EIA v1.26.01 Beta Hotfix #2 Available

[hapshott]

Hello,

I just installed the new beta. One thing I noticed is the change in the English AI in the naval phase when I'm playing as the French. In the previous version the English AI put up a blockade on the Dutch and French harbors. But now they are not blockaded at all and I can move the Dutch and French navy without being attacked.

Should the English not blockade or attack the French and Dutch?

Best regards,

Hapshott

[pzgndr]

In the previous version the English AI put up a blockade on the Dutch and French harbors. But now they are not blockaded at all and I can move the Dutch and French navy without being attacked.
Should the English not blockade or attack the French and Dutch?

They should be. I have seen this occasionally but not usually. Sometimes France gets control of Portugal and GB blockades Lisbon rather than Amsterdam. But I haven't seen them not blockade French ports for a while, and usually not for long. I don't think there's any difference for a human or AI France but I can double check next week. Maybe try shutting down and restarting a game, and see if you get better results. The blockades were working fine on my playtests so I'm not sure what the problem may be.

[hapshott]

I did re-install the whole game and removed my saves. After that I did a new run without the beta. The ports are immediately blocked. Then I enabled the beta and there was no blockade going on and I even could put the French fleets in the Portsmouth. I have attached a screenshot when it is turn 2.

no_blockade.jpg (135.53 KiB) Viewed 773 times

I used the classic campaign 1805. My setup is the imported FrClassicCampaign1805-_Default.set. Difficulty is medium for all the AI countries. I also tried the hard AI and nothing was blockaded.

I hope this helps you in reproducing the same behavior.

Best regards,

Hapshott

[pzgndr]

Sigh. Alright, I apologize for whatever is going on and I'll take a look on Monday. One issue is that I run a development version for my code work and playtesting, and then compile the release version when it's ready. I don't usually playtest the release version because they should be the same. Should. When they don't match up, I need to go digging to find out why. Hopefully something easy, and I'll get out a Hotfix #3 as soon as I can.

[hapshott]

No apologies needed. I'm very impressed on your commitment to improve Empires in Arms.

I hope I didn't give you a lot of work.

Best regards,

Hapshott

[pzgndr]

Alright, I just took a look. Good news and bad news. Good news is that there is no bug with blockades. (Yeah!!) The bad news is that I saved the game for Hotfix #2 with the "Great Britain and France Start At War in 1805" option disabled. So you probably started your game normally expecting this option to be enabled by default, and it wasn't, so they aren't at war. Therefore, Great Britain isn't blockading and France is able to move fleets into neutral Portsmouth. When I enabled the option, blockades happened as expected. If this is not the case, please send me a saved game.

So, as a Public Service Announcement for players, please verify the game options to be what you want them to be for your first game. The game should then save your options as defaults for you for your next game(s). I will relook this for future releases so the "Great Britain and France Start At War in 1805" option is enabled by default.

[I try not to be too paranoid with this game, but I swear the code has gremlins out to get me and it irks me to no end. ]

[hapshott]

My sincere apologies. I indeed didn't see the fact that the at war option was not enabled. I'm really ashamed to bother you with this. I hope you didn't waste a lot of time.

Lesson learned. Check the options before posting.

Best regards,

Hapshott

[pzgndr]

My sincere apologies. I indeed didn't see the fact that the at war option was not enabled. I'm really ashamed to bother you with this. I hope you didn't waste a lot of time.

No bother at all. It keeps me on my toes. I should have recognized you were not at war when you mentioned French fleets able to go to Portsmouth. Now I'm wondering what I did to disable the option and what to do to enable it as the default. Oh well.

I hope you and others play some and provide some comments about your game. Too hard? Too easy? AI doing anything reckless? I do what I can based on my playtesting but I know some players push the limits and I'd like to hear about that. Or if you just had a good game. That works too!

[pzgndr]

I have not received any issues reports for this latest build. I assume some folks have played it some and haven't found any issues, so I take that as a positive sign for moving forward. If anyone finds an issue, send me a game save.

I have spent this past week reading through the Player Notes, Grand and Grandiose Strategy, and Campaigning in Arms. I have five pages of notes listing some general issues and Major Power-specific issues that I will work on for v1.26.02, starting next week. I'm guessing that I should have a Beta ready for posting sometime next month.

Why now, after all these years, are you just now re-reading the strategy articles? Fair question. My priorities have always been on bug fixes and game enhancements first, and then AI improvements. Just getting the AI to perform certain functions that it wasn't doing before took time and effort. And a lot of the strategy articles' material is already embedded in the AI code. But now I am at a point to better assess what grand strategy improvements can be implemented and how/where in the AI code to make it happen. Ideally, all Major Powers should be able to be played by the AI computer opponent in at least a competent manner, preferably in a challenging manner, and ideally as human-like as possible. It's a tall order, I know, but I am optimistic that I can get the Empires in Arms AI up to speed in Napoleonic grand strategy.

[pzgndr]

I want to share another end-of-week update on AI Grand Strategy code development. As discussed previously, the Player Notes, Grand and Grandiose Strategy, and Campaigning in Arms articles provided lots of ideas for grand strategy options for all Major Powers.

I'll summarize what I have coded:

France
- Default
- Early and Often
- Build
- Naval
- Invasion of Great Britain

Great Britain
- Default
- Scandinavia
- Mediterranean
- Defend Great Britain
- Invasion of Mainland

Spain
- Default
- Great Britain-Spain-Russia Alliance
- France-Spain-Russia Alliance

Prussia
- Default
- Grab Minors
- Buy Nothing
- Prussia-Russia-Austria Alliance

Turkey
- Default
- Patient and Quiet
- Assertive and Bold

Russia
- Default
- Great Britain-Spain-Russia Alliance
- France-Spain-Russia Alliance
- Prussia-Russia-Austria Alliance

Austria
- Default
- Wars With Turkey
- Prussia-Russia-Austria Alliance

That's the basic outline. I've previously implemented some parts of these grand strategy articles, such as Prussia saving manpower and Great Britain saving money to give to Prussia, but now there are some clearly defined strategies and difference in what and how the computer opponent will do things. And the idea is to behave as human-like as possible. We'll see. I'll start playtesting next week and get v1.26.02 out when I'm satisfied with what I see.

I'm still looking for any comments regarding v1.26.01. And any comments or questions about the grand strategies are welcome. This is a work in progress.

[CounterMarch]

Returning after a long while away, so I am eagerly looking forward to these updates!! Originally started with the ADG board game. I've liked the computer version, but the AI had always been too passive and while I prefer to play the Austrians with Charles' 4-4-6 and having a passive Turkey so I can engage France is nice ... it wasn't very challenging.

So ... thanks for all of this hard work! I am also looking forward to the national objectives.

One major deficit had been the inability for France or GB to lose Major Power status, or for other nations to gain it. This was a significant game feature that provided incentives that would drive play towards historical emnities and alliances, as well as give all powers a chance at leveling the playing field. I never understood why this was never implemented. While goal-achievement was rare, it always featured prominently in gameplay. I haven't caught up on years away from the forums, so I apologize if this has been answered, but what had been the technical and / or gameplay issues in not having included Major Power Status attainment / loss?

[pzgndr]

Returning after a long while away, so I am eagerly looking forward to these updates!! Originally started with the ADG board game. I've liked the computer version, but the AI had always been too passive and while I prefer to play the Austrians with Charles' 4-4-6 and having a passive Turkey so I can engage France is nice ... it wasn't very challenging.

So ... thanks for all of this hard work! I am also looking forward to the national objectives.

One major deficit had been the inability for France or GB to lose Major Power status, or for other nations to gain it. This was a significant game feature that provided incentives that would drive play towards historical emnities and alliances, as well as give all powers a chance at leveling the playing field. I never understood why this was never implemented. While goal-achievement was rare, it always featured prominently in gameplay. I haven't caught up on years away from the forums, so I apologize if this has been answered, but what had been the technical and / or gameplay issues in not having included Major Power Status attainment / loss?

Welcome back!

I think you mean optional rule 11.8, Alternate Dominant Powers? I can't speak for Marshall Ellis's original decisions, but looking at it I'll say it's problematic to code all of the logic for gaining/losing Dominant Power status and also to code the morale, combat, and income modifiers. Not impossible, but a lot of work and a lot of opportunity to get something wrong. Perhaps some simplified effects based on being in the Dominant zone or not could be considered? If France or Great Britain are not in the Dominant zone then they lose the ability to change move order and infantry morale is reduced by "-1". If the others get into the Dominant zone then their infantry morale is increased by "+1". I think I could code those changes. Let me think about it and I'll start a separate discussion for a proposed rule change, to see what other think.