RE: Axis GC normal vs AI - very historical

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

RE: Axis GC normal vs AI - very historical

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's War in the East Series >> RE: Axis GC normal vs AI - very historical

Page: << < prev 1 [2]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Axis GC normal vs AI - very historical - 8/18/2011 11:54:23 PM

pzgndr

Posts: 3170
Joined: 3/18/2004
From: Maryland
Status: offline

quote:

AI players do not give a crap about PBEM play and whether it works

quote:

And they will gladly support changes that will ruin PBEM play because they don't care

Now, that's two stupid assertions that deserve a response. In my many years of watching these forum discussions regarding many different games, one RARELY if ever hears anyone promoting solitaire gaming at the expense of or exclusion of multiplayer gaming. But let any discussion bring up AI development or computer opponent improvements/enhancements and the whackaloons come screaming out of the woodwork. It's stupid.

quote:

We realize that the majority of customers play against the AI.

At least Matrix and 2by3Games and other computer wargame developers recognize reality and seek to accomodate all players. Because frankly different players have different preferences for what games they purchase and how/when they play them as they see fit. It's a shame that some folks just cannot see it that way.

(in reply to Gargoil)

Post #: 31

RE: Axis GC normal vs AI - very historical - 8/19/2011 2:14:22 AM

Mynok

Posts: 12108
Joined: 11/30/2002
Status: offline

I've never said I don't support AI improvements. You are reading something that isn't there.

My only beef is with those who insist and demand AI changes that will harm PBEM. And frankly, I've only seen that in Witp, never here so far. But I keep an eye on it because of the Witp experience. This game has an excellent AI. I'm just going to keep an eye on things and put counterpoints out there if I think it would harm the PBEM experience. So far, so good.

I do encourage players to try PBEM. It is a very different game. Some will never do that and that's fine. They'll not know what they are missing. Their loss not mine. As long as they are enjoying the game, all's well.

_____________________________

"Measure civilization by the ability of citizens to mock government with impunity" -- Unknown

(in reply to pzgndr)

Post #: 32

RE: Axis GC normal vs AI - very historical - 8/19/2011 2:17:15 AM

Mynok

Posts: 12108
Joined: 11/30/2002
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Gargoil

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mynok

And they will gladly support changes that will ruin PBEM play because they don't care.

How does changes to the AI affect games not using it?

Good question. With WITE, I've not seen anything yet, but I did see it in Witp. Very different game obviously, so there may never be issues here. That's a good thing.

I suspect it mostly stems from games where the AI controls a lot of action even in PBEM. This is again more like Witp than WITE.

_____________________________

"Measure civilization by the ability of citizens to mock government with impunity" -- Unknown

(in reply to Gargoil)

Post #: 33

RE: Axis GC normal vs AI - very historical - 8/19/2011 2:20:13 AM

Mynok

Posts: 12108
Joined: 11/30/2002
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: ETF

I do think though that MP's are at odds sometimes with the AI crowd as it comes down programmer resources (or lobbying for them) . Do you want the precious resources on the AI (which will never live up to even an intermediate player - well assuming it isn't cheating) which I have seen can be a bottomless pit. OR do you spend those precious resources on game features/UI that truly produce a epic wargame (almost there now IMHO) that is a true to a historical simulation as possible ASSUMING one is playing MP vs. MP. I have most Matrix games out there and NONE have a decent AI. Wish it was different but it is not.

Just my 2 cents.....

Also a good point, although as I said above, this AI is pretty good as far as AI's go. While we must leave that decision in the hands of 2x3, they have a history of good balance here.

_____________________________

"Measure civilization by the ability of citizens to mock government with impunity" -- Unknown

(in reply to ETF)

Post #: 34

RE: Axis GC normal vs AI - very historical - 8/19/2011 6:53:08 PM

EisenHammer

Posts: 440
Joined: 9/1/2008
Status: offline

Most PBEM players think any AI improvements is a waste of time and money for the developers, as they should only be working on PBEM improvements. So it's really the other way around it the PBEM players who don't give a crap about single player.
And what AI improvements ruin the PBEM part of WitP?

IMHO� I think 2by3Games weaken the Soviet winter offensive to much. The Russian never even came close to encircling any of my unit's and I came out of the winter in very good shape. Is this because of PBEM... If so then PBEM is ruining the single player game.

