Matrix Games Forums

Originally posted by sapperland:
Sounds like a fun game to play, but whos gonna program the beast? World in Flames has been worked on for years and is only now nearing completion, but this is only for play against other people. They have not even started the AI. I can imagine how hard that would be. But then again, I'm sure the folks here at matrix are much better programers

Its a step by step process sapperland and if enough people get involved and work out the design to a reasonable and realistic level. Maybe Matrix Games may like it enough to get involved. And they(the Matrix game guys) do read these posts

The idea of a game by gamers...literaly by everyone who reads and posts to this topic, may not be as difficult to implement as it sounds. We shall wait and see...



------------------
understanding requires patience

Grok

Very Good Ideas laurent! You're a one man design team.

I like the idea of political points though it might be better to limit the number of events that can gain/lose them(DoW, Alliances, limit the cities to Capitals, coastal ports and very large population/industrial/oil centers, treaties, and successfull invasions). Diplomacy should be limited and kept simple.

Using chits is good, and the concept of national traits is good too. The use of leaders should be kept to a limited basis, too many spoil the recipe. Maybe assign the leaders(which are only in the game because they are so exceptional), to the units that need them and then reassign them somewhere else as needed.

I need to think some more on the rest, but I do like what you have so far.

Anyone else have any suggestions to laurents design?



------------------
understanding requires patience

Grok

Thanks, Grok

In my wishful thinking serie, let's go to the production rules a bit more detailed... Last, just in case it is not whisful thinking: all ideas expressed here are offered to wargamers for free but I would express I don't want to see these ideas be implemented in a Talonsoft game... if they were programmable which obviously are certainly not
-production is based on 3 ressource types, industrial centers, manpower, financial means and technologies.

- ressources are:

- oil: only used for computing supply of armored, mech, motorized units and planes.
- raw materials figures carbon, iron, wood, food abstractly. Used for weapon creation, supply of all units,expansion of production capacity, civilian goods, transport.
-rate materials figure rare minerals as tungsten, copper. Used as raw materials.


-ressources will be furnished by some hexes in the map, each rated for genre and volume.

- industrial centers will be towns. each will have a number figuring production capacity and types of equipment which can be built.

- the production capacity will be the number of raw and rare materials each industrial center can transform during one month. This value will be affected by: investment, bombing, voluntary destruction, manpower level, strikes.

- production capacity could be exchanged between 2 industrial centers, with delay ( relocation of Soviet and german industries)


- manpower is a national global setting varying with mobilization, women manpower, mandatory working. It will lower industrial capacities if diminushing.

- some technologies ( taylorism, production rationalization) will be able to raise production capacity.

- financial means are only used for investment. At start, each nation will dispose of money means which will have to be increased by taxes, forced loans, inflation, commercial exchanges. Taxes, forced loans, inflation will of course be regrouped into one variable, affecting political points . For creation or expansion of a production capacity, money will have to be spent with materials.

- the production will be at nation level ( not by industrial centers). Production will be divided in many categories with percentage levels altered by player.

- fleet production ( total of naval capcity production points)
- planes production (idem)
- ground production: with sub categories:
- civilian goods ( giving political points)
- industrial capacity
- transport level ( a low transport level will result in loss of a part of the materials ressources.
-research
- general weapons (ground units)
- tanks
-artillery
- AT guns
- AA guns
- electronic features (radio and radar)
- special weapons ( gas, Atomic bomb, V1 and V2)
-supply


- each production type will be: x raw materials + y raw material = 1 supply points, 100 planes, 1000 general equpmments, etc

- player will be able to vary the proportion of rare materials in production type. If the proportion is lower than needed, the production result will be randomized ( reflecting fact low quality equipment is more or less useless in battlefield)

- rare materials will be very needed for special weapon and electronics.

- production priorities will simulate the difficulties to turn production of one type to another: when lowering one and for raising another, part of the percentage will be temporary lost and slowly recovered during the next months.

- production of a new weapon type( created by research) will cost more in the 2 first months.

- last, production of any genre will last at least 2 months ( and much pore for fleets, atomic bomb, etc) to force players to plan ahead.




[This message has been edited by laurent Favre (edited October 02, 2000).]

[This message has been edited by laurent Favre (edited October 02, 2000).]

[This message has been edited by laurent Favre (edited October 02, 2000).]

In my wishful thinking serie, let's go to the some secondary rules a bit more detailed... Last, just in case it is not whisful thinking: all ideas expressed here are offered to wargamers for free


Technology tree: will be common for all nations.Will be featured:
- production enhancement (taylorism)
- special weapons (A bomb,etc)
- armor
- fighters
- bombers
- strategic bombers
- AT
- AA
-radar/sonar and countermeasures
- communications
- artillery

Each research object will have several levels, except special weapons which will be perfect as soon discovered ( but time and ressources needed will be huge). Levels will be at max 5.

Each nation will begin with some level reached ( level 1 for radar for Great britain by exmple).

