AI Pulling back - PLEASE fix

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

AI Pulling back - PLEASE fix

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 >> AI Pulling back - PLEASE fix

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

AI Pulling back - PLEASE fix - 6/9/2018 8:16:34 AM

Redmarkus5

Posts: 4456
Joined: 12/1/2007
From: 0.00
Status: offline

The AI's tendancy to run away was always the main game breaker for me, but after reading a post that said, 'play on challenging' I decided to give the game another try.

On turn 2, playing the 1943-45 campaign as the Soviets on challenging, the AI pulled back all its forces around the Kursk salient. I had not attacked any AI units on Turn 1. The AI even abandoned a city (Belgorod) without a fight.

I know that T1 is programmed, reflecting what an expert player has recorded as the ideal first moves. After that, the AI makes its own decisions, leading to sensible but a-historical moves. After all, a really sensible Axis strategy would have been never to attack the Soviet Union in the first place.

What is missing from this game is the insanity emanating from Hitler's HQ. The game needs 'No retreat' settings at the strategic level, whereby no retreats would occur unless a unit has been attacked and is threatened with being cut off. In fact, the Axis forces were regularly cut-off and prided themselves with being able to escape from pockets.

Perhaps the ZoC movement cost for Axis units is too high? The more experienced the unit, the greater its ability to move through ZoC, combined with retreat limiting settings? Would this help?

Finally, cities were generally turned into fortresses and the defence centred on these. Currently, it seems that the AI treats a city the same as it treats an open terrain hex. Will all this change in WitE 2? If not, what a shame that will be...

Attachment (1)

Post #: 1

RE: AI Pulling back - PLEASE fix - 6/9/2018 12:42:19 PM

chaos45

Posts: 1889
Joined: 1/22/2001
Status: offline

The Axis do not need any more movement advantages in the game than they already have.

As to the AI retreating...well its a smart move in the pictures you present.

(in reply to Redmarkus5)

Post #: 2

RE: AI Pulling back - PLEASE fix - 6/9/2018 6:51:35 PM

Redmarkus5

Posts: 4456
Joined: 12/1/2007
From: 0.00
Status: offline

Yes, and I acknowledged it as a smart move in my post.

That's not my point. Hitler was not in the habit of allowing smart moves on the part of his generals at this stage of the war.

My point is that invading the Soviet Union was not a smart move. Driving on Moscow in the winter was not a smart move. Commiting massive resources at Stalingrad in order to seize a single city was not a smart move. Sending substantial forces into the Caucasus was not a smart move and neither was it smart to defend a long open flank with second rate Axis Allied forces.

The AI would do none of these things, because it uses pure logic. Therefore the game fails to simulate history in any way, after Turn 1. Stupidity needs to be built in.

I would like WitE 2 (at least) to be a simulation of WW2, not a sandbox containing WW2 units. I'm pretty sure that's what most WW2 gamers want.

Probably a pointless post and a futile dream on my part.

(in reply to chaos45)

Post #: 3

RE: AI Pulling back - PLEASE fix - 6/9/2018 7:54:09 PM

SparkleyTits

Posts: 898
Joined: 10/7/2016
From: England
Status: offline

Thing is the game would become unhistorical in a more dramatic sense than you are suggesting as us humans being the sneaky buggers we are will abuse the AI being dummies and before you know it "poof" the AI now have 3 metophorical divsions and some sheep with pistols duct taped onto them to guard the entire front

(in reply to Redmarkus5)

Post #: 4

RE: AI Pulling back - PLEASE fix - 6/10/2018 7:28:41 PM

Searry

Posts: 848
Joined: 1/24/2014
Status: offline

Wouldn't it just make the game too easy to enjoy? I find the AI easily exploitable in any complex wargame already, making it dumber would probably make it less fun.

I remember my first pvp game as the Germans which I finished where I fell into same sorts of strategic mistakes as the Germans like trying to push Stalingrad as a diversion first but not committing enough troops there because to me it felt like if I could force my opponent to think the real offensive came from there he would have to defend the badly defensible terrain going to Moscow. Sure i made it there with big encirclements which took too many turns to reduce. The problem was I did not finish Leningrad off since my opponent committed big time there even though it's just a huge big trap for the Soviet player.
So, launching two tank offensives at the same time, in the north and south, with an unfinished Leningrad was a mistake. I couldn't make a large enough spearhead in the north due to the terrain nor could I exploit the easiest terrain in the game in the south.

I have noticed experienced Germany players first try to destroy almost everything they can with almost magic like maneuver with split up tank divisions and try to take the most important railways or even maneuver through the marshes if Kiev proves too difficult and then proceed in a huge tank ball from every direction of the map towards Moscow to absolutely blast it to hell just before winter and it always succeeds because even though the winter comes after a couple turns of mud, the light snowfall allows a few last turns of intense mechanized maneuver. I think it's a big flaw of the game which warrants it's own thread.

(in reply to SparkleyTits)

Post #: 5