Artifical Intelligence for World in Flames

[lomyrin]

Russia:  If by 42 the German attack has not occurred, or is imminent and the USA is already in the war, or the US entry level is sufficient, consider DoW on Germany, then Finland cannot enter the war by an Axis DoW.
 
Lars  

[Froonp]

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets
France
(...)
A Direct attack on Germany, possibly through Belgium (and the Netherlands)
B Direct attack on Italy
C Attack to remove all Axis forces from the Med
D Attack through the Balkans, against the Axis aligned minors

I'd add that such a thing is mainly a follow up of something else, either B, C or E, not.

E Play a supportive role in CW, USA, and USSR attacks on Germany and Italy
(...)

Russia
(...)
∙ DOW Persia

I'd add "and follow up with Iraq if possible".

∙ DOW Bulgaria

This one should have low chances of being chosen.

∙ DOW Rumania - demand Bessarabia

This one should be the most likely.

∙ DOW Finland - demand Finnish borderlands

This one is quite awkward and should be not very frequent too.

[Ullern]

I was surprised this one wasn't on the list:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets
I The USSR is not under immediate attack at the start of the Global War scenario. This gives the USSR several options:

Add:
∙ DOW Germany
So I agree with Lars, but will say it even more strongly. A USSR Dow on Germany is always very beneficial for the allies. Those very few games I have experienced with this scenario, Germany are about conquered before USA enters the war. So I'd say that if this is possible I would do it even though it means exhausting US-entry against Germany.
Any semi-smart German player would always be sure to maintain his garrison (so this need really to be on the to-do-list for the German AI).
Of course, a forward set up is very risky for USSR, so to DOW Germany should be considered as a quick stunt, not a grand strategy.

I would also add another bullet that would make the above scenario more likely:
If nothing better to do with the USSR, then set up defensively against German attack, and DOW Japan (or do not choose to end the Japanese war even though you can). If you combine a halfway backwards set up, and an "active" USSR (Say Odessa and a line north from Odessa). Then USSR can deploy to a forward set up with two clear weather impulses. This should stress Germany a lot, as I point out that a USSR DOWing Germany on a bad timing always wins the game for the allies. I have done this myself in games where the Euro-Axis commits too heavily in Spain, or goes Sea lion.

[iamspamus]

Not sure if this is above, but what about USSR dow on Persia? Shouldn't that be an option too?

Jason

ORIGINAL: ullern

I was surprised this one wasn't on the list:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets
I The USSR is not under immediate attack at the start of the Global War scenario. This gives the USSR several options:

Add:
∙ DOW Germany
So I agree with Lars, but will say it even more strongly. A USSR Dow on Germany is always very beneficial for the allies. Those very few games I have experienced with this scenario, Germany are about conquered before USA enters the war. So I'd say that if this is possible I would do it even though it means exhausting US-entry against Germany.
Any semi-smart German player would always be sure to maintain his garrison (so this need really to be on the to-do-list for the German AI).
Of course, a forward set up is very risky for USSR, so to DOW Germany should be considered as a quick stunt, not a grand strategy.

I would also add another bullet that would make the above scenario more likely:
If nothing better to do with the USSR, then set up defensively against German attack, and DOW Japan (or do not choose to end the Japanese war even though you can). If you combine a halfway backwards set up, and an "active" USSR (Say Odessa and a line north from Odessa). Then USSR can deploy to a forward set up with two clear weather impulses. This should stress Germany a lot, as I point out that a USSR DOWing Germany on a bad timing always wins the game for the allies. I have done this myself in games where the Euro-Axis commits too heavily in Spain, or goes Sea lion.

[Froonp]

ORIGINAL: iamspamus
Not sure if this is above, but what about USSR dow on Persia? Shouldn't that be an option too?
Jason

Yes, it was mentionned in Steven's article (#240), and I quoted it in my answer (#242) underlying that it could have a follow up with Iraq.

[Shannon V. OKeets]

Persia was in post #240.

I'll add the DOW on Germany (conditional on the frontline being denuded by Germany).

------------

I have been in Provence, France (or en route) for 5 days - just south of Avignon. While in Europe I have generated a lot of new stuff for the AIO, which I will type in when I get home. Here is something for you to chew on:

8.5 Defense against partisans
First evaluate each country for the threat from partisnas. This includes both any partisans already on the map or possible new arrivals. For on map partisans, either eliminate them or contain them within ZOCs. Consider redepolying units to eliminate any remaining partisans in future impulses. Establish garrison levels to prevent the arrival of new partisans.

