AI in detailed battles

[moose1999]

A few comments on the AI in detailed battles:
(I play as the Union with medium starting distances)

Offensive AI:

Definitely better. The AI will try to outflank me and sometimes pulls it's units out of hopeless situations to "regroup" on my flank.
This new behaviour is downright annoying at times (in the good sense) and has caught me off-guard on more than one occation.

But sometimes the AI will also display suicidal behaviour and just throw a single, unsupported unit in column formation against a line of my units (in line formation) leaving it's flanks completely open to attack when my turn comes around.
In fact, the AI's sense of cohesion is often not much better than mine...! [X(]

I know it must be hard to achieve the right balance between aggressive/creative moves that could throw the player off-balance and a more conservative style that favors cohesion and massed attacks. As it is now, the AI throws away at least a handful of brigades in each battle in hazardous solo-strikes into my (more or less solid) battleline.
I definitely think these things should happen from time to time, and sometimes there is a clear point to the AI's reckless behaviour (like charging an exposed flank of a brigade in column formation), but it's happening a bit too often and often leaves the brigade flanked on several sides, ripe for the picking for my Gatling guns... [:D]

Defensive AI:

Well, the AI is very aggressive now and I've yet to experience true defensive behaviour from it.
Often when I attack (and mostly it's me on the attack) the AI will lash out against me instead of waiting for me in defensive positions. I guess it's nice that you don't know quite what to expect (in contrast to before the patch where the AI would always just sit and wait for you behind it's automaticly generated entrenchments) but often the AI abandons really good defensive terrain to engage me in a "battle of the flanks" in clear terrain. And when it meets me it's often "in drops" of one brigade/division at a time instead of as a solid battleline - which would pose a much bigger problem for me as the attacker.
Instead of forcing me to break it's defensive line (and hurt myself doing it) the AI slices it up for me itself.

I think a little more restraint and (again) cohesion and better use of terrain would benefit the AI enormously when on the defensive and give me a much harder run for my money.

One thing that would really help the AI, both on the offensive and the defensive, would be a more consistent use of the line formation. The AI often initiates firefights with my brigades without going into line formation first, although there seems to be plenty of time (i.e. movement points) to do so.
Using the line formation more would benefit the AI a lot, I think, and make the consequences of some of those risky moves it performs a little less catastrophic.
But again, I know it must be a difficult balance to strike between giving the AI manoeuverability (column formation) to encourage flanking moves and keeping cohesion by relying on line formation.
Right now though, I think the AI relies on the column formation too much, which gives me a definite edge in the battles.

So, overall the patch is an improvement of the battle AI which is giving me a harder (and better) time than before the patch. But obviously there's still a long way to go to reach the "perfect" formula. But you're on the right track and seem dedicated to the task and I'll keep downloading your patches and buying your games as long as you keep marching...! [:)]

Regards,

Norman

[sadja]

I have found the opposite in the AI on line formation. If I present a few Cav brigades or some fast Inf in Col, the AI will deploy in line preparing for battle. I use this tactic to slow him down while my enginerres prepare defensive position(brigades with digger, they are worn out by the time the battle starts[;)] ). When assulting position especiall if they have a range advantage they will blast away until I lose moral.

Sometimes they will run into ambush. Unlike us who have eyes with all our brigades I think line of sight is used for each brigade and they stumble onto a brigade in defilade while still in col.

[dude]

Well the one thing I find way too predictable is it's flanking moves... in every detailed combat I've fought in the last three games the AI does the exact same thing... it tries to get around my right flank.  It's like watching the AI army passing in review... it gets it's units within 1 or two hexes of my center then promptly turns and passes along my front to try and get around my right.  I just keep extending the right flank and the AI just keeps trying to go further.  In a lot cases I could just pull troops off the left flank and move them to the right.  (by deploying my forces in a horseshoe like shape it's easy to pull off.)  Then near the end of the battle (assuming I'm winning) I can wheel the left flank troops around the center and cut off the AI units on the right... I've captured a fair number of AI troops this way.
 
As long as my moral holds out the detailed combats are way to predictable now.
 
