AI for MWiF-Italy

A forum for the discussion of the World in Flames AI Opponent.

Moderator: Shannon V. OKeets

Post Reply
hakon
Posts: 298
Joined: Fri Apr 15, 2005 12:55 pm

RE: AI for MWiF-Italy

Post by hakon »

ORIGINAL: Froonp

Well, you tell me that "Italy should have her entire original force pool of land units available", but you don't built it (you only have 11 BP for that in 39-40 with your built schedule, unless I made mistakes in my counts), so you can't have 2 units in each factory, and can't ZoC each invasion site. There can't be any MECH, except the setup one, because you only have 11 BP for that. Well, there can be 2 of them, right, but this mean that there is only 1 BP for the whole rest of the 1939 & 1940 years to built. Moreover, if you promise to cross the Urals to the Italian, you'll need every German unit that you can spare, both to push through the Red Army, and to garrison your previous conquests. I don't see how you can both crush the Russian and defend Italy with only Germans units.

All this leads me to say that we do not play the same game.

Of course Italy can be conquered in 1941, if she makes mistakes. I dont like making that kind of mistakes.

Italy starts with about enough units to put 1 in each coastal factory city. So 5-6 more are needed to have 2 in each, 4 of these come from Africa. Another 7-8 are needed to put 1 unit it every dangerous minor port as well as in rome + Milan. The mech may go into sicily, and I tend to build a mech div to be able to call blitz in the north. (The div will typically be built in may/june 41). Graziani often stays in France at this point, but he (along with a German HQ if needed) will rail into Italy if there is an invasion, while the land units already there will help contain the invasion force until it can be blitzed back to sea. (Provided of course, that it doesnt land in a hex that can be easily dislodged.
User avatar
Froonp
Posts: 7998
Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 8:23 pm
Location: Marseilles, France
Contact:

RE: AI for MWiF-Italy

Post by Froonp »

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets
ORIGINAL: Froonp
Moreover, I'd add that those kind of games seem more enjoyable in my opinion, because everyone gets to play and enjoy at one moment or the other, not only the German or the CW. In the games you describe, I'm not sure that the Russian enjoys it very much.

Finaly, I'd conclude that you are playing against RAW (by having an Axis players match that is not recommended, and house ruling out of the game one of the strategies -- the stuff -- which I would surely agree upon, because I also hate it [;)]), and that the result may be a game where not all players enjoy the experience.

Hey, how does the Russian player feel about those kinds of games [;)] ?
I doubt that the AI Opponent will feel very much of anything.
But how would the human player who choose to play Russia alone vs. the AI would feel if he discovered that the AI always team up Germany + Italy against Russia, because this-was-never-beaten ?

Moreover, the AI has to comply with RAW, and RAW does not recommend having the same player playing Italy & Germany.
Shannon V. OKeets
Posts: 22165
Joined: Wed May 18, 2005 11:51 pm
Location: Honolulu, Hawaii
Contact:

RE: AI for MWiF-Italy

Post by Shannon V. OKeets »

ORIGINAL: Froonp
ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets
ORIGINAL: Froonp
Moreover, I'd add that those kind of games seem more enjoyable in my opinion, because everyone gets to play and enjoy at one moment or the other, not only the German or the CW. In the games you describe, I'm not sure that the Russian enjoys it very much.

Finaly, I'd conclude that you are playing against RAW (by having an Axis players match that is not recommended, and house ruling out of the game one of the strategies -- the stuff -- which I would surely agree upon, because I also hate it [;)]), and that the result may be a game where not all players enjoy the experience.

Hey, how does the Russian player feel about those kinds of games [;)] ?
I doubt that the AI Opponent will feel very much of anything.
But how would the human player who choose to play Russia alone vs. the AI would feel if he discovered that the AI always team up Germany + Italy against Russia, because this-was-never-beaten ?

Moreover, the AI has to comply with RAW, and RAW does not recommend having the same player playing Italy & Germany.
I find all this discussion very helpful in formualting possible AIO strategic plans for Italy. Which one is chosen and the frequency with which each is chosen remains to be seen. Having the AIO always choose the same strategic plan would be really boring, so that won't happen (even for China).
Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.
wosung
Posts: 610
Joined: Mon Jul 18, 2005 8:31 am

RE: AI for MWiF-Italy

Post by wosung »

But please, don't let the Axis and the Allies AIO act like the Borg.