(in reply to Mynok)

Post #: 35

RE: Axis GC normal vs AI - very historical - 8/19/2011 11:27:58 PM

Mynok

Posts: 12108
Joined: 11/30/2002
Status: offline

PBEM players want a decent AI they can learn against. There's frankly nothing beyond that which could possibly be done with current technology. If that means "doesn't give a crap about single player", then I'm guilty as charged.

But I'm fine with you playing that way. Just don't understand why you do.

There's lots of bad analogies to be made, but to me it's kind of like the guy who sits at home eating eggs and toast when for a little bit more, he could go out and get steak and a baked potato.

_____________________________

"Measure civilization by the ability of citizens to mock government with impunity" -- Unknown

(in reply to EisenHammer)

Post #: 36

RE: Axis GC normal vs AI - very historical - 8/20/2011 1:10:34 AM

unikey

Posts: 9
Joined: 6/24/2007
Status: offline

Its all aboutr time for me if I could find a human opppent who can do multiple turns a day starting at anytime at all on a hour's notice and then not complain when I'm not about except for an odd turn for 3 or 4 months often with little or no notice.

dont get me wrong you can't beat a real opponent for a more interesting game althouogh they aren't always better than the AI (civ4 on sid is more difficult to beat than any human i've played but not as much fun)

I see no reason why changes to the game mechanics for the AI have to be replicated for human players much like the garrison requirements for the axis atm so changes that help the AI or Human shouldnt have to affect the other

IMO alot of people complaining about balance in WiTe are looking for a game that allows the axis a 50% chance of winning whilst I'd rather have more accuracy and regard a historical result as a draw

(in reply to Mynok)

Post #: 37

RE: Axis GC normal vs AI - very historical - 8/20/2011 10:12:08 AM

Rasputitsa

Posts: 2903
Joined: 6/30/2001
From: Bedfordshire UK
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: ETF

I do think though that MP's are at odds sometimes with the AI crowd as it comes down programmer resources (or lobbying for them) . Do you want the precious resources on the AI (which will never live up to even an intermediate player - well assuming it isn't cheating) which I have seen can be a bottomless pit. OR do you spend those precious resources on game features/UI that truly produce a epic wargame (almost there now IMHO) that is a true to a historical simulation as possible ASSUMING one is playing MP vs. MP. I have most Matrix games out there and NONE have a decent AI. Wish it was different but it is not.

Just my 2 cents.....

Game features/UI are not the resource eating parts of game design and, if we are 'almost there' in producing an epic MP v MP game, what's to lose by putting effort into the AI. It has been said that the AI can give a realistic representation of early Soviet play, or even the Axis in the later war period. AI has many weaknesses, but how weak were many actual events during the war, Stalingrad, etc, realism come in many ways.

Much of the challenge in the game is in how the preferences are set, whilst neither AI, nor human play, has a monopoly on enjoyment. I have played against AI since the the 1980's and had loads of fun, weird things have happened, but war is hell. There is a large PBEM population out there, also having loads of fun, great, the more people enjoy these game, the more money there is to support the industry. There doesn't have to be an either/or in the design, the developer's are smarter than that, the real battle is on the screen.

_____________________________

"In politics stupidity is not a handicap" - Napoleon

�A people which is able to say everything becomes able to do everything� - Napoleon

�Among those who dislike oppression are many who like to oppress" - Napoleon

(in reply to ETF)

Post #: 38

RE: Axis GC normal vs AI - very historical - 8/20/2011 2:06:00 PM

ETF

Posts: 1748
Joined: 9/16/2004
From: Vancouver, Canada
Status: offline

I agree SP's are very important to the industry. I too have been computer wargaming since the early 80's. What was that game "Eastern Front" from the Atari.....
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eastern_Front_(video_game)
The AI was amazing as we have never seen anything like it before. However the AI has improved since then but not overwhelming in the last 3 decades. AI development from what I have seen beta testing games can take horrendous amounts of $ and man-hours away for marginal improvements in SP performance.
Whether we like that or not is up to the individual player I guess. The opportunity cost though comes directly out of UI/game development/features that have to be removed from the game engine due to developing a "decent" AI and staying within budget. Until this century I was like most players afraid to go on-line. Thinking I would get killed by guru players. My first few turns were terrifying. I did find 95% of the PBEM/On-line players to be gracious gentlemen who helped me enjoy the product further. Once you get away from "AI bashing" you truly are liberated.