Research will be financed by expanditure of rare materials ressource points with a constant national modifier reflecting level of R/D in the country ( very high for USA, Germany, lower in USSR, Italia)

Technology will be part of diplomatic and commercial exchanges.

Last, the ressources yet spent in a branch will not transferable to another project; if one project is abandoned, all ressources will be lost.

Research levels will give advantages: by example an amount of 3 production points with armor level 1 will give 1 armored strenght point; with level 2, it will give 1.5, etc.


[This message has been edited by laurent Favre (edited October 02, 2000).]

Much of this work is already done viz, A3R and Days of Decision/WiF. IMHO, I believe strategic games should be strategic in play. Get's down to what one is simulating: National political leader, General Staff, theater Commander? I would suggest the capability for a player (human or AI) to play each major combatant. Makes for interesting political and coalition interaction.
Not flaming anyone, each of us has our own gaming tastes, but I find it interesting that we slam Hitler and Stalin for getting down in the weeds with maneuvering divisions/battalions, but we as wargamers insist on doing the same thing...

Originally posted by Grumble:
Not flaming anyone, each of us has our own gaming tastes, but I find it interesting that we slam Hitler and Stalin for getting down in the weeds with maneuvering divisions/battalions, but we as wargamers insist on doing the same thing...

That's because we don't have a Patton or Rommel level AI yet. I'm not even sure we have Gomer Pyle AI yet.

------------------
Billy Yank
I don't define "my own" the way you want me to.

The problem with AI's is that at some point they do bad moves. So until (if ever) we get an AI that can play a human without cheats and win 50% of the time, I will want to control all the little details. The only game that I have seen that the AI performs very well is chess. However, in chess you have a limited number of moves. Compare that to even a basic war game like Axis and Allies and you get an almost unlimited number of choices to make.

Not just AI, I've seen the same tendency in boardgames as well. Don't want to labor the point, but I still say a strategic-level game should remain strategic in execution, regardless of opponent.

Originally posted by Grumble:
Not just AI, I've seen the same tendency in boardgames as well. Don't want to labor the point, but I still say a strategic-level game should remain strategic in execution, regardless of opponent.

I'm not sure about boardgames, unless you're talking about "monster games", say, AH's "Longest Day", the whole damn Normandy invasion at battalion level or some such crazyness. When speaking of boardgames it comes down to the scale and scope of the game. As for computer games the reason is simple. AIs are *stupid*. Even low level AIs meant to do the grunt work freeing the player to handle high level issues. I've never found a good one in wargames or strategy games, and boardgames of course can't rely on a low level AI, so the players inevitably end up doing more than is realistic for their position, like moving all units themselves. AI stupidity is probably the reason why WiF is delayed and will initially show up without an AI, and "Road to Moscow" is still vaporware.

The only true wargames are those done by the Pentagon, using human beings all the way through the chain of command from say, regiment level to corps commander, or something similar.

The AI is a major cause of the holdup in Computer WIF alright.
It has been AGAIN put back 3 Months to the first quarter of 2001. Matrix should put in a bid to take over.

------------------
Wait for Death. There's a choice?
Recon

new game title: Democraty and darkness.

occupied territories rules:

- a nation can be partially or totally occupied.

Common rules for both cases: the national will track remains basically the same tahn described in political module. but its consequencies are now:
- the lower the national will, the higher the collaboration level.
- the higher the national will, the higher the resistance

- collaboration level will give to the ruler: free manpower, army volunteers ( eventually some chrome units will be created), lesser garrison request, a few political points.

- resistance level will create intel resistance and sabotage effect, partisans units, suppress the other advantages to the rulers.
- intel resistance will lower Fog of war.
- sabotage will lower production value and increase movement cost.
-partisan units will, given the 50 km scale, have some special characteristics: they will be more difficult to spot, recovery losses will be higher, they will be able to stack into enemy occupied hexes, increasing the movement cost. By the contrary, enemy units will be able to fight them either directly, either indirectly by terror and repraisails.Partisan units will appear in wooded, mountain and marshes hexes. their movement point allowance will be very low.

- terror and repraisail: possible only when for nation whose terror general level will be high. Effects: partisan units in the hex terrorised will get some high losses, representing loss of help from civilian. But the national will of the occupied territry will increase the next turn.

- garrison: mandatory but variable level depending of the occupied territory national will. Each town will have a garrison of at least one ground unit.

- Occupation policy: will be determined by manpower and production policy, propaganda, terror or freedom of press level.
Ruler of an occupied country will be able to draft manpower (increasing national will); if he uses all the production and resources points of the occupied town, civilian goods will be considered reduced to nothing, increasing national will; if partially exploited, civilian goods will be considered produced. Propaganda points will be spent for all occupied territories, whatever their nationality, decreasing national will in occupied territories; general terror level will decrease national will, freedom of press will increase it.Totalitarian nations will lose Political points with a low terror level, as democraty for a low freedom of press level. The ruler will be able to spent production points in occupied territories, reprensenting economi help, decreasing the national will.

