AI a little /too/ aggressive?
Moderators: wdolson, MOD_War-in-the-Pacific-Admirals-Edition
- WingedIncubus
- Posts: 566
- Joined: Wed Oct 03, 2007 2:17 am
RE: AI a little /too/ aggressive?
Can the AI scripts be modified to slow down its conquests and prioritize them in order of importance? I have a feeling the Japanese AI attempts to conquer too many bases, a little too fast, at the expense of his main target: the DEI. And becauses these are so spread out and made around the same time, escorts become scarce.
After all, Rabaul and Kobe Island are both very, very secondary targets in Dec. 1941 compared to the PI and the DEI. I don't see why Japan should rush to take these useless little islands at the expense of conquering the PEI, and secure both the PI and Malaya away from the Allies. After all, these areas are to be the blood vessels of Japan's industrial force, not Rabaul.
After all, Rabaul and Kobe Island are both very, very secondary targets in Dec. 1941 compared to the PI and the DEI. I don't see why Japan should rush to take these useless little islands at the expense of conquering the PEI, and secure both the PI and Malaya away from the Allies. After all, these areas are to be the blood vessels of Japan's industrial force, not Rabaul.
- Canoerebel
- Posts: 21099
- Joined: Fri Dec 13, 2002 11:21 pm
- Location: Northwestern Georgia, USA
- Contact:
RE: AI a little /too/ aggressive?
ORIGINAL: EUBanana
It's gone and landed an entire division basically on its own, completely unsupported at Koumac. It's nearest base to the action is Rabaul (!).
Sounds like John 3rd is in command.
"Rats set fire to Mr. Cooper’s store in Fort Valley. No damage done." Columbus (Ga) Enquirer-Sun, October 2, 1880.
RE: AI a little /too/ aggressive?
ORIGINAL: Andy Mac
There is but if a CA is not available do you want the invasion to fail its a balance maybe its to far one way now but you all wanted a more aggressive AI [:D][:D]
I wonder if from a modding point of view, would deleting some of the excess covering forces near singapore give the extra ships needed to form covering forces elsewhere. I realize this is unhistoric, so it doesn't really help the overall problem; but it might be a temporary fix for a mod.
RE: AI a little /too/ aggressive?
I strongly suspect you should wait for the next set orf AI builds and see how that does
RE: AI a little /too/ aggressive?
ORIGINAL: Andy Mac
I strongly suspect you should wait for the next set orf AI builds and see how that does
lol. I guess I am starting to sound like a five year-old.
RE: AI a little /too/ aggressive?
Yeah a little bit of a blind eye of AI moves will make for a much more exciting game. Up to the player of course, I was pleased to see the agression for sure.
RE: AI a little /too/ aggressive?
The AI seems to flip between sensible levels of cover and what are, too me at least, bloody stupid moves. It's on it's second attempt to take one of my major bases after the first one turned round 3 hexes out and went home [&:] This time however it's brought BB and CVs to cover the invasion. At the same time it's sent piddly little TFs out that are getting smacked about by a man with a rifle and a canoe [:D]
It's a bit strange to see a TF get so close to a base and then high tail it away for no obvious reason, I had a CV TF nearby but it wasn't in range for strikes until a day or two later after they chased down the enemy TF. The second attack looks like it's going to fail on the beaches as they didn't send enough troops for the task. [8D]
It's a bit strange to see a TF get so close to a base and then high tail it away for no obvious reason, I had a CV TF nearby but it wasn't in range for strikes until a day or two later after they chased down the enemy TF. The second attack looks like it's going to fail on the beaches as they didn't send enough troops for the task. [8D]
[center]
Bigger boys stole my sig

Bigger boys stole my sig
RE: AI a little /too/ aggressive?
I will say the AI is doing a nice job with Subs so far.
- WingedIncubus
- Posts: 566
- Joined: Wed Oct 03, 2007 2:17 am
RE: AI a little /too/ aggressive?
ORIGINAL: Q-Ball
I will say the AI is doing a nice job with Subs so far.
Absolutely. In fact, I like the fact that the AI is more unpredictable and aggressive than in WITP. Surprise is a very nice element.
Now, if it could protect all its amphibious landing TFs with escorts or accompany them with SCTFs, even if it means slowing down the juggernaut schedule a bit, everything would be nigh-on perfect. [&o]
RE: AI a little /too/ aggressive?
ORIGINAL: Andy Mac
I strongly suspect you should wait for the next set orf AI builds and see how that does
Considering the complete lack of love the AI received in WitP this is most encouraging.
Thank you.
- WingedIncubus
- Posts: 566
- Joined: Wed Oct 03, 2007 2:17 am
RE: AI a little /too/ aggressive?
ORIGINAL: Andy Mac
I strongly suspect you should wait for the next set orf AI builds and see how that does
Now I am scared. [X(]
- Cap Mandrake
- Posts: 20737
- Joined: Fri Nov 15, 2002 8:37 am
- Location: Southern California
RE: AI a little /too/ aggressive?
re. the Jap AI and sub use (which seems almost prescient)....I have a suspicion they have a mole in Admiral King's office. [:)]
It may be the guy typing up the transport convoy orders.
It may be the guy typing up the transport convoy orders.

RE: AI a little /too/ aggressive?
Aborting is fine but what if the abort is PI ?
If there is a time to attack with insuffuicient force its early doors - iots not such a huge issue for the allies as they have so many DD's but Japan is ALWAYs short of them
Good point.

RE: AI a little /too/ aggressive?
AI definitely doesnt sit around like WITP and is much improved Andy. I agree a little aggressive without proper support. Needs to wait for air cover and expand in steps. Also I like the surface support ships come in to clear out landing area but then leave Amphibious ships to fend for themselves and move on to the next area. Sometimes the sit for a week or more awaiting arrival of landing tf.
I also like sub ops and mining ops for many surprises.
Still much more than previous and I anticipate your changes [:D]
I also like sub ops and mining ops for many surprises.
Still much more than previous and I anticipate your changes [:D]
-
- Posts: 2664
- Joined: Mon Apr 29, 2002 12:40 am
RE: AI a little /too/ aggressive?
Yeah, I keep finding subs in places I never saw them in WitP, usually to my dismay. I had a TF of 3 tankers leaving San Diego get sunk by one sub a few hexes out. Had one shoot (and miss) at Enterprise as her TF went south to bomb the Canton Island invasion. I've also seen them around Java and the usual ones on the east coast of Australia. I may have hit a few with DC's but don't think I've sunk any yet.
RE: AI a little /too/ aggressive?
The KB and a smaller second CVL force sat in the Java sea around Kendari and Balipakin(sp) for a week laying waste to everything that came near all the landing forces attacking several bases at the same time. Once Kendari was taken and the Mendano and those other smaller bases the KB vanished and landbased Betties Rule the area now.... Can't move anything without getting whacked they took out many of my precious TK's AO's... 

RE: AI a little /too/ aggressive?
ORIGINAL: Andy Mac
I strongly suspect you should wait for the next set orf AI builds and see how that does
This is what I call the right attitude!!


RE: AI a little /too/ aggressive?
Thanks guys the issue is Japan is really quite short of escorts and the AI (rightly) will not form heavy TF's without a screen - this places DD's at a premium.
If I suck in to many to small SCTF's the big boys dont form.
(Its one of the main reasons Scen 2 has extra jap DD's to help the AI form the right TF's)
Also you need to be aware of the fact that the if the AI is going to take insane risks early doors is the time to do it.
Anyway I have reworked 12/13 scripts to try and improve cover 1 more to do and they will be ready for testing pre going into patch 1.
Its achieving the balance (which to be fair tot he AI most players as Japan struggle with) of DD's to support small escort forces and DD's for the big boys.
Remember the AI will always struggle in this area if I allocate to many to SCTF's then KB wont form or the BB's wont be on the prowl.
If Japan had another 30 DD's and 10 CL's I could go through and increase the cover forces for all critical TF's from small/minimum and have a reasonable chance of them forming but Japan doesnt have another 30 DD's and 10 CL's (At least not until I get my Ironman mod out post patch 1 !!!!!) [:D][:D][:D]
Andy
If I suck in to many to small SCTF's the big boys dont form.
(Its one of the main reasons Scen 2 has extra jap DD's to help the AI form the right TF's)
Also you need to be aware of the fact that the if the AI is going to take insane risks early doors is the time to do it.
Anyway I have reworked 12/13 scripts to try and improve cover 1 more to do and they will be ready for testing pre going into patch 1.
Its achieving the balance (which to be fair tot he AI most players as Japan struggle with) of DD's to support small escort forces and DD's for the big boys.
Remember the AI will always struggle in this area if I allocate to many to SCTF's then KB wont form or the BB's wont be on the prowl.
If Japan had another 30 DD's and 10 CL's I could go through and increase the cover forces for all critical TF's from small/minimum and have a reasonable chance of them forming but Japan doesnt have another 30 DD's and 10 CL's (At least not until I get my Ironman mod out post patch 1 !!!!!) [:D][:D][:D]
Andy
RE: AI a little /too/ aggressive?
p.s. it all comes down to DD's there are never enough of these types of ships