explorer2
Posts: 465
Joined: 11/30/2007 Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: barerabbit The AI Brits have carrier air III and fighter II, the AI french have flak II. Can they build this stuff? This may make a more interesting AI game, but it is no longer WWII, This is a Harry Turtledove alternate history game. I dont think it is what you started out to do. Are you sure about this? This was a difficult design decision. I had so many responses about how the AI wasn't significantly challenging. I've done all I can to make the AI "smarter" but there's not much I can do on that. So my response has been to make it "stronger" AT's AI simply doesn't have the oomph to understand long term goals or to project strength over distances or water. WaW has all this, as well as multiple fronts. Though certainly I am giving the AI a leg up in terms of technology, and sometimes also giving them extra units, I believe the result will be that it plays more "historically" meaning most importantly that human GE can't get a victory in SU and UK by end of 1942. I have done very little so far to strengthen GE AI, since it already has the least difficulties. AI is best at single fronts on land, and GE situation is pretty close to that. That being said, I gave even it a few extra starting techs and a tech bonus. In answer to can they build this stuff: sometimes yes, sometimes no, depending on the situation. I've made it now so AI cannot build carriers at all, no matter what regime. This came after I had already given it Carrier III tech. Ishould go back and delete that from AI. You can't assume the AI has the tech just because they have a unit with that tech, but sometimes I have given them extra techs. I did not put AI "helps" in the Briefing because that would make the game again far more predictable and far easier. To be honest, I don't consider this design strategy to be cheating on the side of the AI. WaW is simply too complex for the AI, even given that it can't use carriers and paratroopers. Some examples of AI conduct in WaW: 1. It consistently does amphibious invasions without the ability to create a port, capture a port, and without brining any kind of HQ or engineer. Of course, in 2 turns these units are totally out of supply and die quite easily. How does AI as JA or GE stand a chance this way? 2. Another example, AI as West typically sends less than 10% of production from USA to UK or Pacific, making USA production of no help in the game. How can West stand a chance this way? 3. I've seen several games where West as AI quickly transfers units out of Maginot line. a) this is of course not closely historical and b) with the new condition that abandoning the Maginot Line causes GE to get Western Blitz card, GE gets to do the Blitz usually in October 1939 this way. 4. Still another example, I saw a game where AI gave 100% of all of Gorki's production each turn to making Carriers! And it can't even use them! I could give many many other examples. Point being, the AI, left on its own, will be grossly not historical and IMHO not very competetive. So I'm hoping my "helps" make it both more comepetetive and, from a big picture standpoint, actually more historical than if left on its own. Hopefully these changes will make playing the AI more challenging and more enjoyable, but yes, certainly not as historical. If you want to play a version prior to most of these AI helps, use version N, though it still had some helps. I'd love for you to give the AI in P a go and tell me what your experience was like. If you enjoy "beating up" on the AI though, it would be better to use one of the earlier versions like K as I recall, before I turned my eyes to the AI at all. I'd be happy to send that to you if you like.
< Message edited by explorer2 -- 6/29/2009 5:11:56 AM >
|