- guerrilla units will be either communist or not, depending from the USSR national will and a constant factor reflecting the pre-war communist implantation. Communist and non communist units will be able to be stacked together, but with an possible risk of fight between them ( event not under players control).

Special rules for nations totally occupied: a "puppet governement" will be created. As long he lives, he decreases the national will but limits for the ruler ressources, manpower exploitation and terror level. puppet government can be removed at any moments. puppet goverments will have their small little army. A democratic ruler will not be able to remove a "puppet goverment" ( but will be able to create one, as the greek monarchy in Greece).

- for historical accuracy, Ukrain and caucasus Soviet republics will have their own national will track and so will be considered as occupied by USSR even if belonging to USSR side.

Any comments welcome.

[This message has been edited by laurent Favre (edited October 03, 2000).]

[This message has been edited by laurent Favre (edited October 03, 2000).]

[This message has been edited by laurent Favre (edited October 03, 2000).]

[This message has been edited by laurent Favre (edited October 03, 2000).]

In captured territory you can ethier rebuild/retool industry for points down the road or loot for points right away in diminshing amounts. Also make local population turn partisan. While terror methods work in occupied areas they increase resolve of opponent nations and polarize neutrals (countries close to you adopt policies towards you. ones out of reach go to other side) Bonus for "first use" of special weapons/units/tactics with lessened effect there after. Friendly nations can share knowledge, sell or give material but not manpower, make loans, trade territory (not home areas)

------------------
I'm not retreating, I'm attacking in a differant direction!

Originally posted by Mogami:
In captured territory you can ethier rebuild/retool industry for points down the road or loot for points right away in diminshing amounts. Also make local population turn partisan. While terror methods work in occupied areas they increase resolve of opponent nations and polarize neutrals (countries close to you adopt policies towards you. ones out of reach go to other side) Bonus for "first use" of special weapons/units/tactics with lessened effect there after. Friendly nations can share knowledge, sell or give material but not manpower, make loans, trade territory (not home areas)

Good ideas.

Local population and guerilla: the fact is guerilla was a very small part of the population, even in USSR or Yougoslavia. Partisan units are created by national will level and terror has for goal to cut the guerilla from civilian support.

Polarize neutrals: maybe. Fact is Switzerland and possibly others were more often more sensible to the military fluctuations. But you're right: a democratic neutral should be more prone to hostility toward totalitarian nations.

thanks for yor remarks,

Laurent

is this a real game or ideas?

------------------
Spam.....Is there anything it can't do?

Originally posted by Dan Cook:
is this a real game or ideas?

just ideas, alas. But I've yet fun howewer to put them. I'm certainly mad.

Originally posted by sapperland:
The only game that I have seen that the AI performs very well is chess. However, in chess you have a limited number of moves. Compare that to even a basic war game like Axis and Allies and you get an almost unlimited number of choices to make.

Ouch ! Exact number is 2**64, Even for a computer it is unlimited. There is no difference between Unlimlited and 10 time unlimited. The difference between chess AI and wargame AI is 20 years of AI developping on the SAME game with SAME rule. I don't think than any company will ever produce alone a good AI. However, if you compare on what happened with chess, the solution is to have AI as an external open module, standartized within an expert system with thousands of rules (forget heuristic model). This model must be external to the game (rules of game are coded) and the model is open source so that it can be modified and reworked by many people in time.
There is an attempt to create such model at "http://openwarsim.org/". As far as I know it is the only one on the Web which is about wargeme and is active. We try to build rules and then attract people from Gameai.com to build various engine to compete each other. but you will need patience.

Bernard

Originally posted by laurent Favre:

just ideas, alas. But I've yet fun howewer to put them. I'm certainly mad.

If that was a real game, I buy it in a second.

-Dan

------------------
Spam.....Is there anything it can't do?

Originally posted by Dan Cook:
If that was a real game, I buy it in a second.

-Dan

Dan,

Even if I guess chances to see this game completed are around 0%, I will post on the open source wargame forum of the Wargamer board. A bottle in the sea... and a motive for me to learn C++. So maybe around 2015...

Originally posted by laurent Favre:
Dan,

Even if I guess chances to see this game completed are around 0%, I will post on the open source wargame forum of the Wargamer board. A bottle in the sea... and a motive for me to learn C++. So maybe around 2015...

Take heart Laurent, you never know who might be reading these posts....I keep reading your posts, though I don't agree with all of your ideas...I do like them.



------------------
understanding requires patience

Grok

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by sapperland:
The only game that I have seen that the AI performs very well is chess. However, in chess you have a limited number of moves. Compare that to even a basic war game like Axis and Allies and you get an almost unlimited number of choices to make.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hi PC's suck at chess. Main frames are a different story against less then IM's. But you have to know how to both play chess and understand computers. Do not play open tactical games against the machine play closed stratigic games and watch the machine make what are known as "computer moves" ie rooks on back rank moving back and forth waiting for center to open. You can get computers rated as high as 2100 but that is a blitz rating most pc programs perform at about 1600-1800 rating. Most under 10 year old humans are 1100 most humans 1400 so computers look good intill they meet real chess players.