Each of them should have its' own targets. Don't overdo AIO team-playing

I think Patrice is absolutely right here.

Regards
wosung
User avatar
Froonp
Posts: 7998
Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 8:23 pm
Location: Marseilles, France
Contact:

RE: AI for MWiF-Italy

Post by Froonp »

ORIGINAL: wosung

But please, don't let the Axis and the Allies AIO act like the Borg.

Each of them should have its' own targets. Don't overdo AIO team-playing

I think Patrice is absolutely right here.

Regards
Wow [X(] [X(] [X(] Someone who does not disagree with me !!!!!
User avatar
Froonp
Posts: 7998
Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 8:23 pm
Location: Marseilles, France
Contact:

RE: AI for MWiF-Italy

Post by Froonp »

ORIGINAL: wosung
Each of them should have its' own targets. Don't overdo AIO team-playing
While I agree with what wosung wrote, obviously, let me also stress that team play is important in WiF FE.
There is no victory possible, for no one, without team play.

We just need to reach the correct mix of team playing.
wosung
Posts: 610
Joined: Mon Jul 18, 2005 8:31 am

RE: AI for MWiF-Italy

Post by wosung »

No no no, you're wrong on that [:-]

I'm sure it's not only me.

There should be others as well, who agree with you [:D]
wosung
wosung
Posts: 610
Joined: Mon Jul 18, 2005 8:31 am

RE: AI for MWiF-Italy

Post by wosung »

BTW: Nobody else interested in some sort of interface for inter-alliance negotiations, at least for dealing with the AIO??

Nobody here without totalitarian team-play discipline [&:]
wosung
Shannon V. OKeets
Posts: 22165
Joined: Wed May 18, 2005 11:51 pm
Location: Honolulu, Hawaii
Contact:

RE: AI for MWiF-Italy

Post by Shannon V. OKeets »

ORIGINAL: Froonp
ORIGINAL: wosung
Each of them should have its' own targets. Don't overdo AIO team-playing
While I agree with what wosung wrote, obviously, let me also stress that team play is important in WiF FE.
There is no victory possible, for no one, without team play.

We just need to reach the correct mix of team playing.
I believe I have been both consistent and clear on this. Each AIO for a major power will operate independently. There is provision for specific decision makers within each major power's AIO to provide communication to other AIOs on the same side (Foreign Liaisons). This goes beyond mere trade agreements and lend lease, to include sharing of all the other elements in the game (victory cities, resources, units, etc.). I also expect there to be a dominant major power for each side within a theater of operations (e.g., Europe and Pacific) with the other AIOs that are involved in that theater following the lead of the dominant major power AIO. Germany in Europe, Japan in the Pacific. CW in Europe and Pacific until the US enters the war. Then the US takes over the Pacific, and maybe eventually Europe too. The non-dominant AIOs will not be slave states, neither will they operate with complete disregard of what the dominant AIO is doing/planning.
Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.
wosung
Posts: 610
Joined: Mon Jul 18, 2005 8:31 am

RE: AI for MWiF-Italy

Post by wosung »

Yes Steve, I perfectly understood this.

But my main point for inter-alliance negotiations was another one:

(How) does a human player communicate with his AIO allies?

If a human player just wants to play Italy, how does he strategically interact with German AIO?

Or take human CW and US AIO. Now what about D-Day???

Regards
wosung
Shannon V. OKeets
Posts: 22165
Joined: Wed May 18, 2005 11:51 pm
Location: Honolulu, Hawaii
Contact:

RE: AI for MWiF-Italy

Post by Shannon V. OKeets »

ORIGINAL: wosung
Yes Steve, I perfectly understood this.

But my main point for inter-alliance negotiations was another one:

(How) does a human player communicate with his AIO allies?

If a human player just wants to play Italy, how does he strategically interact with German AIO?

Or take human CW and US AIO. Now what about D-Day???

