Graf Leinsdorf
Posts: 23
Joined: 9/27/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Graf Leinsdorf
I think that long time wargamers (e.g. former boardgamers) are not so much interested in winning against AI or PBEM, as in seeing the game mechanics so well devised that historical developments are magically simulated, with only some credible and well founded what-ifs reasonably tested.
I think that the current development of this really intelligent and riveting game doesn’t yet meet such grognards expectations, at least as to the conduct of operations in the role of EP by the programmed opponent.
I will focus on the few points which, after some games played as CP against the AI as EP, have slightly baffled my need of a sound historical simulation of World War 1.
1. In one game I concentrated my effort on the Western front, leaving a very tiny veil of units deployed against the Russians. Well, albeit being so feebly opposed, they were able to somewhat threaten German or Austrian territories only after 2 years of war. That seems really too little also for the not so glamorous and well equipped Russian troops, which on the contrary historically did do well (Brusilov offensive teaches) overwhelming the CP lines in Galicia and threatening even to reach the heart of Austria-Hungary and Prussia. We know that Western Allies often istigated the Russians to renew their efforts in order to relieve the pressure they were sustaining in France and Russian generously responded to such demands.
2. In another game I completely neglected the Serbians, leaving against them only a couple of weak Austrian corps and they didn’t dare to undertake any attack against my feeble line. I think that the hard-pressed Western allies would and could have required more collaboration from the part of the sturdy Serbians too!
3. With great astonishment in the May-June 1916 game turn I assisted to the quite un-historical surrender of Britain, I suppose just for the outcome of some naval battles in the North Atlantic and losses in the Western Front. I can’t imagine any development like this in the real Great War, at least until the fall of Paris and that was not the case in my game.
4. In all the games I played as CP, the Ottoman Empire could serve as supine purveyor of raw material and industrial points to Germany as no military threat ever materialized against them to require the build-up of a solid line of troops: no Allenby advance in Palestina, no sustained Russian offensive in the Caucacus and almost nil also in Mesopotamia. Even when once I dared to reach the outskirts of Alexandria with my weak Ottoman Corps the 5 or more strong British corps deployed there remained unmoved without daring any offensive against such feeble line. And the same could be repeated for the sleepy Mesopotamian Front. I wonder moreover whether a simulation of Lawrence and the Arab uprising could not add some flavour and, together with a more sustained British initiative, help to upgrade Ottoman Empire from sheer source of raw materials and industrial points to active partner in the CP alliance.
5. In no game at all played as CP I did see any attempt by the EP to repeat a kind of Gallipoli endeavour. Besides being quite unhistorical, that’s undoubtedly something which deprives the game of a not minor source of fun and variety.
In any case I’d thank very much Frank Hunter for the great game design and for the patient effort of responding to so many users update demands!
After some more games playing as CP against the AI as EP, I’ve not experienced any difference in the outcomes that in my previous message I complained of being so unhistorical. Rather I could complement my perplexities with further remarks.
6. Saloniki expedition, if undertaken at all by EP (and in my games it has been seldom the case), has always been very timid, posing almost no serious threat to CPs south flank. We know instead that in real Great War the Entente advance was deep, bringing about the collapse of Bulgaria which, according to a Ludendorff remark, “decided the fate of the Quadruple alliance” (namely of CPs).
7. It’s a bit strange that as CP player I’ve closed all my campaigns with a flourishing production and plenty of industrial points and raw materials, due to conquests and docile supplies by the Ottoman Empire (as already said, quite unscathed by British or Russian operations), but mainly to an unrivalled control of the seas by German fleet. We know instead the Germany and Austria were reduced almost to starvation by the Entente blockade and that was one of the main reasons of their surrender.
8. All in all: just since my first game, I was able to win easily against the AI in the role EPs, provided that I followed a “France and Serbia first” option, stubbornly sticking to the Schlieffen setup (and plan). If the programmed opponent hasn’t been able to put up a serious challenge even against a human player not yet experienced in game mechanics, that seems as ample evidence of its inability to simulate historical events: after all CP WERE defeated in the Great War and there were sound historical (namely political, economic and military) reasons for that to happen.
|
Printable Version
Historical AI? - 
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread