Matrix Games Forums

A.I. is constantly improved. It's the most enjoyable thing I like working on.

ORIGINAL: Alvaro Sousa

A.I. is constantly improved. It's the most enjoyable thing I like working on.

Glad to hear it! I like PBEM play too, but don't always have time for this and also play vs AI is better for learning and trying out ideas.

I have not invaded Russia yet, but so far the AI doesn't seem to do anything. Poland, Norway and Denmark were a cakewalks. Invaded France and the AI just kept falling back. Took France, Yugo and Greece all with little AI resistance.

Turned to Egypt and the AI did nothing. The UK did not mount any sort of an attack. It just sat there. Once I had enough troops in North Africa I invaded and took Egypt.

Looks like solitaire play is the only way for me. I can't hot seat and PBEM takes too long.

Give me time tables on the conquests please.

Also specify what do you mean by did nothing. In the minors it really can't. In France it is supposed to delay you as much as possible.

The Egypt thing is something I am working on. Patrolling fleets aren't working correctly for some reason in the scripting.

PBEM turns take 10-30 minutes per turn, you can get from September 39 to June 40 in two real days easy, in a real week you should be able to crank out 12-30 turns really.

I playtested against the AI on various difficulty level. AI activity is heavily dependent on their units' current effectiveness level and experience level. It's definitely true that the AI will give better resistance and aggressiveness on higher difficulty levels.

I put AI experience levels on Optimal, and push the AI effectiveness levels (supply) way up.

ORIGINAL: Alvaro Sousa

Give me time tables on the conquests please.

Also specify what do you mean by did nothing. In the minors it really can't. In France it is supposed to delay you as much as possible.

The Egypt thing is something I am working on. Patrolling fleets aren't working correctly for some reason in the scripting.

Conquests were earlier than historical but not by much, maybe a month. In France the AI just kept moving backwards and not attacking, I guess this the the delay action. In Yugo they all ran into the mountains and just stayed there leaving the path to Belgrade open.

Greece, the AI just stayed in position and got pummeled.

I expect the above to be easy. But I expect Egypt to be more difficult. I had Italy declare war on the UK historically. All UK units stayed in Egypt and did not attack the Italians despite being at war. Not even air or naval attacks.

I am playing on Historical levels, should I up the levels to get the AI to be more aggressive?

Generally the more complex the game the harder it is to make a solid A.I. Unity of Command is one map with set objectives and very obvious what needs to be done. The A.I. is fantastic. In games like WarPlan it is far harder. The 1st time I played SC3 I beat the game as either side easily. And that is a seasoned game. I always need to put the experience up.

I would do it automatically for the A.I. but I would rather the player choose how to benefit them for a challenge. Players would notice the difference and complain. So I leave the choices in your hands.

But I am always working on the A.I. Thanks for the feedback on the countries. I am already changing some things.