Matrix Games Forums

I'm considering to buy this game for the upcoming holiday season.

How is the AI...I mean is it at least somehow dynamic...so if you replay a scenario does it change its tactic etc?

Thanks.

It's ok to learn the ropes against.
However it does have suicidal tendancies with unescorted invasion task forces.

I have also taken bases where at least 5 squadrons have become destroyed on the ground.

Plus the AI has only 4000AV in Mancukuo instead of 8000AV and yet the Soviets do not become active so i guess the AI cheats a bit.

ORIGINAL: hawkeye_de

I'm considering to buy this game for the upcoming holiday season.

How is the AI...I mean is it at least somehow dynamic...so if you replay a scenario does it change its tactic etc?

Thanks.

The Ai is pretty interesting, its a VAST improvement then what WITP had, in your situation learning the game the AI is a great tool to get going, start out with a small scenario then upgrade to a full campaign. The AI has a set of scenario Goals, different areas mean different tasks. The AI will expand beyond historical game play, meaning just because you think you are secure, you really arn't.

Once you become an experienced player and start "beating" the AI, then Its time to throw some gloves on and test out the PBEM.

ORIGINAL: hawkeye_de

I'm considering to buy this game for the upcoming holiday season.

How is the AI...I mean is it at least somehow dynamic...so if you replay a scenario does it change its tactic etc?

Thanks.

The AI does a decent job, quite well, given the very complex task given to it and the limited resources available. It isn't perfect and occasionally makes a mistake, with many preferring head to head, but overall it functions quite well. There are around 14 AI scripts for each scenario, if I recall correctly, with one picked randomly at the start of the game. Meaning each time you start a new game, you are likely to be facing an AI that will behave differently, with a different set of objectives and timetable to achieve them.

Playing a whole campaign takes a lot of time (several months for sure, several years in most cases, I believe), and that the situation changes a lot over time (each side being overwhelming and overwhelmed at different stages of the campaign). As such, so long you don't go on replaying the first month over and over, the game would appear varied, even if the AI never changed its scripts.

Also, since the game is very complex, when you start playing, you mostly play against yourself, in the sense that you need a long time to use the system correctly. Quite a while will pass before you get "too used" to the AI.

In my opinion, people PBEM not just because the AI is not good, but because there is a thrill of playing against someone else. Same as in chess, in fact, where a real opponent is often preferred to a machine, which generally plays better...

Francois

I think the AI is good enough is fun. I like the historical aspects of game so it is more than fun to me.

PBEM is ok if you have endless patience. Some games only go a few turns to a dozen turns a week on average.

The different scenarios also beef up the AI like Iron Man which is a good one. The scenarios are so long that replay is not much of an issue. The players options are endless, invade from the North Central South SW Asia or all of them. As Japan the industry is tricky but still you have open options on how to play the game.

When playing the AI you have to control yourself and play within "reasonably historical" limits.

I'm playing a game now and have had some interesting (not all good) moves

The AI is a good learning tool and can be fun in the absence of a real opponent.  It has two failings you must keep in mind.  One, as someone mentioned, is that it plays best against fairly "standard historical" moves.  Get "wild and wooly" and it gets confused.  Secondly, the longer into the game you go, the more predictable and stupid it becomes.  It runs on "scripts", and no one could ever write enough "scripts" to deal with the situations which arise as a game this complex continues.

Compared to the AI in WITP(stock), the AI in AE is 20 times better and seems to be intuitive in its' decisions..

In past I could take an island and never see another Japanese force till I met him further north, but this AI seems bent on retaking old turf in places, and will commence agressive campaign beyond the first six months of the war!

I play AI exclusively due to time constraints and feel a lot more comfortable feeling I will get a challenge with this game I never felt with WITP(stock) after 1943..

ORIGINAL: m10bob

Compared to the AI in WITP(stock), the AI in AE is 20 times better and seems to be intuitive in its' decisions..

In past I could take an island and never see another Japanese force till I met him further north, but this AI seems bent on retaking old turf in places, and will commence agressive campaign beyond the first six months of the war!

I play AI exclusively due to time constraints and feel a lot more comfortable feeling I will get a challenge with this game I never felt with WITP(stock) after 1943..

Against the AI and the new logistics models I've just had to abandon Darwin in Dec 1942 due to inability to get supplies in and keep a CAP up. I waited too long to pull out and lost 2 BBs in the retreat. I've had to truck-move all my planes back to Katherine, and the AI is STILL sending deep-strike Betties there to bomb them on the ground. Katherine has no supply either. (OK, it has 6.)

The AI may do some "dumb" things, but it does keep coming, and coming, and coming. I'm focusing on an historical Solomons campaign, and it's fighting like crazy for Tulagi and Tassafaronga. I'm haivng a devil of a time keeping any fuel at Espiritu Santo, enough to get my surface TFs up to the invasion sites to stop the Musashi raids down from Rabaul. The outcome is in some doubt.

The AI gets a lot more air power than historical, and it uses it. I will win this game. but it's no cakewalk so far.

If you are going to play against a Japanese AI I do suggest either scenario 2, or the 'Ironman' scenario since both of these give the Japanese side a lot more assets to work with, thus keeping the AI in the fight and challenging a bit longer.

ORIGINAL: Shark7

If you are going to play against a Japanese AI I do suggest either scenario 2, or the 'Ironman' scenario since both of these give the Japanese side a lot more assets to work with, thus keeping the AI in the fight and challenging a bit longer.

I'm playing Scen 2. It has so many planes it's ridiculous. I get 45 Betty/55 fighter raids and I can get up maybe 10 mixed model fighters. I hate 1942 . . .

