Strategic Options and AI
Posted: Sat Jul 19, 2008 5:59 pm
I, like many of you, have dedicated countless hours to WITP, but I haven't played it in months. There are several reasons for this, 1) waiting for AE, 2) after completing a game year the situation for the AI opponent is abysmal and my progress dramatically exceeds that which was historically achieved, and 3) there isn't enough flexibility to explore other strategic options other than essentially re-fighting the war.
The various threads in this section would indicate that there have been several improvements in the AI that will inject a greater degree of realism and in the process make the outcomes more realistic. The one that most interests me is the land AI. I generally like to explore the option of a more aggressive campaign in China and India. Now, I am not trying to generate a discussion on the constraints the Japanese faced, which influenced them in not attempting anything other than what thy did historically. Rather, I think that the game should give the player some strategic options with enough AI capability to enable the game to be challenging without skewing the algorithms to make it appear challenging.
Some things that could be done are:
1) Make several Western map edge cities off limits to Japanese ground attack. These cities would represent more than a city, they would represent the vast areas to the West that the Japanese could not physically get to. They would also serve as staging areas for allied forces to begin counter-offensives when their force levels were sufficient.
2) Give the Japanese a strategy option menu where they could spend a number of victory points to activate certain "what if" options, e.g., more aggressive ASW technology research, more aggressive aircraft technology research, improved pilot training program, etc.
3) More mission assignment options. I don't mean more mission types; I mean more ways to perform existing missions. Most notably, submarines could have mission options. If I am the U.S. player and I know that the Japanese are going to dedicate hundreds of bombers and surface ships to ASW/convoy defense, I don't want to use the standard U.S. strategy. I may task some subs to patrol aggressively for convoys and cautiously for task groups. Maybe there should be a wolf pack option for the U.S. to counteract an aggressive convoy program.
4) Japanese garrison requirements for captured territory.
The various threads in this section would indicate that there have been several improvements in the AI that will inject a greater degree of realism and in the process make the outcomes more realistic. The one that most interests me is the land AI. I generally like to explore the option of a more aggressive campaign in China and India. Now, I am not trying to generate a discussion on the constraints the Japanese faced, which influenced them in not attempting anything other than what thy did historically. Rather, I think that the game should give the player some strategic options with enough AI capability to enable the game to be challenging without skewing the algorithms to make it appear challenging.
Some things that could be done are:
1) Make several Western map edge cities off limits to Japanese ground attack. These cities would represent more than a city, they would represent the vast areas to the West that the Japanese could not physically get to. They would also serve as staging areas for allied forces to begin counter-offensives when their force levels were sufficient.
2) Give the Japanese a strategy option menu where they could spend a number of victory points to activate certain "what if" options, e.g., more aggressive ASW technology research, more aggressive aircraft technology research, improved pilot training program, etc.
3) More mission assignment options. I don't mean more mission types; I mean more ways to perform existing missions. Most notably, submarines could have mission options. If I am the U.S. player and I know that the Japanese are going to dedicate hundreds of bombers and surface ships to ASW/convoy defense, I don't want to use the standard U.S. strategy. I may task some subs to patrol aggressively for convoys and cautiously for task groups. Maybe there should be a wolf pack option for the U.S. to counteract an aggressive convoy program.
4) Japanese garrison requirements for captured territory.