I think the upward trend is in MP gaming. It has just taken the wargaming community longer to experience this. I do look forward to this decade as we will see MP player features override the necessity of catering larger and larger portions of your programming budget being "spent" on the ever needy AI. I personally look forward to the day when the AI is reduced to tutorial status

.

_____________________________

My Top Matrix Games 1) CMO MP?? 2) WITP/AE 3) SOW 4) Combat Mission 5) Armor Brigade

Twitter
https://twitter.com/TacticWargamer

(in reply to Rasputitsa)

Post #: 39

RE: Axis GC normal vs AI - very historical - 8/20/2011 6:23:25 PM

Rasputitsa

Posts: 2903
Joined: 6/30/2001
From: Bedfordshire UK
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: ETF
I think the upward trend is in MP gaming. It has just taken the wargaming community longer to experience this. I do look forward to this decade as we will see MP player features override the necessity of catering larger and larger portions of your programming budget being "spent" on the ever needy AI. I personally look forward to the day when the AI is reduced to tutorial status .

That is a very one dimensional view, I totally agree that if you want a really challenging game on an Eastern Front theme, then MP is the way to go. If, however, you want realism, then the AI can provide just as a rewarding experience. How do you replicate the behaviour of the Red Army in 1941, the 'stand fast' orders that helped destroy the German Army later in the war. No sensible human opponent will do these things, but the AI can. You can explore what-ifs, alternative strategies and pet theories on historical events, in your own time, the game is much more that just a tournament.

I don't just play WiTE, I have dozens of games on my hard drives, including an ongoing game of WIR. I play some turns on one title then move to another, sometimes coming back months later to finish a game. Only the AI can wait patiently that long and won't give up, or get bored.

There are enough preferences and options to suit most people, no one has to lose here, we can all enjoy the game in the style that suits us best. The developers are not going to trash one, or other, aspect of the game, just because of comments on the Forum. The polls on this and other sites show significant votes for both SP and MP and, therefore, we all pay our cash to the cause and should each have a chance to enjoy the game in our own way.

_____________________________

(in reply to ETF)

Post #: 40

RE: Axis GC normal vs AI - very historical - 8/20/2011 9:42:49 PM

ETF

Posts: 1748
Joined: 9/16/2004
From: Vancouver, Canada
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rasputitsa

If, however, you want realism, then the AI can provide just as a rewarding experience. How do you replicate the behaviour of the Red Army in 1941, the 'stand fast' orders that helped destroy the German Army later in the war. No sensible human opponent will do these things, but the AI can.

I see what your getting at, but having a crappy AI and then congratulating it for acting historically is a little strange. What happens in 42-45 with that poor "historical" AI. That is the point AI's are deficient period. Who wants to play the Soviets vs. the German AI (non cheating) when the German AI refuses to do almost anything re. Attacking. But hey each to there own.

I play some turns on one title then move to another, sometimes coming back months later to finish a game. Only the AI can wait patiently that long and won't give up, or get bored.

That would be obvious. Can be fun at times I do the same sometimes.

The developers are not going to trash one, or other, aspect of the game, just because of comments on the Forum. The polls on this and other sites show significant votes for both SP and MP and, therefore, we all pay our cash to the cause and should each have a chance to enjoy the game in our own way.

I agree but there is a shift (finally in the wargaming community ) and I wouldn't expect to see any significant changes in the AI capabilities anytime soon. Don't see to many on the forums really happy with any AI period. I do think though for the beginner and casual gamer it is certainly needed.

_____________________________

My Top Matrix Games 1) CMO MP?? 2) WITP/AE 3) SOW 4) Combat Mission 5) Armor Brigade

Twitter
https://twitter.com/TacticWargamer

(in reply to Rasputitsa)

Post #: 41

RE: Axis GC normal vs AI - very historical - 8/20/2011 11:09:58 PM

jwarrenw13

Posts: 1897
Joined: 8/12/2000
From: Louisiana, USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mynok

Superior how? If you mean in how one enjoys the game, certainly you are correct. But if you are insinuating that the AI will challenge you just as well as a human player, you are grossly wrong.