8.6 Place and move partisans
If damage can be caused, then maximize damage. If several possibles ways to inflict damage exist, prioritize to maximize damage with minimal risk to the partisans them selves. If no damage can be caused immediately, seek to preserve units and/or force the attackers to poor locations.

Damage priorities are:
- putting many units out of supply
- destroying disorganized air units and naval units,
- forcing organized air and naval units to rebase,
- attacking divisions without corps or other very weak units (e.g., disorganiyed out of supply black print units),
- putting one or two units out of supply,
- creating a supply source (e.g., recapturing a home city , with the capital being the best),
- denying a resource or red factory to the enemy,
- denying a transportation line for moving resources,
- taking out a supply oline which may later enable putting enemy units out of supply by taking out a second supply line, and
- threatening to do any of the above.
- consider making a partisan HQ if the rule is being used. If it is possible, then use the two weakest partisan units to form the HQ.

[Froonp]

Seems good.

8.5 Defense against partisans

Not that I would like to appear pedantic, but I had written what I found a good thing, about garrisoning, in the German AI (here : tm.asp?m=979605, post #5)

- creating a supply source (e.g., recapturing a home city , with the capital being the best),

I think that this one is impossible, because PART don't control hexes, nor change control of hexes, they just interupt the benefit of controlling the hex for the country controling it.
So a capital occupied by PART would only allow for units cooperating with said PART to Paradrop / Invade without combat here, of deny the occupying country the use of the RP or Red Factory that may be present here too.

There was also a good thread about AI for Partisans here.
tm.asp?m=988374&mpage=1&key=partisans&#988374

[Shannon V. OKeets]

ORIGINAL: Froonp

Seems good.

8.5 Defense against partisans

Not that I would like to appear pedantic, but I had written what I found a good thing, about garrisoning, in the German AI (here : tm.asp?m=979605, post #5)

- creating a supply source (e.g., recapturing a home city , with the capital being the best),

I think that this one is impossible, because PART don't control hexes, nor change control of hexes, they just interupt the benefit of controlling the hex for the country controling it.
So a capital occupied by PART would only allow for units cooperating with said PART to Paradrop / Invade without combat here, of deny the occupying country the use of the RP or Red Factory that may be present here too.

There was also a good thread about AI for Partisans here.
tm.asp?m=988374&mpage=1&key=partisans��

I had forgotten about the AI Partisan thread (oops). I had intended for the 'control' to be for paradrops, though invasions might be possible in a few rare cases.

I will integrate the AI Partisan thread into what I have already written. It should be fairly complete then. I am thinking of the garrisoning task as separate; more of a opertional decision about where to deploy primarily land units.

[npilgaard]

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets
I have been in Provence, France (or en route) for 5 days - just south of Avignon. While in Europe I have generated a lot of new stuff for the AIO, which I will type in when I get home. Here is something for you to chew on:

Don't you ever take a break from this...? [:)]

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets
Damage priorities are:
- putting many units out of supply

Best if it allows for some counterattack on the oos-units (ie there must be some significant enemy force capable of doing an attack - best if possible to flip oos units), or if the supply chain cannot be easily redone. Otherwise I think that destroying a fd air unit is better (or maybe fd naval units)

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets
- consider making a partisan HQ if the rule is being used. If it is possible, then use the two weakest partisan units to form the HQ.

A matter of playing style, I guess, but I think I would make this a higher prioroty, especially if having two not-so-strong partisan units. Especially the Russian HQ is nice (iirc it can be used as a standard Russian HQ)

Otherwise it looks good

[Shannon V. OKeets]

ORIGINAL: npilgaard

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets
I have been in Provence, France (or en route) for 5 days - just south of Avignon. While in Europe I have generated a lot of new stuff for the AIO, which I will type in when I get home. Here is something for you to chew on:

Don't you ever take a break from this...? [:)]

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets
Damage priorities are:
- putting many units out of supply

Best if it allows for some counterattack on the oos-units (ie there must be some significant enemy force capable of doing an attack - best if possible to flip oos units), or if the supply chain cannot be easily redone. Otherwise I think that destroying a fd air unit is better (or maybe fd naval units)

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets
- consider making a partisan HQ if the rule is being used. If it is possible, then use the two weakest partisan units to form the HQ.