Regards
Well, if the AI is on the human player's side, then it is an AIA (assistant) not an AIO (opponent). I make this distinction because there will be different code for these 2 roles. I do not have any specific plans for including an AIA with MWIF product 1, other than what is required for PBEM. The PBEM design calls for the AIA acting on a player's behalf by following "Standing Orders". Most of the standing orders relate to air movement and combat, but not exclusively. Basically, they are the decisions a player make as the non-phasing player (e.g., combat casualties, choice of combat tables, interceptions, and so on). Altogether there are over 2 dozen Standing Orders.

To support standing orders, the program will contain a player interface where the human player decides in advance how he wants these decisions made. Over the course of a game, that will save thousands of emails.

If you simply review the discussion in this thread over the last couple of days, you will see that negotiations between 2 major powers can involve numerous details. Building a system for storing all those details and a player interface to support human-AIA negotiation would be a lot of work.
Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.
po8crg
Posts: 15
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 2004 2:21 am
Contact:

RE: AI for MWiF-Italy

Post by po8crg »

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

Well, if the AI is on the human player's side, then it is an AIA (assistant) not an AIO (opponent). I make this distinction because there will be different code for these 2 roles. I do not have any specific plans for including an AIA with MWIF product 1, other than what is required for PBEM. The PBEM design calls for the AIA acting on a player's behalf by following "Standing Orders".

If you simply review the discussion in this thread over the last couple of days, you will see that negotiations between 2 major powers can involve numerous details. Building a system for storing all those details and a player interface to support human-AIA negotiation would be a lot of work.

Whoa, back up a bit.

Does that mean that it will be impossible to play only part of the Allies/Axis with human players?

Does that mean that if a human goes missing in a multi-player game, his country can't be handed over to the AI?
Shannon V. OKeets
Posts: 22165
Joined: Wed May 18, 2005 11:51 pm
Location: Honolulu, Hawaii
Contact:

RE: AI for MWiF-Italy

Post by Shannon V. OKeets »

ORIGINAL: po8crg
ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

Well, if the AI is on the human player's side, then it is an AIA (assistant) not an AIO (opponent). I make this distinction because there will be different code for these 2 roles. I do not have any specific plans for including an AIA with MWIF product 1, other than what is required for PBEM. The PBEM design calls for the AIA acting on a player's behalf by following "Standing Orders".

If you simply review the discussion in this thread over the last couple of days, you will see that negotiations between 2 major powers can involve numerous details. Building a system for storing all those details and a player interface to support human-AIA negotiation would be a lot of work.

Whoa, back up a bit.

Does that mean that it will be impossible to play only part of the Allies/Axis with human players?

Does that mean that if a human goes missing in a multi-player game, his country can't be handed over to the AI?
Yes to both.

2 of the scenarios are limited to half the world: Europe/Pacific. So if you just want to play one theater of operations and not the other, that's easy. For example, just Japan or just Germany/Italy. If you play the Allied side in the Pacific, you only get part of the forces for: USSR, USA, and CW. These are all part of the WIF FE scenarios, and the rules for all of this are taken straight from WIF FE Rules As Written (RAW).

You could substitute a 'new' player if one "goes missing", which includes assigning the missing major power to a player already in the game.

This is not that I think having the AIA co-command a side is a bad thing. It is just a lot of work to enable.
Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.
po8crg
Posts: 15
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 2004 2:21 am
Contact:

RE: AI for MWiF-Italy

Post by po8crg »

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets


This is not that I think having the AIA co-command a side is a bad thing. It is just a lot of work to enable.

OK, that's fine, just not what I had anticipated. I think a lot of the discussions on many of the other AI threads have had the same misconception as I did.
trees
Posts: 175
Joined: Sun May 28, 2006 7:30 pm
Contact:

RE: AI for MWiF-Italy

Post by trees »

