First impression

[MikeAP]

Alright...so...I just picked up the game after seeing some of the tutorial videos.

The concept of actually COMMANDING and not micromanaging was very appealing. Being a military guy, I felt like it was a realistic and appealing concept. Being a gamer, I knew that there would be some issues with AI being able to develop and execute orders.

First off...I've played the tutorial mission a dozen times, strictly following guidance from the tutorial videos. I have yet to come close to a victory - which is TOTALLY FINE. It's going to take some time. Just like Unity of Command took me a dozen or so crushing defeats before I could grasp some of the realistic aspects of the game.

Here's my biggest issue with this game:

Its title, and main marketing concept appears to be: COMMAND UNITS - NOT MICROMANAGE. Maybe I'm wrong, but this was my perception. Even the initial tutorial videos boasted a 'powerful AI' and lack of micromanagement. However, when I give my battalions order to attack, they will send in units piece-meal and usually get slaughtered.

I know that I can set all kinds of parameters for the Battalion to use in it's attack....but again, that's painful micromanagement. For example: Why can't the "powerful AI" determine that it needs to attack with 3 companies abreast, instead of sending them in column formation, piecemeal? Or, why can't my AI Battalion coordinate its own attacking companies? The powerful AI can't do its own terrain and/or enemy assessment? what is so powerful about the AI? It's certainly not tactical..

Even if I synchronize my Battalion attack plans, the AI will still develop terrible Company-level concepts....so...now I get to micromanage...not fun. Especially not fun when you hit Day 3 on the tutorial and you have 4 or 5 battalions to command. That's approximately four CO's per BN, so 20 or so Companies that you have to closely watch and manage, because the AI cannot do it, and they will get slaughtered if you don't.

Not fun, and I'd go as far to say that this game is painful to play. Add to the fact that it is not a very pretty game, and is mostly boring to watch.


Edit - Tactically speaking, the tutorial videos were on point. Whomever made them is smart on their tactics, and the concepts of time-distance analysis are crucial in real-life operations. It would be nice, however, if the AI actually followed some sort of tactical guidelines. For example, during offensive operations both American and Soviet doctrine recommends organizing forces into three elements - Support/Fix, Breach/Assault, Assault/Exploit. It would be nice if the AI was able to recognize this, and plan accordingly.

[dazkaz15]

Hi Mike

Can you post some screenshots, of examples where you feel the AI is not performing as it should?

There are some very knowledgeable people on the forum, not least the developer Dave, who regularly helps out with queries, that might be able to talk you through some of the issues you are having. As you can imagine there are a million and one different variables in this very complex game, that are working under the hood, and any one of them might be the reason you are seeing strange results from your Bn attacks.

Also which version are you using, as there has been a lot of changes since the Tutorial was made, and are still going on via the public beta testing that's ongoing on this forum.

[Arjuna]

Mike,

Thanks for the feedback.

What version/build are you running? The latest is 4.4.258. It's a public beta but its stable and incorporates the latest overhaul to the formation code.

I take your comments seriously. So I ran the tutorial and only issued five orders. Each used the default settings. Initially I issued two attacks and two defend in-situs. Later I issued a follow on attack. Check out these screen shots.

[Arjuna]

Here you see the two attacking Bns assaulting their objectives. The 51st Mech Bn is on the left and is assaulting into the edge of the covered terrain in successive lines. The 318th on the right is an inf Bn and is deployed in echelon to better protect its flank. I think these are both reasonable formation choices.

[Arjuna]

In just under five hours the 318th achieves its objective after much hard fighting against good enemy infantry in woods. The 51st had achieved its objective some time ago. Note that they are in the process of redeploying into a defensive position. Again this is what I would expect.

[MikeAP]

Gentlemen,

Thank you for the quick replies.

I purchased the game on Sunday, and my auto-updater says I'm running the latest version.

The concept of my operation is the same as the tutorial; I' using 318 IN and 51 IN to simultaneously attack, with 35 AR in reserve (they will pass through the breach (bridge) to seize the town. I'm using C/35 AR as a support by fire element on the hill. They are having weak results, at best. This is extremely frustrating. This is a TANK COMPANY, establishing a support by fire position on high ground, outside effective AT range....and they're not doing shit. They are getting constantly getting routed. Why? There is nothing that can even range them.

The biggest issue I'm having is with 318 IN. Their BN attack order is horrible. They're sending all 3 companies up the road, and each one is getting slaughtered. Additionally, they're always tired. They're tired from walking less than 1km? Tired before they even get in the fight? Weak. I tried to get them to use the concealment of the woods to the E as an axis of advance, but it was painful micromanaging the companies.

[Arjuna]

I then gave a follow up attack order to the 35th Armoured Bn. Note it has chosen left echelon because of the strong enemy in Lommersweiller on its left. I reckon that is an excellent choice of formation.

[Arjuna]

ORIGINAL: MikeAP

Gentlemen,

Thank you for the quick replies.

I purchased the game on Sunday, and my auto-updater says I'm running the latest version.

The concept of my operation is the same as the tutorial; I' using 318 IN and 51 IN to simultaneously attack, with 35 AR in reserve (they will pass through the breach (bridge) to seize the town. I'm using C/35 AR as a support by fire element on the hill. They are having weak results, at best. This is extremely frustrating. This is a TANK COMPANY, establishing a support by fire position on high ground, outside effective AT range....and they're not doing shit. They are getting constantly getting routed. Why? There is nothing that can even range them.

The biggest issue I'm having is with 318 IN. Their BN attack order is horrible. They're sending all 3 companies up the road, and each one is getting slaughtered. Additionally, they're always tired. They're tired from walking less than 1km? Tired before they even get in the fight? Weak. I tried to get them to use the concealment of the woods to the E as an axis of advance, but it was painful micromanaging the companies.

Mike,

The reason your game is reporting that you have the latest version is that we have not released the final patch #4 yet. But I do recommend you download and install the latest beta build. I believe it will address most of your concerns. I am in the process at the moment of putting out the final patch #4 build. But it will probably be another week or so before you can get it.

[wodin]

Fatigue is a big issue with the Bugle game due to the conditions. Search the forum you will see the coy issue going in one at a time was a bug..it's now fixed in beta.

[dazkaz15]

Here is how to find the latest public beta patch.

[Phoenix100]

Yep. It's a bug, Mike. You need to join the Matrix site (free) and access the members area, download patch 4.4.258.

You will still find things you don't like, of course, but if you look at Dave's shots above then you would surely agree that that is impressive AI?

[MikeAP]

Ok. Installed. Now nobody wants to attack. What am I doing wrong now?

[dazkaz15]

Looks to me like you played with the attack timings after you issued the attack order.
See here for what you can, and can't play with after issuing an attack order:

[MikeAP]

I didn't specify any times though

[BletchleyGeek]

ORIGINAL: MikeAP

I didn't specify any times though

Under some conditions the estimated time to complete an assault becomes extremely optimistic (say, 20 minutes for a Bn attack). Just check that the start and end times the AI estimates make sense. If the time frame is too narrow, just adjust the End time and it will be fine.

[MikeAP]

ORIGINAL: Bletchley_Geek

ORIGINAL: MikeAP

I didn't specify any times though

Under some conditions the estimated time to complete an assault becomes extremely optimistic (say, 20 minutes for a Bn attack). Just check that the start and end times the AI estimates make sense. If the time frame is too narrow, just adjust the End time and it will be fine.

Yep. You're right. I went back and checked, and the unit didn't have their own internal plan developed yet.

Is there an option to 'Attack when ready' or something along those lines?

[BletchleyGeek]

ORIGINAL: MikeAP
Yep. You're right. I went back and checked, and the unit didn't have their own internal plan developed yet.

Is there an option to 'Attack when ready' or something along those lines?

They should be doing that by themselves, and usually they're. This could be a problem with the routines to estimate timings before the actual plan is developed.

[dazkaz15]

I've just been checking this, and when using an assault order, the timing is automatically set to the end of scenario time so unless you play with the timings by setting something else it should be fine?

Move orders however are a different matter. They are set to how long the AI determines the move should take if all goes well, and there are no enemy on route.
If you where to then make your attack from the move order icon instead of deleting the move first then it will not re adjust the time, and you will be stuck with the move time which will obviously not be long enough.
What I do it just check that the end time is set well ahead. Sometimes days ahead jsut to make sure they don't abandon it, then click no rest as well.

This means you will have to keep an eye on fatigue levels yourself though, and rest them when appropriate.
I personally feel the timings are a bit buggy at the moment, or misunderstood.
By me at least. But there are ways around the problems as mentioned.

[dazkaz15]

Moving

[dazkaz15]

change to attack