Good grief. Enjoying the game. I figured that was obvious.

(in reply to Mynok)

Post #: 42

RE: Axis GC normal vs AI - very historical - 8/21/2011 9:55:39 AM

EisenHammer

Posts: 440
Joined: 9/1/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: ETF
I personally look forward to the day when the AI is reduced to tutorial status .

Then I guess you look foward to the day when real wargames are no longer made.
Remember there not that many wargamers out there right now, as is. In time there will be fewer. The Masters of wargaming are growing thin lately, and in time MP will dominate and both sides will be even, and no one will be able to tell the difference between the two sides. It will be like a chess board instead of history. Multiplayer is killing the history part of the game by making it even for both sides.

(in reply to ETF)

Post #: 43

RE: Axis GC normal vs AI - very historical - 8/21/2011 12:41:27 PM

Rasputitsa

Posts: 2903
Joined: 6/30/2001
From: Bedfordshire UK
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: ETF
I agree but there is a shift (finally in the wargaming community ) and I wouldn't expect to see any significant changes in the AI capabilities anytime soon. Don't see to many on the forums really happy with any AI period. I do think though for the beginner and casual gamer it is certainly needed.

To survive, these games must appeal to the widest possible customer base and you can be a casual player of WiTE, but still be a committed gamer, just with wider interests.

Those people who are happy, or at least satisfied whilst waiting for the next level of improvement, probably don't feel the need to complain, but either way, nobody has to lose, we can all get (within reason) what we want. There are preferences, options and potential alternative scenarios to keep us all going. Seeing how far the industry has come, it's not either/or, but more and more.

< Message edited by Rasputitsa -- 8/21/2011 12:51:44 PM >

_____________________________

(in reply to ETF)

Post #: 44

RE: Axis GC normal vs AI - very historical - 8/21/2011 6:21:57 PM

ETF

Posts: 1748
Joined: 9/16/2004
From: Vancouver, Canada
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rasputitsa

quote:

ORIGINAL: ETF
I agree but there is a shift (finally in the wargaming community ) and I wouldn't expect to see any significant changes in the AI capabilities anytime soon. Don't see to many on the forums really happy with any AI period. I do think though for the beginner and casual gamer it is certainly needed.

To survive, these games must appeal to the widest possible customer base and you can be a casual player of WiTE, but still be a committed gamer, just with wider interests.

Those people who are happy, or at least satisfied whilst waiting for the next level of improvement, probably don't feel the need to complain, but either way, nobody has to lose, we can all get (within reason) what we want. There are preferences, options and potential alternative scenarios to keep us all going. Seeing how far the industry has come, it's not either/or, but more and more.

True good points. Wargaming though I would suggest has grown from the PC side of things significantly in the last 10 years. Mind you it is a small genre to begin with

That being said its growth curve dwarfs the board wargaming/miniatures as these are both in decline. The ability to publish games and D/L and remove the retailer has been a welcome boast to the industry.

_____________________________

My Top Matrix Games 1) CMO MP?? 2) WITP/AE 3) SOW 4) Combat Mission 5) Armor Brigade

Twitter
https://twitter.com/TacticWargamer

(in reply to Rasputitsa)

Post #: 45

RE: Axis GC normal vs AI - very historical - 8/21/2011 9:51:25 PM

Rasputitsa

Posts: 2903
Joined: 6/30/2001
From: Bedfordshire UK
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: ETF

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rasputitsa

quote:

ORIGINAL: ETF
I agree but there is a shift (finally in the wargaming community ) and I wouldn't expect to see any significant changes in the AI capabilities anytime soon. Don't see to many on the forums really happy with any AI period. I do think though for the beginner and casual gamer it is certainly needed.

To survive, these games must appeal to the widest possible customer base and you can be a casual player of WiTE, but still be a committed gamer, just with wider interests.

Those people who are happy, or at least satisfied whilst waiting for the next level of improvement, probably don't feel the need to complain, but either way, nobody has to lose, we can all get (within reason) what we want. There are preferences, options and potential alternative scenarios to keep us all going. Seeing how far the industry has come, it's not either/or, but more and more.