Playing without the rules for breaking the Pact is a completely different game. In RaW WiF you couldn't break the Nazi-Soviet Pact with such massive lending to Italy unless the Russians let you. So one counter-strategy is to go back to playing RaW. Another counter-strategy to such a kitchen-sink plus bathroom-sink Barbarossa is to simply run like hell, forgetting any idea of a line on the Dnepr, leaving Garrison and Militia caltrops all over the place covering factory movements while never ever letting the Russian mechanized forces come within range of very good Axis bombers until you get to the passes in the Caucausus mountains, the swamps south of Archangelsk or it's impregnable off-map box, and the Volga River, while the Red Air Force flies only re-base missions backwards, except when occasionally covering the tanks against any deep Axis LND-3 raids in late June and August. Swallow your pride and forget the flanks of Moscow, leave it to the Moscow MIL and 1st Siberian Army stiffened with engineer detachments to fight to the last tractor lathe as Fortress Rostov, Fortress Sevastopol, and Fortress Leningrad do the same against a Germany bereft of Offensive Chits or Infantry masses; Hitler will promote a political general who rolls a couple 3's in land combat eventually. And have someone with more time than I this evening harvest the Russian tangents in this thread for the Russian thread sometime. And send the Royal Marines, British Parachute Corps, and Army Group Alexander plus Sandhurst's best Tommy formations down the ramps of a couple of AMPHS and into a very weakly defended Italian boot landing right on top of junk Axis units thanks to very offensive unlimited ammunition chit requisitons, under massive RAF cover from air-base Albania as the never-tested Royal Navy at the peak of it's strength dominates the seas covering the Royal Anti-Tank Artillery, Royal Engineers, the pick of the Commonwealth Infantry and Tankforce Wavell's follow-on forces, forcing Balbo's vultures to start worrying about their nest and the CV-laced Yankee armada on the horizon while the Lancasters start threatening to reduce the Wehrmacht's hometowns to rubble.
plant trees
Shannon V. OKeets
Posts: 22165
Joined: Wed May 18, 2005 11:51 pm
Location: Honolulu, Hawaii
Contact:

RE: AI for MWiF-Italy

Post by Shannon V. OKeets »

ORIGINAL: trees
Playing without the rules for breaking the Pact is a completely different game. In RaW WiF you couldn't break the Nazi-Soviet Pact with such massive lending to Italy unless the Russians let you. So one counter-strategy is to go back to playing RaW. Another counter-strategy to such a kitchen-sink plus bathroom-sink Barbarossa is to simply run like hell, forgetting any idea of a line on the Dnepr, leaving Garrison and Militia caltrops all over the place covering factory movements while never ever letting the Russian mechanized forces come within range of very good Axis bombers until you get to the passes in the Caucausus mountains, the swamps south of Archangelsk or it's impregnable off-map box, and the Volga River, while the Red Air Force flies only re-base missions backwards, except when occasionally covering the tanks against any deep Axis LND-3 raids in late June and August. Swallow your pride and forget the flanks of Moscow, leave it to the Moscow MIL and 1st Siberian Army stiffened with engineer detachments to fight to the last tractor lathe as Fortress Rostov, Fortress Sevastopol, and Fortress Leningrad do the same against a Germany bereft of Offensive Chits or Infantry masses; Hitler will promote a political general who rolls a couple 3's in land combat eventually. And have someone with more time than I this evening harvest the Russian tangents in this thread for the Russian thread sometime. And send the Royal Marines, British Parachute Corps, and Army Group Alexander plus Sandhurst's best Tommy formations down the ramps of a couple of AMPHS and into a very weakly defended Italian boot landing right on top of junk Axis units thanks to very offensive unlimited ammunition chit requisitons, under massive RAF cover from air-base Albania as the never-tested Royal Navy at the peak of it's strength dominates the seas covering the Royal Anti-Tank Artillery, Royal Engineers, the pick of the Commonwealth Infantry and Tankforce Wavell's follow-on forces, forcing Balbo's vultures to start worrying about their nest and the CV-laced Yankee armada on the horizon while the Lancasters start threatening to reduce the Wehrmacht's hometowns to rubble.
While not necessarily agreeing with all of this, it is in the spirit of my philosophy about WIF. Any movement towards an extreme (e.g., throwing the kitchen sink against the Russians), leaves a deadly riposte available to the opposing side. If the Axis wants to put everything into attacking the USSR, then gaping holes should be available in numerous other places. The AIO will assess the balance of power in terms of relative air, land, and naval forces (just a few examples) and look to exploit advantages when they present themselves. Comparably, it will seek to minimize losses when at a distinct disadvantage. I believe WIF is a robust enough design to prevent any one strategy guaranteeing success.
Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.
trees
Posts: 175
Joined: Sun May 28, 2006 7:30 pm
Contact:

RE: AI for MWiF-Italy

Post by trees »

Yep, whatever product Ronco makes can be eaten by the Ronco Product Destroyer, which can of course be gotten rid of by the Ronco Product Destroyer Destroyer. (old SCTV reference).

