Where's the fearsome AI?

[chichiroxxi]

I bought KP around ten days ago. My neighbor recommended it to me, and he mentioned how tough the AI was. I've read similar comments in reviews of KP, so my expectations for the AI were high. While I think the game itself is awesome, I'm afraid the AI was extremely disappointing. I only did the first two sections of the tutorial before I got anxious and dove into the main campaign as the Axis. By the end (turn 48) of the game I was ahead of the computer (Soviets) by over 8000 points (12,000-something to 4,000-something). Considering I spent the first part of the game at a serious handicap due to the fact I had skipped most of the tutorial, I found the AI's performance totally inadequate. I'm looking forward to battling my neighbor now.

[Tomus]

I find the AI pretty adequate TBH although sometimes I am surprised they don't take the obvious route I am still pleasantly happy with it.

Playing against someone else is really the only way to go.

[Real and Simulated Wars]

Where's the fearsome AI?
Busy kicking my butt every time I run KP.
Man, you are smart![;)]

[ASHBERY76]

It is better in the ADD-ON and the Bulge scenario IMO, but then again maybe i suck.

[Rob Gjessing]

The true challange of this game is through the PBEM (email) play against other human opponents if you havent dont it yet.. get on to it! Run5 (http:\\run5.wargamer.com) is a good meeting place for opponents as are these forums. There is also the official 'unofficial' PBEM ladder over at Run5.

[Janet Reno]

I agree. I did the same, got bored with tut. and started playing the game. Got though all the battles in no time. Won way big. BUT try the Aceoss the Dnper addon.
THERE is the way mean AI.

[vamp07]

When I read posts like these I can't help but laugh. I must be a horrible player.

[Brip]

Try playing the 16 turn scenarios as the Germans (with comp as Russian) and offer no input except to click through turns. You should find that you'll win decisivly every time. I tried this and the AI could only manage a draw at best. This will tell you how deficient the AI is at handling offensive actions.

The AI often seems to make meaningless moves with units in its rear areas. I've also observed it achieving significant advances (big VP gains) only to incomprehensively withdraw its forces.

Alas another disappointing game from a Human vs Comp angle.

I havent tried playing the offensive side yet...Who has as yet? and what sort of game does the comp give when its defending? I'd be interested to hear.

Cheers Brip[:)]

[Miller Logan]

There is somewhat more challenge playing as the Russian in KP but in my opinion, of the three campaigns available, KP, TAO, and ATD if you buy it, KP is the easiest against the AI from either side. Try playing the german in TAO with giving all advantages to the allied AI and you should have a challenge. I can understand if you are reluctant to buy ATD after your early experience with KP but as others have said, winning as the germans even on normal difficulty is a pretty stiff task.

I have yet to play a computer wargame (CC, CM, TOAW, HTTR, and others) where the offensive AI really posed a challenge after a few games. Of the ones I mentioned I think KP is the best in that regard.

[Brip]

I have found the same Miller...I've yet to find a wargame whether Strategic/Operational or Tactical level which can boast a kick butt AI. I'm definately going to PBeM ths game once I learn its system more thoroughly...but I would like to play against a comp too which can offer a challenge close to what a human opponent can.

I feel generally that there is a tendency for a lot of games to be massively overrated in terms of their AI capability in preview and reviews, across many of the genres not just hardcore wargaming. Maybe one day they will get as good as some the better chess programs out there...not yet though.

The ATD is the Across the Dnieper expansion isnt it? But what is TAO that you mentioned?[&:]

Cheers Brip [:)]

[Brip]

Doh oh okay "The Ardennes Offensive"

Yes fortunately I've just started a game as the Allied with Comp as German...so far I'm finding the AI doing a good job so far (Better than what I've seen in KP)...After this I'll try the Germans

Brip[:)]

[tomaszp]

How about scripting AI?
FPS have their own scripting languages for a long time now. It allowed players to create powerful bots that could be a challenge even for a human player. Why this idea was not developed in strategy games? It seems to be much easier since the speed of calculations is not as crucial as in FPS. Anyway I wouldn't mind waiting for a computer move even for 5 minutes if it only was a little bit more competent.

[JSS]

Tomaszp:

Here's how to script the AI in KP. Anyone can do this.

http://www.wargamer.com/wachtamrhein/ed ... al%208.htm

JSS

[tomaszp]

Thanks JSS!!!
That is a great news for me. I'll check if I can make the AI a bit more fearsome.

However, in my previous post I was suggesting a real procedural scripting language (with flow control statements like "if", "while" etc.), which could be used to define very detailed behaviour of each unit and group of units - something that would allow to create complete decision making algorithm.

It was just an idea that struck me after another turn of AI's incompetent moves. I'm not sure if it would work out, however. Maybe the level of complexity would be too big to create good AI without, let's say, a team of qualified designers. That would make such language completely useless for common players. Anyway, that topic should be rather discussed on another forum.

Tomek

[Fred98]

If you write a script then you know exactly what the AI will do.

Its kind of like playing agaisnt yourself. Of course the rest of us would probably enjoy it !

[Sauron]

I think the primary problem the AI appears to have is putting too much emphasis on combat odds in favor of overall strategy. This really came to light for me in my first game of AtD (which I am still playing). I'm playing with no-hidden units so that I can see everything the computer is doing, and man is it frustrating to watch!

As the Germans, I'm trying to attack in cohesive formations either to capture objectives or eliminate units. Thus far the AI's only concern has been to mount spoiling attacks against whatever unit of mine is most exposed. On its own, this is fine - nipping away at my onslaught is a viable tactic after all. However, the AI frequently leaves its own units horribly exposed to my counter attacks by doing this - at this point I have destroyed over 30 Russian units (34 I believe), many to my counter attacks in these situations. In return the Russians have destroyed a mere 3 of my units.

In addition, the AI moves its units in wierd ways - by this point it should have been able to form a coherent line of defense against me which would make my attacks far more difficult. Instead, it has fragmented and nonsensical formations that are going to grant me large encirclements - I should be able to bag roughly 30 more units in the next 2-3 turns!

I've seen the AI move whole units away from the front one turn - just to move them right back to where they started from the next turn. Many of these moves appear to have no logic to back them up. Sometimes the main opposition to my advances deep into enemy territory are these units that have been bouncing around in the backfield for a few turns - I just run into them in transit.

Don't get me wrong - this is a great game, and the AI has defended the strategically important areas fairly well - my main criticism is that the AI is very incoherent and overly concerned with it's combat advisor. It should be far less concerned with attacking my one exposed battalion than it is about opposing my big river crossing!