AI a little on the stupid side

[DrewMatrix]

it would be far more appropriate to have J Lo getting confused and annoyed with the concept of the left-click

J Lo Rallys Hollywood Liberal Elite in "Snappy" Fund raiser.

"I intend to call it "Left-Click" announces J Lo (pictures of J Lo on page 3)

[Mike Scholl]

ORIGINAL: barbarrossa

I wonder if the AI can be programmed with waypoints to avoid enemy bases. But that might be a tall order.

Actually, if the AI had just been coded to go south or north before going east or west
much of this nonsense would have been avoided. Convoys sailing from San Francisco
Typically sail out to Hawaii and farther before "jogging" south to the SW Pac..., if they
went south first, then "jogged' west, much of this would be avoided.

The AI seems almost purposly coded to go "in harms way" whenever possibile---the opposite of what it should be doing.

[JohnK]

ORIGINAL: Kid


If you have a save that repeates the problem, send it to me with step-by-step instructions on how to repeat/see the problem.

This is been the most glaring AI problem since UV, mentioned by many people (AI sending small unescorted or escorted by 1-2 PCs or MSWs convoys of APs/AKs repeatedly, on an almost daily basis, into dense enemy LBA) I'm sort of astonished that a save from someone is needed to "see" the problem.

And in terms of the issue of fixing it may cause other problems, frankly, I don't see how; the worst possible side effect of fixing this problem is for the AI to simply stop supplying its forward bases at all.

That actually would still be an improvement of the AI over the current situation, as unless a human playing against the computer takes his LBA off naval attack, the AI as an opponent actually does worse losing 3-5 APs/AKs a turn than if it lost none but none of its forward bases got supply.

[Mr.Frag]

This is been the most glaring AI problem since UV, mentioned by many people (AI sending small unescorted or escorted by 1-2 PCs or MSWs convoys of APs/AKs repeatedly, on an almost daily basis, into dense enemy LBA) I'm sort of astonished that a save from someone is needed to "see" the problem.

John ...


In order for a programmer to go in and screw with the internals, a save showing the exact problem is required. With that save, he can quickly make a change and see if the change actaully did what it was supposed to.

If you want to complain, you need to save. If on the other hand you simply want to whine then you don't need saves. The choice of being part of the solution or part of the problem is entirely up to you guys.

The fewer saves that Kid collects, the less likely that *your* specific AI issue gets addressed.

[ZOOMIE1980]

ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag

This is been the most glaring AI problem since UV, mentioned by many people (AI sending small unescorted or escorted by 1-2 PCs or MSWs convoys of APs/AKs repeatedly, on an almost daily basis, into dense enemy LBA) I'm sort of astonished that a save from someone is needed to "see" the problem.

John ...


In order for a programmer to go in and screw with the internals, a save showing the exact problem is required. With that save, he can quickly make a change and see if the change actaully did what it was supposed to.

If you want to complain, you need to save. If on the other hand you simply want to whine then you don't need saves. The choice of being part of the solution or part of the problem is entirely up to you guys.

The fewer saves that Kid collects, the less likely that *your* specific AI issue gets addressed.

The problems with these kinds of "bugs" are they are not like traps, or getting a corrupted unit showing up or disappearing, or something that is particular to a specific turn. These AI problems are encountered over a series a 20, 30, 60 turns and are as variable and random as the rest of the game. It is a "trend" bug, not reproducable by one save file and is a widespread trend across the whole game game for both sides in all scenarios. A "save" file is not needed or even particularly useful in this instance. We have a situation of computer controlled transport TF's all over the map, blindly going into heavy concentrations of enemy anti-ship aircraft, in ALL scenarios, at ALL times in the game, for BOTH sides. Save files aren't going to help at all with that. The situation is easily reproduced...just play any game.

However some of these AI "death spirals" are particularly noticeable. The Japanese AI Rabaul Death Spiral has been widely reported and I thought the originitor of that one over a month ago sent you guys the series of actions he took over the course of 20 or so turns to generate it. I was similar to your Mandalay thing back before the game was released, only this one is a sea base problem. Not sure its a "real" bug though, since its one of those "outside the box" types of things Mogami and others have generally warned against doing if you want the AI to play a useful game.

[JohnK]

ORIGINAL: Mike Scholl

Actually, if the AI had just been coded to go south or north before going east or west
much of this nonsense would have been avoided. Convoys sailing from San Francisco
Typically sail out to Hawaii and farther before "jogging" south to the SW Pac..., if they
went south first, then "jogged' west, much of this would be avoided.

The AI seems almost purposly coded to go "in harms way" whenever possibile---the opposite of what it should be doing.

Yeah, don't quite get how that got through Beta (I applied, never heard anything myself)....