A matter of playing style, I guess, but I think I would make this a higher prioroty, especially if having two not-so-strong partisan units. Especially the Russian HQ is nice (iirc it can be used as a standard Russian HQ)

Otherwise it looks good

Not really, I work on this more or less continuously, and get real nervous when I'm not.

Putting a lot of units out of supply is really great, in my opinion. It kills any offense, leaves the units vulnerable to ground strikes and annihilation, and forces the enemy to come over and kill the partisnas immediately.

[Shannon V. OKeets]

For the AIO, I think only a few lend lease rules are needed.

- Italy only requests lend lease air units, when those units are better than the average units in its force pool it has the BPs to build them.
- Germany always grants Italy's requests.

- China always requests lend lease air units when it can afford to build them.
- USA never asks for lend lease air units.
- CW and USSR only request lend lease air units when those units are better than the average in their force pools and they have the BPs to build them.
- France only asks for lend lease air units after it has gone On the Offensive (strategic plan #4 - described in next post), and it has the BPs to build them.

- USA always lend leases air units, in priority order, to: China, USSR, CW, France.
- USSR and CW always lend lease air units to others unless those units are desperately needed by themselves.

Perhaps this is oversimplified but it should get the right answer 90% of the time.

[Shannon V. OKeets]

I have designed a lot of the strategic plans' variable structure, internal to the program, and accompanying CSV file formats. At the start of a Solitaire game, the AIO will read in the CSV files for the strategic plans into program storage (i.e., the variable structure).

For China there are only two strategic plans. In short they are:
1 - Defend against conquest
2 - On the Offensive (which occurs when the balance of power in China swings in its favor).

France has 4 strategic plans:
1 - Defend Paris
2 - Defend Spain
3 - Free France (rebuild in accordance with USA/CW instructions)
4 - On the Offensive

France always starts with #1.
#1 transitions to #2 when Paris falls
#2 transitions to #3 once no French units remain in Metropolitan France
#1 transitions to #4 if Paris does not fall and the balance of power vis-a-vis EuroAxis is in France's favor.

There are obviously many more details, but that is a quick overview.

I have given this design a preliminary run through for the other major powers, and I believe it will work out ok. Germany will have choices to make (which strategic plan to start with), as willl CW, USA, and USSR (though the actions of other major powers will clearly affect the decisions of the last 3). Italy is mostly responsive to what the CW, France, and Germany do.

[lomyrin]

China, if severely mauled by the Japanese, might consider surrendering if it would hurt the Japanese by an increased US entry or by causing Japan to be at peace removing their Mil and reserve units from the map and forcing Japan to use only combined actions. The latter can be powerful against Japan in mid to late 41 when they are getting ready to hit the CW in the Pacific.
 
Lars 

[Froonp]

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets
- CW and USSR only request lend lease air units when those units are better than the average in their force pools and they have the BPs to build them.

The "are better than" has to be defined.
For example, while the CW LL P-40E is worse in A2A factors than most of that year's FTR2s (they have 5-7 A2A factors), it has the advantage of being one of the first allied FTR2 able to reach the Sea Box Section 3 (Range 7) with a decent A2A strength which is IMO VERY important for the CW who in this period (1941) is either trying to get the upper hand in the Med, or defending Gibraltar. So in this case, whateve its A2A strength, it is his range that makes the P-40E a must have for the CW in 1941.

- France only asks for lend lease air units after it has gone On the Offensive (strategic plan #4 - described in next post), and it has the BPs to build them.

I disagree.
Lend leased A-20 & A-22 are must have for the French in 1939. They are equal to or better than what the French have, and can be obtained in setup.

- USA always lend leases air units, in priority order, to: China, USSR, CW, France.

I disagree, in regards of what I wrote previsouly about the P-40E, who is the first decent FTR2 to be able to reach section 3 in a sea box. This is a must have for the CW. It is also good for China, but it is nearly too good for China, in regards of how much good it is for the CW. This is not the same for the P-40F of next year, because by then the CW will have had other FTRs to take superiority in the sea areas.

[Froonp]

ORIGINAL: lomyrin

China, if severely mauled by the Japanese, might consider surrendering if it would hurt the Japanese by an increased US entry or by causing Japan to be at peace removing their Mil and reserve units from the map and forcing Japan to use only combined actions. The latter can be powerful against Japan in mid to late 41 when they are getting ready to hit the CW in the Pacific.

Lars 

I would really only do this if China really was in such a desperate situation that it makes any future hope of liberating China impossible, and that Japan is refraining from conquering it. For example, if max production falls below say 1 BP steadily (only 1-3 factory left).

