africa.
Heh, your AI did better in France than I, a human, did as the Axis just now. I didn't take France until late October 1940, and this after a May 1940 launch! The AI did a fine job of blocking me at every turn. Plus I made mistakes, as I'm new at this: I didn't upgrade my tanks and aircraft in time for the start of the offensive, and I probably wasn't efficient with my movements and attacks.
I've always heard that AI in general is better as a defender than an attacker. I know very little about programming so I can't speak to that other than to say the thought seems to make sense to me.
I'm playing on the medium setting, so to speak. No advantages for the AI in production and such.
And also, I love this game, I certainly don't want any comment to appear critical of it. This is the most fun I've had with a PC game since the first Harpoon way back in the 90's, and High Command as mentioned in another thread.
Splendid work by the AI - it has just caught me in early 43 with a deadly and rapid D Day taking full advantage of my light defences in the west as the Reich was committed to a yet another major (and over ambitious) offensive in the east. A fun game - its a long time ago since I can recall such an enjoyable non-multiplayer experience.
The AI Is not bad, but when I find a AI that out plays me at this sort of game with out cheating I will ask for my life support to be switched off[;)]. It is good for learning the game though. I look forward to playing a human as I think the game balance is better than in the old game.
The AI Is not bad, but when I find a AI that out plays me at this sort of game with out cheating I will ask for my life support to be switched off[;)]. It is good for learning the game though. I look forward to playing a human as I think the game balance is better than in the old game.
It's not cheating afaik. Huberts A.I. blog is a good read if you're up for it. It's in the dev blog section.
The AI is just terrible on a strategic level but does a good job on a tactical one.
Just finished my first game with an Axis major victory not even sweating a little.
Just did the following:
- Poland [evidently]
- Accept to take Norway and Denmark.
- Crush Holland [just move against the Capital and leave the reast as it will surrender]
- Same for Belgium.
- Take the whole of France and move German Troops to take Algiers then you get it all.
In the meantime invest 5 Diplomacy Shits to Turkey with the German and 3 to Spain with Italy.
Once Turkey is Axis then switch to Spain with the German as well.
After the Fall of France you get Spain easily then you'll get Hungary, Romania and Bulgaria [assuming you gave to Stalin what he wanted]
Then move all your Diplomacy points to keep Russia out of the war as long as possible.
- From Spain take Gibraltar.
- From Turkey take Palestine, Jordania, and help Iraq then crush Egypt between the Afrika Korps and Palestine troops [not forgetting to get Malta in the meantime].
- Once done move troops from Egypt close to Persia and make sure the whole Turkish army is on the border with Russia.
During that time invest heavily in Infantry, Armor, Planes, Long Range Planes, Production research. Leave out Rockets, Hvy Bombers, Naval, Subs, Anti-Subs.
That should give you the edge once Russia enters the war around 1942 as they will have more troops but not as good as the German, keep upgrading troops as much as you can [Infantry, Planes, Tanks]
Once Russia enters the wars move Diplomacy points against the US [it's expensive but worth it] to delay the US entry as long as possible.
Dont build any Naval troops to get enough troops to start moving into Russia from the West and from Middle East [Get back Persia as well].
In 1942 the US should go to war as well and will first invade Marocco, just move 2-3 tanks and 2-3 armies to push them back to the sea. Use Uboats and the Italian Navy and don't care if you loose the Italian Navy in the meantime.
Start when the US enters the war to search Advance UBoats so they are more efficient sinking transports and other ships [don't attack destroyers].
Upgrade the whole Spanish Army and build everything you can for them, leave them in Spain just as a reserve.
The AI surprised me invading France in 1943 while I was busy in Russia but I stopped them with the Spanish army long enough to bring more troops. [I did build a lot of Garrison in France as well to slow down any invasion, especially on the ports].
Once the France invasion is containing then start the push back with tanks and have some fighters in cover. They will get hit heavily each turn but your production is almost 1,500 points at that time so you can afford it.
In 1944 France will be cleared of Allies troop easily.
In Russia just destroy troops at every opportunity with Tanks and planes. I upgrade my Tanks constantly and the plane as well. In 1943 all the German army was in Mobility 2 so you can move quite well in the vastness of Russia.
Winter just upgrade and repair troops, keep your HQ close enough and build a few as needed. Those are a must or your troops starts to suffer penalties and can't be reinforced/upgraded.
Turkey front is hard to move but with 3-4 Italian Tactical and Medium bombers you can move [even slowly] enough to capture oil wells.
Upgrade German and Axis Allies troops as they benefit from the Germany research so the Rumanian/Hungarian/... are as good as German troops almost.
Strategy in Russia is to move against Leningrad to take it first, move against Smolensk and in the direction of Moscow. In the South just destroy troops when possible and move slowly towards Kiev/Odessa.
Besides 1 tank in the South all the tanks are against Leningrad/Moscow. All the Luftwaffe in the North as well. With 2-3 planes you can soften any Russian unit in a city and take it right away then keep pushing forward. Encirle the Russian troops at every opportunity.
It's a slow process as there is a lot of Russian but they take a lot of losses against Tanks so you can push forward. By keeping the Luftwaffe together you can clear any hex even heavily defended.
Just keep fighters all over the front line to protect your own troops.
Once Leningrad is taken, join with the Finns and move to Moscow.
The South is getting easier as Russian troops are moving North to protect Moscow.