A great deal of effort appears to have been expended coding the Auto convoy system, which unfortunately ended up being useless, particularly for the Allies as you can't have any important base as part of the system other than PH; the system seems to take almost malicious glee in choosing the route that moves as close as possible to the Japanese in the Marshalls for all convoys from the US to Australia, Noumea, etc even when a path of the same hexlength or a couple more hexes would completely avoid all enemy bases by a huge margin.

Though I remember reading most of the beta players had turned Auto Convoy off, guess that should have been a sign something was wrong.

Don't quite get how hardcoding a safe path for the allies for US to Australia or Nomea autoconvoy, at least as a start to fixing the problems, wasn't in the first release or even this patch.

[ZOOMIE1980]

ORIGINAL: JohnK

ORIGINAL: Mike Scholl

Actually, if the AI had just been coded to go south or north before going east or west
much of this nonsense would have been avoided. Convoys sailing from San Francisco
Typically sail out to Hawaii and farther before "jogging" south to the SW Pac..., if they
went south first, then "jogged' west, much of this would be avoided.

The AI seems almost purposly coded to go "in harms way" whenever possibile---the opposite of what it should be doing.

Yeah, don't quite get how that got through Beta (I applied, never heard anything myself)....

A great deal of effort appears to have been expended coding the Auto convoy system, which unfortunately ended up being useless, particularly for the Allies as you can't have any important base as part of the system other than PH; the system seems to take almost malicious glee in choosing the route that moves as close as possible to the Japanese in the Marshalls for all convoys from the US to Australia, Noumea, etc even when a path of the same hexlength or a couple more hexes would completely avoid all enemy bases by a huge margin.

Though I remember reading most of the beta players had turned Auto Convoy off, guess that should have been a sign something was wrong.

Don't quite get how hardcoding a safe path for the allies for US to Australia or Nomea autoconvoy, at least as a start to fixing the problems, wasn't in the first release or even this patch.

This really isn't an "AI" problem, but with the subroutine that creates the paths for the TF's, auto-convoy, computer-controlled or not. Take any save file from Scenario #15 that is a couple of months or so into the game. Play as the Japanese. Get Tarawa to size 4 and put Avaiation support there. Then transfer a A6M2 and two G3M or G4M units and give them Naval attack orders. Now save and reload as the Allied player. Recon Tarawa or do something so you know the system knows there is an airwing there. Form a TF in San Francisco and set it's destination for Brisbane. Look at the path. It goes right by that airwing on Tarawa!!!! That's NOT an AI problem per se, but a bug in the pathing subroutine. The pathing subroutine for auto-convoy at least, simply MUST be able to use intelligent waypoints that plot around known enemy air zones of control. At the VERY LEAST repath the SF to OZ auto-generated tracks to go deep to the south, then dogleg west.

And speaking from experience in desgining thing like reservation systems for the Transportation Industry, BY FAR the most complex subroutines in that software are the "best path" algorithms, espeically for bus companies like Greyhound. Lots of very high level mathematics using a lot of differential equations and regressions and such. This kind of stuff, if put into a single, "intelligent" routine vs usage of hardcoded paths, can be a really buggar to fix...

[Mr.Frag]

If you actually *ran* that scenario, you would see that the TF would divert around the base with the high Air Bal number. It will not show the turn you actually gave the order as the path is updated as the turn runs.

Look at the path AFTER the turn. You'll notice some really strange zigzags in it. This is the AI stepping in and trying to route around danger. The ability to do this is based on the level of intel available. The more the intel, the higher the safety factor.

[SunDevil_MatrixForum]

I thought I read somewhere, maybe it is the manual, that this whole auto-convey feature was for behind line operations. Going from SF to OZ a few months into the game is not behind the lines. I think this should be fixed what you guys are mentioning as issues, but it is sometimes hard to put a square peg in a round hole. Just my opinion.

[ZOOMIE1980]

ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag

If you actually *ran* that scenario, you would see that the TF would divert around the base with the high Air Bal number. It will not show the turn you actually gave the order as the path is updated as the turn runs.

Look at the path AFTER the turn. You'll notice some really strange zigzags in it. This is the AI stepping in and trying to route around danger. The ability to do this is based on the level of intel available. The more the intel, the higher the safety factor.

That may be the problem with this chronic computer AI thing with the auto-convoys or the computer player AI sending countless small transport TF's deep into enemy zones of control, then. Maybe the computer player isn't reconning and then using the results. How else do you explain the games in late 1944 having the Allied AI send unescorted TF's with 3 or 4 hexes of the Japanese home islands trying to resupply the PI as reported two days ago in this forum?

[ZOOMIE1980]

ORIGINAL: SunDevil

I thought I read somewhere, maybe it is the manual, that this whole auto-convey feature was for behind line operations. Going from SF to OZ a few months into the game is not behind the lines. I think this should be fixed what you guys are mentioning as issues, but it is sometimes hard to put a square peg in a round hole. Just my opinion.

