Matrix Games Forums

I would like to know how AI problem is resolved in UV.
I've noticed recently that AI has information how many planes covers tasks forces. So if you put your carriers one hex near enemy TF and other small TF few hexes away, AI will go after that second TF leaving carriers alone. I wonder if AI has info about mission assigned, eg if you set bombers to attack it would attack carriers in mentioned situation. It is "a little bit" annoying - when I repeated my experiment with just one carrier TF, AI responded moving its TF twice towards mine but didn't attack.
Unfortunately it doesn't work both ways - AI on players side is dumber than year old baby. When I assign TF to Nagumo or others I expect to act reasonably and predictably - after all those guys served many years and had great experience. I can make mistakes not assigning enough air cover, but if carrier TF responds by approaching toward enemy TF i expect that TF leader is going to scramble some planes for protection (i don't even require him to attack enemy TF). After all it was his decission to act aggressively.
The same with target selection. Computer AI always assignes escort for raids attacking enemy carrier TF. Player TF is more that happy to send 100 fighters escorting few bombers to attack life boat and 100 bombers without protection to attack carriers. It also loves overusing resources - I can't really imagine 100 planes bombing minesweaper over and over again. If there is enemy carrier TF nearby none captain would devide his forces to attack insignificant targets at the same time.
All those AI problems make the game irritating. I really can't imagine playing WiTP - huge scale, and much more risk of "crazy behaviour".
The developers should put more attention to AI. I don't think comp AI should have any advantage other player AI. I am not game programmer but to create few strategies for AI shouldn't be such a problem (eg target priority, if in danger with no CAP assigned assign default CAP and so on). All in all such strategies exist on comp AI side.

Hello...

There is no computer opponent AI vs. player AI. They both use the same set of routines. These routines do not know or care who controls the units.

Bye...

Michael Wood
___________________________________________________

Originally posted by mrbungle
...The developers should put more attention to AI. I don't think comp AI should have any advantage other player AI. I am not game programmer but to create few strategies for AI shouldn't be such a problem (eg target priority, if in danger with no CAP assigned assign default CAP and so on). All in all such strategies exist on comp AI side.

Originally posted by mrbungle
I would like to know how AI problem is resolved in UV.
I've noticed recently that AI has information how many planes covers tasks forces. So if you put your carriers one hex near enemy TF and other small TF few hexes away, AI will go after that second TF leaving carriers alone. I wonder if AI has info about mission assigned, eg if you set bombers to attack it would attack carriers in mentioned situation. It is "a little bit" annoying - when I repeated my experiment with just one carrier TF, AI responded moving its TF twice towards mine but didn't attack.
Unfortunately it doesn't work both ways - AI on players side is dumber than year old baby. When I assign TF to Nagumo or others I expect to act reasonably and predictably - after all those guys served many years and had great experience. I can make mistakes not assigning enough air cover, but if carrier TF responds by approaching toward enemy TF i expect that TF leader is going to scramble some planes for protection (i don't even require him to attack enemy TF). After all it was his decission to act aggressively.
The same with target selection. Computer AI always assignes escort for raids attacking enemy carrier TF. Player TF is more that happy to send 100 fighters escorting few bombers to attack life boat and 100 bombers without protection to attack carriers. It also loves overusing resources - I can't really imagine 100 planes bombing minesweaper over and over again. If there is enemy carrier TF nearby none captain would devide his forces to attack insignificant targets at the same time.
All those AI problems make the game irritating. I really can't imagine playing WiTP - huge scale, and much more risk of "crazy behaviour".
The developers should put more attention to AI. I don't think comp AI should have any advantage other player AI. I am not game programmer but to create few strategies for AI shouldn't be such a problem (eg target priority, if in danger with no CAP assigned assign default CAP and so on). All in all such strategies exist on comp AI side.

Forget the Ai and go PBEM. that way you have a real person to cuss at and can really learn the game.

Originally posted by Drex
Forget the Ai and go PBEM. that way you have a real person to cuss at and can really learn the game.

Just don't forget, old pal, that the AI is always working "for" you, too, even when there's a human on the other end.

And it sux.

Originally posted by pasternakski
Just don't forget, old pal, that the AI is always working "for" you, too, even when there's a human on the other end.

And it sux.

Young pal,I didn't realize you were an apologist for the AI. God knows it needs one.

Originally posted by Drex
Young pal,I didn't realize you were an apologist for the AI. God knows it needs one.

I refer to it as the "artificial stupidity." A lot of the "bugs" people complain about in connection with target selection and such are just idiotic decisions by your built-in "subordinate commanders."

The only way to play UV is to micromanage as much as possible and leave as little as possible up to the coding. For example, NEVER leave submarines on computer control. It's still frustrating to watch what happens to your ships and planes despite your best efforts, though. Nothing like moving B-25Js into newly-captured Lae, setting them on naval attack, then watching your air ops controller send them unescorted against a couple of AGs at Rabaul, where they get massacred by Zekes. Even when Zeke isn't around, your groups lose morale, gain fatigue, and suffer operations and AA losses, so that when a real target shows up, you can't use them.

I gave up computer control of subs some time ago. The way I look at it the problems with the AI are sufferred by both sides and therefor are equalized somewhat. Although I don't remember seeing Bettys do the search-attack routine.