True good points. Wargaming though I would suggest has grown from the PC side of things significantly in the last 10 years. Mind you it is a small genre to begin with That being said its growth curve dwarfs the board wargaming/miniatures as these are both in decline. The ability to publish games and D/L and remove the retailer has been a welcome boast to the industry.

The way this end of the gaming industry has opened up is fantastic, with games being produced with modding in mind and embracing the input from the users. The quality of the mods that have been made available from various individuals and groups, who have provided them freely, is exceptional. That doesn't mean that everything is perfect, but it can only get better.

_____________________________

(in reply to ETF)

Post #: 46

RE: Axis GC normal vs AI - very historical - 8/22/2011 1:47:41 AM

ETF

Posts: 1748
Joined: 9/16/2004
From: Vancouver, Canada
Status: offline

True very true, except don't hold your breath on the AI

_____________________________

My Top Matrix Games 1) CMO MP?? 2) WITP/AE 3) SOW 4) Combat Mission 5) Armor Brigade

Twitter
https://twitter.com/TacticWargamer

(in reply to Rasputitsa)

Post #: 47

RE: Axis GC normal vs AI - very historical - 8/22/2011 11:39:32 AM

Rasputitsa

Posts: 2903
Joined: 6/30/2001
From: Bedfordshire UK
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: ETF
True very true, except don't hold your breath on the AI

It goes back to what you expect from the AI, if that is to act like a human gaming opponent, then there is little hope in the short term. However, in replicating historical leaders, taking into account the blunders and bad strategic decisions that fill the historical record, the AI can do that quite well. The game can still be challenging, whilst preferences and options can provide fine tuning to each user's needs.

Some pre-set options packages would be useful here, e.g. a set-up to replicate revised Soviet Armoured Doctrine, no Red Army purge, full Soviet mobilisation, Hitler deposed - full release of reserves, victory in the West-increase in German OOB, etc.. However, Joel has already said that this workload would be beyond the development team, at this time, but there is a very capable modding community out there and some of their work is already available.

I know that this is not enough for a major portion of the gaming community, for whom PBEM is the only real solution and I would expect that this aspect of the game should receive its full share of development, even though I personally will probably never make use of it.

< Message edited by Rasputitsa -- 8/22/2011 3:43:34 PM >

_____________________________

(in reply to ETF)

Post #: 48

RE: Axis GC normal vs AI - very historical - 8/22/2011 12:00:00 PM

Jeffrey H.

Posts: 3154
Joined: 4/13/2007
From: San Diego, Ca.
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: ETF

Face it the AI in any wargame in the las 20 years is a best an informed beginner. No game company could invest in a human like AI not possible. Or should I say cost effective. MP games are the only way if you want any sort of challenge. Anyone can rape the AI. I did in my first a game.....and I suck at MP games :)
This will never change in my life time.......ps I'm 41 haha.

That's defeatist IMHO. We should not just give up.

_____________________________

History began July 4th, 1776. Anything before that was a mistake.

Ron Swanson

(in reply to ETF)

Post #: 49

RE: Axis GC normal vs AI - very historical - 8/23/2011 1:41:32 PM

pzgndr

Posts: 3170
Joined: 3/18/2004
From: Maryland
Status: offline

quote:

However the AI has improved since then but not overwhelming in the last 3 decades. AI development from what I have seen beta testing games can take horrendous amounts of $ and man-hours away for marginal improvements in SP performance.

This is certainly a valid business decision issue for developers to consider. Decision Games made the upfront decision to develop a computer War in Europe without AI. Heck, any game could be computerized for pbem using VASSAL or similar programs. If you don't want AI, you can have it.

And yet, the promise and allure of computer wargames over these past several decades has been for players to have a convenient computer opponent to challenge and entertain them. Ready and willing whenever we are, if we have an hour to spare ar a whole day. Nothing at all against real gaming versus another person, just a matter of preference. I've played several games versus other people over the years via pbem and/or tcp/ip and it's fun but the reality is that my schedule is hectic and I'd rather play solo and not commit to any long-term game.

Something I've noticed is that more $ and man-hours of game development seem to go into ever-increasing graphics and complexity and not into computer opponent development. Why can't more simple boardgames of yesteryear be converted to PC with emphasis on decent and challenging AI play? Games like AH Afrika Korps and Russian Campaign and such. Nothing terribly fancy or complicated, but reasonably realistic and historically accurate (for those scales) and enjoyable to play.