[c92nichj]

ORIGINAL: Froonp

ORIGINAL: lomyrin

China, if severely mauled by the Japanese, might consider surrendering if it would hurt the Japanese by an increased US entry or by causing Japan to be at peace removing their Mil and reserve units from the map and forcing Japan to use only combined actions. The latter can be powerful against Japan in mid to late 41 when they are getting ready to hit the CW in the Pacific.

Lars 

I would really only do this if China really was in such a desperate situation that it makes any future hope of liberating China impossible, and that Japan is refraining from conquering it. For example, if max production falls below say 1 BP steadily (only 1-3 factory left).

Seen this tactic used several times, once in a CWIF game, usually it is pulled when China has only 1 factory left(Kunming or Lan-chow)

In two games I played a chineese surrender have given enough Chits to US so the US can dow and potentially deny the japaneese a suprise pulse, in a current game where I play Japan, I managed to win initiative and Dow the US first but I was severly out of position and not ready for a dow so only managed to secure rabaul and land in Philippines and on the 2oilresource hex in NEI.

[lomyrin]

ORIGINAL: Froonp

ORIGINAL: lomyrin

China, if severely mauled by the Japanese, might consider surrendering if it would hurt the Japanese by an increased US entry or by causing Japan to be at peace removing their Mil and reserve units from the map and forcing Japan to use only combined actions. The latter can be powerful against Japan in mid to late 41 when they are getting ready to hit the CW in the Pacific.

Lars 

I would really only do this if China really was in such a desperate situation that it makes any future hope of liberating China impossible, and that Japan is refraining from conquering it. For example, if max production falls below say 1 BP steadily (only 1-3 factory left).

Yes, it would only be done if the Allies could have some definite benefit versus the Japanese by doing so.

There is another side benefit - The Allies can then enter China without being hindered by the foreign troop commitment and HQ limitations.

In MWiF with all the addional Chinese cities this situation may never occur as it often did in CWiF.

Lars

[christo]

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

For the AIO, I think only a few lend lease rules are needed.

- Italy only requests lend lease air units, when those units are better than the average units in its force pool it has the BPs to build them.
- Germany always grants Italy's requests.

Will this mean that the:
-bf 109
-fw 190 D
-Ju 88 a1
-Ju 87 D
will never be available to the german player as the stats for these planes are definately better than average for the italian planes and therefore the Italian AI will automatically request them from a compliant german AI ?

Christo

[Shannon V. OKeets]

ORIGINAL: lomyrin

ORIGINAL: Froonp

ORIGINAL: lomyrin

China, if severely mauled by the Japanese, might consider surrendering if it would hurt the Japanese by an increased US entry or by causing Japan to be at peace removing their Mil and reserve units from the map and forcing Japan to use only combined actions. The latter can be powerful against Japan in mid to late 41 when they are getting ready to hit the CW in the Pacific.

Lars 

I would really only do this if China really was in such a desperate situation that it makes any future hope of liberating China impossible, and that Japan is refraining from conquering it. For example, if max production falls below say 1 BP steadily (only 1-3 factory left).

Yes, it would only be done if the Allies could have some definite benefit versus the Japanese by doing so.

There is another side benefit - The Allies can then enter China without being hindered by the foreign troop commitment and HQ limitations.

In MWiF with all the addional Chinese cities this situation may never occur as it often did in CWiF.

Lars

I currently have Never down for surrendering (it is a new rule that I have never played with). I will add it as a 3rd "strategic plan" for China. What should be the preconditions (besides being reduced to 1BP a turn)? For example, if the US is already at war with Japan, does surrendering make any sense?

Are there other major powers that should surrender, or only China?

[Shannon V. OKeets]

ORIGINAL: christo

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets
For the AIO, I think only a few lend lease rules are needed.

- Italy only requests lend lease air units, when those units are better than the average units in its force pool it has the BPs to build them.
- Germany always grants Italy's requests.

Will this mean that the:
-bf 109
-fw 190 D
-Ju 88 a1
-Ju 87 D
will never be available to the german player as the stats for these planes are definately better than average for the italian planes and therefore the Italian AI will automatically request them from a compliant german AI ?

Christo

Germany has several of each of these air units (I believe), and would only lose 1 of each if Italy lend leases it. Germany can also demand it back at any time, and certainly would get it back if Italy were conquered.

Do you believe there should be more conditions checked before Germany lend leases one or more of these units? If so, what shuold they be?