OTOH, in two weeks I get the Great Torpedo Healing, and I will "Cry, 'Havoc!' and let slip the dogs of war."

And play it on very hard. It might be challenging as the AI gets benefits but it is worth it to learn the game. Especially that the AI gets always a preparation of 100 is worth it. So no easy capturing of some islands and no easy defense against the AI.

ORIGINAL: beppi

And play it on very hard. It might be challenging as the AI gets benefits but it is worth it to learn the game. Especially that the AI gets always a preparation of 100 is worth it. So no easy capturing of some islands and no easy defense against the AI.

My impression, from WITP days, is that in Very Hard the AI essentially does not use or need supplies. The only way to take its bases is overwhelming force. More subtle tactics to sever supply lines aren't there. I find this boring and unweildy as it negates the Allies' increasing superiority in strategic mobility as well as pretty much the whole submarine campaign. If I want toe-toe fighting every day I'll play an Eastern Front game.

No question though that Very Hard slows down the Allied come back.

I am in mid-November '42 as the Allies against the Japanese AI.

The AI is a wonderful training tool for future PBEM, and it is a lot of fun in its own right. As others have stated, it is an order of magnitude more sophisticated than the original WITP AI.

The only issues I have seen with the AI is that the digital Japanese commander doesn't know when to call it quits. I have followed a fairly standard Allied strategy, and the Japanese AI has focused laser-like on Canton Is and especially Port Blair (which I strongly reinforced before knowing the AI would be interested in it).

Over the last few game-months, I'd estimate the Japanese have lost three+ divisions with all transports on the beaches of Port Blair -- it would really be a grand artifical reef for decades to come!

Other than that, the AI has done a good job of offering a challenge and attacking/defending in a reasonable sort of way.

Regards,
Feltan

Don't forget you can alter AI difficulty toVery Hard for a few turns to help the AI out then drop it back again a good way of giving a modest boost wihtout playing all the time at that level

ORIGINAL: Feltan

I am in mid-November '42 as the Allies against the Japanese AI.

The AI is a wonderful training tool for future PBEM, and it is a lot of fun in its own right. As others have stated, it is an order of magnitude more sophisticated than the original WITP AI.

The only issues I have seen with the AI is that the digital Japanese commander doesn't know when to call it quits. I have followed a fairly standard Allied strategy, and the Japanese AI has focused laser-like on Canton Is and especially Port Blair (which I strongly reinforced before knowing the AI would be interested in it).

Over the last few game-months, I'd estimate the Japanese have lost three+ divisions with all transports on the beaches of Port Blair -- it would really be a grand artifical reef for decades to come!

Other than that, the AI has done a good job of offering a challenge and attacking/defending in a reasonable sort of way.

Regards,
Feltan

In my first game I got these scripts re Baker and Canton, plus Midway Island raids. In this game, I have not. OTOH, I've gotten action around Oz I didn't see in the first run through, as well as very, very aggressive IJN carrier usage around the Solomons.

Port Blair has been in contention both times. The AI REALLY wants it, and I can see why, given its location and huge airfield. In both games I garrissoned it well from the get-go, but it's costly to get supplies in, as TFs have to take an extra day to negotiate the reefs, and the LBA from Burma and Thailand is murderous. I've used the RN carriers when I really had to get supplies in, but Hermes is in drydock for 155 days right now as a result. The IJA has two full divisions and a Guard Force ashore, and I have one British Division and about seven support units behind Forts 5, headed for 6, and 8000 supply. If it falls it will be a big hit to the region. OTOH, 8000 supply isn't going to get the job done, and I've lost a lot of xAKs keeping the lights on.

I know a lot of PBEM players sneer at the AI, but it gives a good game which forces hard choices.

ORIGINAL: Andy Mac

Don't forget you can alter AI difficulty toVery Hard for a few turns to help the AI out then drop it back again a good way of giving a modest boost wihtout playing all the time at that level

Good tip. Thanks, Andy.

You can also, if you don't mind giving up FOW for a time, switch sides and play the Japanese for a month or so.

ORIGINAL: Andy Mac

Don't forget you can alter AI difficulty toVery Hard for a few turns to help the AI out then drop it back again a good way of giving a modest boost wihtout playing all the time at that level

WOW! Wonderful tip!

With regard to assisting the AI, do you have any others?

For instance, take over the AI side--via hot-seat solitaire (else switch sides)--at crucial moments for a few days or weeks (or even longer), then revert to human vs. AI as before.

(That would dispel the Fog of War, however and obviously, thus might spoil the overall fun. Unless one were careful to focus just on fixing the critical "broken" areas of AI operation and ignore, leave on autopilot, other less vital theaters during the temporary switchover.)

EDIT: Oops, while I was composing the above, Bullwinkle58 beat me to it!

The main one would be play Ironman or Scen 2 apart from that.

The AI WILL make more mistakes than a human player Ironman is designed to give it the redundancy to take those losses and keep on slugging.

The only other tip is to have a friend peek and run a couple of turns as Japan every now and then.

(I will do it as well if folks need it)

i.e. every 6 - 18 months or so let someone have 2 - 3 days with your game in that time they can do things like alter upgrade paths via PDU on to more relevant types and rescur the odd stuck LCU or sqn of aircraft.

An occasional health check infrequently can make a big difference to the AI and only takes 20 minutes to do - as I said I am happy to do that for folks as I learn about the AI when doing it as well.

I am also working an an Ironman only new script to put into the rotation that will be ultra aggressive I mean seriously nasty but it will be Ironman only - it will take me about 2 - 3 more weeks to finalise and test.
Andy