By 1944 the whole front was getting much easier, Tanks upgraded to 5 were plowing through Russian troops like a knife in melted butter.
By 1945 most of Russia should be conquered and Moscow fallen. The rest of Europe free of Allies.
VICTORY.
The AI is really unimaginative strategically, the attacks are following the real WW2 with invading North Africa then Normandy.
Now tactically it does a great job I must say, great use of air power to soften troops then destroy them with infantry, and then use Tanks to create a hole and exploit. So whenever possible you need a second line of troops to prevent a breaktrough.
It never tries to attack somewhere else like Spain or take Portugal as an Ally or invade Denmark, anything that I wouldn't be able to prevent.
I had to keep no troops but a few Garrison here and there just in case.
At the end I was destroying US troop transports with UBoats and surface ships like it would be Turkey shooting.
All the AI was doing is keep sending more and bombing my production in France/Germany.
First game and I won without even trying anything fancy.
So if you are a casual wargamer then it's a great game, looks amazingly nice, the AI is doing well for that level.
If you are an experienced wargamer like me then give it a pass. Not worth the money.
ORIGINAL: Polonthi
The AI is really unimaginative strategically, the attacks are following the real WW2 with invading North Africa then Normandy.
This is based on one game. That doens't mean it will do exactly the same the next game.
It will also invade the UK for example after you've taken it in Sealion.
Many more variations can be added over time.
I suggest to take a look at the following scripts for all the variations:
Strategic Command WWII - War in Europe\Campaigns\_1939 Storm over Europe\Scripts\AI\amphibious.txt
Strategic Command WWII - War in Europe\Campaigns\_1939 Storm over Europe\Scripts\AI\amphibious_minor.txt
Strategic Command WWII - War in Europe\Campaigns\_1939 Storm over Europe\Scripts\AI\offensive.txt
Interesting game you've played though. Keeping the major parties out of the game.
I guess diplomacy needs some more balancing if you can string all the major parties along like that.
Perhaps it should not be possible to use diplomacy on major parties, or make it even more expensive as it is now.
May I ask on what level you were playing? From your report I can make out you've spend a lot.
"So if you are a casual wargamer then it's a great game, looks amazingly nice, the AI is doing well for that level. If you are an experienced wargamer like me then give it a pass. Not worth the money."
arrogant. The only recommendation I could make sense of would be that very experienced wargamers should pass ANY wargame except for PBEM or multiplayer. If, on the other hand, I compare the competence of SC WW2's AI with the AI of more or less all other grand strategy wargames, then it fares VERY well. If I would have to mention a recent game where the AI destroys all fun in single player mode, I'd take a long and hard look at HOI4 instead.
Well, that said, the AI certainly could be improved still. The dev blog explains that there's a strategical, tactical and "fuzzy" AI. The stratgical AI, which is at issue here, is not hardcoded anymore, but rather constituted by strategy scripts which fire under certain conditions. It seems from Polonthi's game that the AI hasn't a script yet for dealing with
1) an Axis player trying to secure the whole of the Mediterranean (by means of strong diplo focus too) while keeping Russia out of the war as long as possible
2) an Axis player who actually already has achieved that goal
But as the AI isn't hardcoded, it should be possible to provide scripts for these scenarios, where e.g. in 1) the AI "sees" that it has to do more to prevent the diplomatic fall of the Iberian peninsula, and in 2)that it now should consider landing in Portugal/Spain instead of France. In any case, it should not (oblivious to von Moltke's rule) stick to the plan it once chose regardless of what the enemy does or did achieve.
"So if you are a casual wargamer then it's a great game, looks amazingly nice, the AI is doing well for that level. If you are an experienced wargamer like me then give it a pass. Not worth the money."
arrogant.
Polonthi: your victory earns you bragging rights I'd say.
Looking forward to a PBEM game against you as soon as multiplayer is ready!
Well, that said, the AI certainly could be improved still. The dev blog explains that there's a strategical, tactical and "fuzzy" AI. The stratgical AI, which is at issue here, is not hardcoded anymore, but rather constituted by strategy scripts which fire under certain conditions. It seems from Polonthi's game that the AI hasn't a script yet for dealing with
1) an Axis player trying to secure the whole of the Mediterranean (by means of strong diplo focus too) while keeping Russia out of the war as long as possible
2) an Axis player who actually already has achieved that goal
But as the AI isn't hardcoded, it should be possible to provide scripts for these scenarios, where e.g. in 1) the AI "sees" that it has to do more to prevent the diplomatic fall of the Iberian peninsula, and in 2)that it now should consider landing in Portugal/Spain instead of France. In any case, it should not (oblivious to von Moltke's rule) stick to the plan it once chose regardless of what the enemy does or did achieve.
Hartmann: the strategic AI can certainly be further developed using scripts, one more reason the game is worth the money!
Who knows one day it will be unbeatable....
It sounds like there is more of an issue with Diplomacy than anything else. This seems to have been the decisive impact in the game mentioned. I've been finding it definitely pays to go for Spain and Turkey so it may be we need to raise the cost of those or add a bit more uncertainty to that tactic. Maybe a diplo chit should have a small chance of backfiring too (maybe 1%) - people don't like being pressured! This would reduce the rate at which nations moved towards your alliance and increase the risk of such tactics.
Or maybe we need to make the AI keep more watch on what you are doing and react to it. Once Turkey and Spain are pro-Axis the Allies have an enormous mountain to climb.