The good news is that some developers do care. MWiF appears to be on track with a very interesting AI, hopefully one that will prove to be both decent and challenging for a game as complex as WiF. The Strategic Command series has developed a compelling computer opponent, driven not only a decent fuzzy-logic generic AI but also with extensive use of editable events and AI planning scripting (see Using Strategic Command 2 AI to Play Advanced Third Reich). 2by3Games and others are also leaning forward in the foxhole to provide what PC wargamers want to buy and play. For that I am thankful.

(in reply to Jeffrey H.)

Post #: 50

RE: Axis GC normal vs AI - very historical - 8/23/2011 2:02:11 PM

Captain

Posts: 78
Joined: 5/1/2006
Status: offline

The issue is not lack of will on the part of developpers, but sheer impossibility to produce a thinking AI. The AI is just a mathematical program which is told to do action B if A occurs, action D if C occurs or action E if both A and C occur.

In a FPS or a flight simulator, it is easier to fake a "smart" AI because the range of responses is very limited.

You cannot program an AI to think or reason or plan ahead, certainly not in a very complex game like Wite. Chess is an extremely simple game compared to Wite: 64 hexes, 16 units, limited moves, but even there, programs rely on brute force to calculate all possible moves and pick the move they were programmed to choose.

If someone could design a thinking AI, they would not waste it in a computer game.

< Message edited by Captain -- 8/23/2011 2:04:55 PM >

_____________________________

(in reply to pzgndr)

Post #: 51

RE: Axis GC normal vs AI - very historical - 8/23/2011 2:21:11 PM

pzgndr

Posts: 3170
Joined: 3/18/2004
From: Maryland
Status: offline

quote:

The issue is not lack of will on the part of developpers, but sheer impossibility to produce a thinking AI. The AI is just a mathematical program which is told to do action B if A occurs, action D if C occurs or action E if both A and C occur.

No this is not correct, the AI is not necessarily deterministic and predictable. It is true that AI is programmed and doesn't "think" but enough variability can be introduced to make the AI as unpredictable as yourself. I could play you as an unknown pbem opponent and not know anything about your intentions and you will do one thing or another and I react to whatever new situation is presented. Ditto for an AI. Whether it's "thinking" or not is basically irrelevant to me, the result on my end when I start my turn is the same.

The difficult issue for AI programming is whether it can "plan" several turns in advance and then execute those plans, rather than react immediately to whatever the current situation is with rigid AI algorithms. The Strategic Command AI for example can be scripted to plan in advance and then surprise you. Is that much different than you scheming your moves in advance and then doing something I might not expect? I say no, again the result on my end is the same. In some respects, some human players are predictable in their own ways and don't "think" very well either, which can easily ruin a game.

(in reply to pzgndr)

Post #: 52

RE: Axis GC normal vs AI - very historical - 8/24/2011 11:58:39 PM

ETF

Posts: 1748
Joined: 9/16/2004
From: Vancouver, Canada
Status: offline

Using Strategic Command 2 AI to Play Advanced Third Reich - hmmm will have to give that puppy a trial run. I find it highly unlikly SC2 can come even close to a PBEM partner without overt cheating. Hey I'm gamethough.
In the mean time I will be in the "sheer impossibility to produce a thinking AI" camp.

< Message edited by ETF -- 8/24/2011 11:59:02 PM >

_____________________________

My Top Matrix Games 1) CMO MP?? 2) WITP/AE 3) SOW 4) Combat Mission 5) Armor Brigade

Twitter
https://twitter.com/TacticWargamer

(in reply to pzgndr)

Post #: 53

RE: Axis GC normal vs AI - very historical - 8/26/2011 9:23:37 AM

jomni

Posts: 2827
Joined: 11/19/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: barkorn45

sorta ot but for a very good ai try "Hannibal Rome and carthage in the 2nd punic wars"it is a single player game and the ai can be wicked!

That's because it's a single player game... and you can only play one side. The game mechanics all point to the development of a good AI. No game balancing issues as well.

Those Panther Games Operational titles have good AI. They act like real commanders and you can leave the game to play itself.

< Message edited by jomni -- 8/26/2011 9:25:48 AM >

_____________________________

My Blog
Random Wargame Name Generator

(in reply to barkman44)

Post #: 54