I think elsewhere I suggested that the CW might want to be ready to go with a big CP life-line to Russia rather than such nifty offensive units and a CW O-Chit has been suggested by some players but I have never built one that early. But going for the direct approach on the Italian mainland is probably more fun gaming. And good Russian strategy is to run, run, run away, especially from that clear terrain in Stuka range, river line or not. Russia sitting on the Kalmyk Steppes with four stacks of MECH/ARM, Zhukov (hmm now where did I put that O-Chit Harry gave me, the flank of the German Turkish dream appears to be right in front of me), and some FTRs doesn't look as tough as it still is facing a spread-out German army with a lot of left-over chaos in it's rear. What matters is if the Russians got their factories out but I'm typing in the wrong thread again.

I hope the AI is a gambler on occasion though. The great thing about all-out Barbarossa is that it is fun, and it can work. At least the AI's morale will never break.

An Italian/Axis strategy I like is to borrow some German units to go for French North Africa in 1940 (likely getting stuck in the Moroccan/Algerian border mountains eventually), go conservatively slow in France, take everything in the Med except Gibraltar, wall that off with Me-110's, the Italian NAV forces and any other Axis FTR's with some range also with Frogmen ready to pounce on any lift appearing in the only Allied base in the Med, take the Middle East, maintain pressure in the Atlantic, and then advance in Russia in 1942 far enough to take and hold Minsk, Kiev and Leningrad (via O-chit) to hold their production multiples down for as long as possible while the Axis economy wanes and enjoys emptying it's force pools after low to moderate casualties and a possibly bloodied CW that must re-build for a while from such long run-on sentences.


edit: errr, that should be Axis economy _waxes_, possibly outbuilding the Allies for some additional time than normal thanks to the Iraqi/Persian crude
plant trees
trees
Posts: 175
Joined: Sun May 28, 2006 7:30 pm
Contact:

RE: AI for MWiF-Italy

Post by trees »

I thought I posted this this morning on my way out the door, but RaW does support the same player controlling Italy and Germany ... in a 2 person game. It's probably somewhat rare for people to play WiF against a single opponent but in the middle of nowhere where I live I feel extremely lucky to have a WiF opponent only 2.5 hours away. A 2 player game is quite different naturally and if you have never tried one, well, AI games will essentially be 2 player games and with MWiF a lot more people will see the differences to your average 5-6 player game.
plant trees
User avatar
Froonp
Posts: 7998
Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 8:23 pm
Location: Marseilles, France
Contact:

RE: AI for MWiF-Italy

Post by Froonp »

ORIGINAL: trees

I thought I posted this this morning on my way out the door, but RaW does support the same player controlling Italy and Germany ... in a 2 person game. It's probably somewhat rare for people to play WiF against a single opponent but in the middle of nowhere where I live I feel extremely lucky to have a WiF opponent only 2.5 hours away. A 2 player game is quite different naturally and if you have never tried one, well, AI games will essentially be 2 player games and with MWiF a lot more people will see the differences to your average 5-6 player game.
It supports it in 2 & 3 players games, because the system is FORCED to support it.
I played 3-4 of 2-3 players games.
If it was a recommended team, it would still be there in 4 and 5 players variations. It is not.
trees
Posts: 175
Joined: Sun May 28, 2006 7:30 pm
Contact:

RE: AI for MWiF-Italy

Post by trees »

I just mentioned that because I think the differences in playing the game with different amounts of people is part of what drives this conversation. It is interesting to see what one can do in WiF when in charge of all the Major Powers on one side and I think it is something people are looking forward to in playing MWiF.
plant trees
Post Reply

Return to “AI Opponent Discussion”