Dude

[sadja]

They will go around the flanks and are very concerned with their own flanks. If you send 1 Cav brigade around behind, sometimes you can pin 2-4 brigades waiting for you to attack. The last battle the union tried to go around both flanks because I set my army in the middle of 2 of the victory hexes. But when I moved some troops out of the center to reinforce a wing the union did try to come through the gap in the middle. I think line of sight effects the AI more than us because we have the God like view of all our troops.

[sadja]

Well off to do more detailed battles. [:D][:D][:D]

[Bombsight]

Currently playing an advanced game, 2nd Lt difficulty, 1.9.4 Beta installed: In late March 1862, the AI controlling the CSA invades Maryland! I meet the invasion with the entire Army of the Potomac (AOP).
The banner stated the USA had 128,00 troops and the CSA had 98,00 troops. I selected detailed battle to resolve. Being on the defensive, I tied both flanks into rivers to prevent flanking manuevers and deployed my 3 armies/10 divisions in depth (i.e. each division had 3-4 brigades up and 1-2 brigades in reserve).
The AI made frontal attacks with 8 divisions against my Army deployed in line. I was shocked at the electronic carnage! Two CSA brigades disappeared and four more attacks yielded casualties exceeding 1,600. The capper appeared with the information boxes informing me that I had killed R.E. Lee, A.P. Hill and R.S. Ewell! The overall casualty list was 23,000 with only 8,500 USA casualties.

Can someone please explain the AI alogrithm which induce this kind of suicide?

[Ironclad]

That seems more like pre-patch behaviour and so does the casualty ratio. The AI is not supposed to be making any frontal charges against ordered units and that has been my experience with post patch games which have seen the AI concentrating, flanking and using fire tactics until it can charge exposed or disordered units. I have been playing the CSA (Southern Steel, major difficulty) so haven't experienced a beta Union AI.

[ericbabe]

ORIGINAL: Whit
Currently playing an advanced game, 2nd Lt difficulty, 1.9.4 Beta installed: In late March 1862, the AI controlling the CSA invades Maryland! I meet the invasion with the entire Army of the Potomac (AOP).
The banner stated the USA had 128,00 troops and the CSA had 98,00 troops. I selected detailed battle to resolve. Being on the defensive, I tied both flanks into rivers to prevent flanking manuevers and deployed my 3 armies/10 divisions in depth (i.e. each division had 3-4 brigades up and 1-2 brigades in reserve).
The AI made frontal attacks with 8 divisions against my Army deployed in line. I was shocked at the electronic carnage! Two CSA brigades disappeared and four more attacks yielded casualties exceeding 1,600. The capper appeared with the information boxes informing me that I had killed R.E. Lee, A.P. Hill and R.S. Ewell! The overall casualty list was 23,000 with only 8,500 USA casualties.

Can someone please explain the AI alogrithm which induce this kind of suicide?

Sure, it's a knowledge system combined with minimax running a 2-ply search over a local unit-pruned subspace of the current state of the game's state space.

[Drex]

You bet Ericbabe! Whatever you said?

[jchastain]

ORIGINAL: ericbabe
Sure, it's a knowledge system combined with minimax running a 2-ply search over a local unit-pruned subspace of the current state of the game's state space.

There's your problem Eric! 2-ply searches are SOOOOOOO 2006. Everyone knows it's all about 3-ply now. No wonder your unit-pruned subspace routines are so elementary. [;)]


[Edit: On the outside chance that anyone might take the above comments seriously, let me state for the record that I have no idea what I just said but feel quite certain it made no sense to anyone who actually knows what they are talking about.]

[moose1999]

Well, I'm with Eric on this one.
I'm a 2-ply man all way through. [8D]
And you can't beat those unit-pruned subspaces - they're just to die for!

[Gil R.]

"I cannot spare a 2-ply state space. I do not have a 2-ply state space to spare."

[Erik Rutins]

"I cannot prune that subspace, it fights."

[Gray_Lensman]

ORIGINAL: Erik Rutins

"I cannot prune that subspace, it fights."

Personally, I dislike pruning, it gives me gas.