Playing Allies vs. Playing Axis

[Goodmongo]

What a difference it makes. I first played 3 games as the Axis and all three were hard fought games, not to mention lots of fun. Then I played as the Allies and it was so easy that it wasn't fun at all. It seems that the AI Axis will need massive boosts against a human Allied player. The main areas for this are broken down as follows:

1) I can take Poland in 2 turns, 3 at most as Germany but the AI Germans never take it till it defaults to a loss in November.,

2) While France can be hard it takes 4 or 5 turns to capture it. The AI has trouble doing it in 7 turns even if I barely use the BEF.

3) North Africa falls to me and the Italians can hold in Egypt. The AI gets beat in early 1942 at the latest and the last few turns are mopping up 1-2 holdout units.

4) As Germany I can get to and usually take all 3 Soviet key cities in 1942 or most likely in 1943. The AI could not take Riga, Minsk and barely took Kiev for 3 turns till thrown back out of it. The AI Germans never got past these points as the massive Soviet MPP and armies were just too much for them.

5) I can keep destroying Soviet units and take enough resources to balance out the MPP the Soviets get which is massive. As the Soviets I purchased every available unit, land, sea and air by 1943. I had too many units.

6) As Axis I can win or at least nullify the allied navies depending on my strategy. As the allies I sunk every Italian and German ship in 1941 or 1942 at the latest.

It's clear to me that for a human the harder game is playing as the Axis. So this means to get even a half way decent game AI Axis MPP needs to be bumped up by 50%, especially from 1941 on.

[Hartmann]

Playing the Allies, I always only use JUST the Soviets or (alternatively) JUST UK and US - the rest is AI controlled.
This way, playing the Allies still provides a fun challenge against the AI. The Axis is ok as is IMO.

[Goodmongo]

That might be a good alternative. Playing as UK/USA I think would be the harder game as I had zero problems stopping the Germans in Russia. Maybe even give France over to the AI along with Poland. So only the UK/US.

[Hartmann]

Yeah, Poland and France are always AI controlled in my games as the Allies too. Otherwise the Germans don't get off the ground. And you're right: Most challenging is to play as UK/US only, especially during the time in 1941 where UK is virtually alone.

[ILCK]

Allies are a joke frankly, I routed the Italians out of Egypt easily and hammered the DAK when it formed. The U.K. swept all of NOrth Africa and the whole Middle East. The big win was the invasion of Norway and Sweden that took away all the MPP the Germans get from Scandinavia.

The Soviets are grinding the Germans to bits and the German AI in Russia gets cut off way, way too often as the Germans often advancing in ways that make it easy.

One particular AI issue is that the Germans throw around Axis units apparently with little regard for staying near their HQ. I have Hungarian units opposing me outside of Riga, Smolensk and also Odessa areas.

Once the USA gets involved they invaded and knocked out Italy via Sicily. This is in 1942.

The problem is that the Germans commit/have to commit everything and I mean everything including allied units to the Soviets that they literally have basically nothing left to defend anything else. The German build limits and MPP might be too low when it is the AI and I would assume any human player would be able to exploit the same weaknesses I did.

[Jim D Burns]

When I play the allies I give the AI 20% MPP and +1 experience. Really makes a difference in the challenge factor. Spotting help would make the air game too deadly I think, so I don't give the AI any spotting help.

Jim

[Ohf]

Yes I also do something along those lines. Expert difficulty for 39-41 pre barbarossa

[Hartmann]

I somehow never liked giving the AI any artificial advantages in games to compensate for its stupidity, that's why I prefer just playing UK/US OR Soviets, and having the other allies AI controlled. This also has the additional benefit that every game unfolds rather differently. Of course some variants are not worth it (e.g. just playing Poland would make for a short game, while just playing the US would be boring), but others - especially just playing the UK - are really very cool.

[Ohf]

I agree with you, I don't really like the fact that I have to give bonuses to the AI.

But I think that the "real fight" in the game begins in 1941. We KNOW how 39-41 unfolds : Poland falls, France falls, Greece falls. The crucial problem is that the AI does not do it efficiently enough for Barbarossa to be a success.

By giving thoses bonuses for 39-41 I ensure that the Axis is in a good position in 1941. As I said : I switch back to no-bonuses as soon as Barbarossa begins. As a result, in my current game, by December 1941 the Germans are much closer to their historical lines of advance than in my other "normal" games.

[sapper32]

Interesting subject guys there are a lot of alternatives to go for I think I'm gonna switch France in my game over to the AI and see how 1940 unfolds

[Ohf]

Giving XP to the AI in the early game also gives it an invisible boost in MPP, since it won't suffer as many losses in Poland and France.

[Jim D Burns]

ORIGINAL: Hartmann
I somehow never liked giving the AI any artificial advantages in games to compensate for its stupidity,

I don't see it as giving the AI advantages, I see it as equalizing its deficiencies. For example in my current allied game I managed to destroy a tank unit and an infantry corp in France. A human would never take these kinds of losses as he would work to protect badly damaged units.

I also bombarded several HQ's and air units on the coast in France causing lots of expensive losses. Again a human would not expose such expensive units to shore bombardments turn after turn, but the AI does. So the extra cash helps make up the AI deficiencies. And the experience helps keep the Germans on top in Russia through 1942.

Jim

[Goodmongo]

I tend to agree with Jim. While I would love the AI not to lose units in a stupid manner the fact remains it does. I have a unit at 6 strength and seriously think before I use it again or reinforce it. The AI will attack with it and it gets stuck at the front and easily destroyed next turn.

So giving Germany an early MPP boost makes perfect sense to me. Couple this with only controlling UK/US and it creates a game where there is a real need to help out the SU before they get overrun by the Germans.

EDIT: Another thing the AI does is commit way too many forces to Yugoslavia and Greece which hurts the war in Russia. I've seen 2-3 tanks and 3 bombers there instead of being used against the Soviets. When I'm Germany I know Greece is a sideshow and help just a little. Eventually the Italians will get the job done.

[Hartmann]

About the German AI's campaign in Yugoslavia/Greece: I personally like how they always do it swiftly and decisively, then move stuff to the East. Also, historically, the Balkans campaign really delayed the Germans, so it's not unreasonable that it does so for the AI too.

I also always look at how the German AI fares against the Russian AI (when I play the UK only). The German AI then seems to roughly get to the line from (South of) Leningrad to Rostov by the end of 1941, so everything seems to be quite balanced in this respect.