It very well could be just that. It appears that the computer simply picks the most direct route to destination. Then as Fraggo, states, it may alter that route as it discovers enemy force concentrations. Problem is, how soon? G4M's have a huge range vs Ki-21's. And it apparently isn't altering paths enough to stay out of harms way in many instances. Another thing that even old PACWAR did was once a destination base came under an enemy ZOC it would cease auto-supply. Is there a facility for that in this one? I mean, if as the Japanese player I have Rabaul on the auto-convoy system and the Allies eventually get it under a zone of control will the auto-convoy "auto-off" Rabaul and stop trying to supply it???? PACWAR did that.

[ZOOMIE1980]

ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag

If you actually *ran* that scenario, you would see that the TF would divert around the base with the high Air Bal number. It will not show the turn you actually gave the order as the path is updated as the turn runs.

Look at the path AFTER the turn. You'll notice some really strange zigzags in it. This is the AI stepping in and trying to route around danger. The ability to do this is based on the level of intel available. The more the intel, the higher the safety factor.

I also seem to remember you or someone else stating that this new problem with overly aggressive transport TF AI thing was a direct result of your Mandalay test that resulted in wratchetting up the overall agressiveness of the AI. If so, there goes that law of unintended consequences again. Push in on the ameoba on one side, and it bulges out, unpredictably, somewhere else.....

Anyway, there is an overall problem, quite obviously, that too many computer controlled TF's are blindly moving into enemy AZOC's. Not sure what, if anything, can be done about short of segmenting out computer controlled transport TF's from the overall aggresiveness setting and putting them under some sort of alternate control mechanism that is much more sensative to known enemy force concetrations.

[Mr.Frag]

The overall problem is that people are using the auto-convoy system to supply bases that are in a hostile area. It is designed to handle rear area bases only.

When the game starts, until you establish a safe corridor to Oz, the path from West Coast of the USA to Oz *IS* hostile. None of your island bases have been built up to provide air cover, nor do you have the air power projection due to massive shortages of everything.

Using it prior to establishing power projection just means you will loose ships because you are sending them in harms way without proper protection. The AI can't undo your orders even though they are silly.

[ZOOMIE1980]

And, I think others have posted this temp-fix to the SF-OZ transport problem before.

1) Don't use auto-convoy or even Computer Control for the mega TF's going from SF to OZ

2) Set your TF to Not Unload

3) Retirement allowed

4) Destination Pago-Pago

5) Homebase Brisbane (or whatever).

6) Reverse that for the home bound trip

The TF will head to Pago-Pago, will not unload and then "return" to Brisbane.

[ZOOMIE1980]

ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag

The overall problem is that people are using the auto-convoy system to supply bases that are in a hostile area. It is designed to handle rear area bases only.

When the game starts, until you establish a safe corridor to Oz, the path from West Coast of the USA to Oz *IS* hostile. None of your island bases have been built up to provide air cover, nor do you have the air power projection due to massive shortages of everything.

Using it prior to establishing power projection just means you will loose ships because you are sending them in harms way without proper protection. The AI can't undo your orders even though they are silly.

Problem people are having though is the computer player using auto-convoy (or something similar) into hostile territory. The Human can do as you say, and should. But so should the computer AI. IT isn't, apparently

[adsoul]

ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag

The overall problem is that people are using the auto-convoy system to supply bases that are in a hostile area. It is designed to handle rear area bases only.

Roger on this, Auto-convoy system does work really good if you activate only rear-base.

When the game starts, until you establish a safe corridor to Oz, the path from West Coast of the USA to Oz *IS* hostile. None of your island bases have been built up to provide air cover, nor do you have the air power projection due to massive shortages of everything.

I don't understand this point. Why auto-convoy TFs cannot travel on a Southern route, I mean out of range of Jap a/c based at the Gilbert? Maybe this is what happens in the game (I have played just to late January 1942) and I think it was what happened in RL... or I'm missing something?

[ZOOMIE1980]

The problem isn't HUMAN players setting unsafe bases to auto-convoy, it is the COMPUTER player doing that. This weekend I will try and reload an early Japanese AI based game where Japan has taken Khota Bharu and moved on, but I still have a large airwing at Singapore, and see how long it takes the AI the put that base in it's auto-convoy system (or simply starts moving unescorted supply TFs to the base, which is essentially, for the computer AI, an auto-convoy to an unsafe base).

The computer player essentially needs a hostility check and two separate base resupply routines. If base is safe then fine, send transports as it currently does. If base is unsafe (under enemy Air Zone of Control) execute the UnsafeResupply() routine, which should send only heavily escorted TF's there.