Slitherine

quote:

ORIGINAL: Onime No Kyo

I concur on the AI foolishness. I was playing scenario 15 with the Allies. The AI would not budge unto Burma until Singapore fell in early Feb. This is after I had pulled what I could out of there and Malaya back to Dacca. At that point my India line was so strong and the AI initiative so weak that I decided that I should restart because I was neither learning anything nor was able to undertake any opps of my own.

quote:

ORIGINAL: mjk428

quote:

ORIGINAL: Onime No Kyo

I concur on the AI foolishness. I was playing scenario 15 with the Allies. The AI would not budge unto Burma until Singapore fell in early Feb. This is after I had pulled what I could out of there and Malaya back to Dacca. At that point my India line was so strong and the AI initiative so weak that I decided that I should restart because I was neither learning anything nor was able to undertake any opps of my own.

Rangoon fell on March 8th 1942. In my game the AI took it on 1/6/42 and I still hold Singapore as of 1/11. Unless I misunderstand, it's sounds like you abandoned Burma to defend India. Why should they attack you when they've captured their objectives (& the resources) in Burma? It seems that you would still have the difficult task of taking it back.

I would hope that the AI is better on defense. It's too early for me to tell, it's been all defense for me so far.

quote:

ORIGINAL: JohnK

The "suicide unescorted transports" of the Japanese AI was a problem in Pac War....

And a problem in UV......

It's the single greatest AI problem...these unescorted Japanese transports moving into Allied air range time after time after time, often alone. Can rack up huge kill totals very fast.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Captain Cruft

Agree. This together with the also suicidal "let's put all my CVs and BBs into this unprotected port near enemy LBA"

quote:

ORIGINAL: pry

quote:

ORIGINAL: Captain Cruft

Agree. This together with the also suicidal "let's put all my CVs and BBs into this unprotected port near enemy LBA"

Captain,
Do you have a save of the AI doing this?

quote:

Sounds a lot like UV. Playing Japan vs the Allied AI, Japan takes Lunga, then positions a 2 CV TF about two hexes to the NW and simply waits on the AI to send that small bombardment force of about 2CA's, a CL and three or four DD's. They'd send them, I'd sink them. Eventually the AI ran completely out of CA's and CL's....

quote:

ORIGINAL: pry

quote:

ORIGINAL: Captain Cruft

Agree. This together with the also suicidal "let's put all my CVs and BBs into this unprotected port near enemy LBA"

Captain,
Do you have a save of the AI doing this?

The save would need to be from a turn or two before the AI starts putting ships into an unprotected forward base.

If so send save and discription of the issue and game settings to

pry-witp@houston.rr.com

Just a quick note on what we need for issues to be dealt with.
Untill we can get a repeatable save on an bug/other issue it is simply rumor, If/When we can reproduce the issue from a save it becomes a fact and something the programmers can then deal with and fix but it has to be repeatable from a save or step by step instructions on how to recreate a problem with out a save.

quote:

ORIGINAL: John B

I suspect these kind of AI problems are probably common to at least the first releases of nearly all games. It perhaps virtually impossible to programme into an AI the flexibility to changing situations of a human player. It will tend to stick rigidly to its pre-programmed "plan" (not that some human commanders haven't been guilty of the same...). I've not as yet encountered any major AI stupidities, other than leaving CVL hanging around for no apparent purpose in the Straits of Malacca... fortunately for them, at that stage my Dutch a/c were so hopeless that the CVL didn't come to much harm. Oh yes, and the tendency for Auto Convoy to send Allied convoys right up to the front door of the Bettys based on Kwajalein.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Stavka_lite

I am not at all impressed by the AI and here is why. It is the end of December 1941 and the British are defending Singapore and the Malaccan straits. The AI (Japan) continues to send 2-4 transports up the strait daily for some unknown reason. I have a TF consisting of 4 cruisers and 4 destroyers in the straits sinking those transports. To date 12 transports have been sunk and I can see at least 3 more groups steaming int that direction. You would think that the AI would send some sort of SAG to eliminate this little issue or at least stop sending transports to their doom. It is to the point that this particular game( scen 15) needs a restart to try to reset this bug. hhumpf...

quote:

ORIGINAL: WhoCares

Well, AI could base its decision on the size of nearby bases and encounters in the recent past and obviously sigint and recon.

Invulnerability is not so nice - how would Pearl work out that way

Yammas from The Apo-Tiki Lounge. Future site of WITP AE benders! And then the s--t hit the fan

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker

I wonder if possible?

1) The IJ AI sending AP/AKs through Malacca Strait or other deadly zones. As soon as Tavoy or some other Indian Ocean base with a port is captured, the auto convoy routine starts sending lemmings. Perhaps if there could be some set of conditions which must be met before a base is included in auto convoy network, such as secure route (out of range of enemy bases-airzones of control- of a minimum size, within range of friendly air bases of a minimum size)

Or, more simply, have the AI transport TFs react away from enemy bases (much like they did vs CVs in UV).

2) Non-crippled ships disbanding in ports close to enemy LBA. Hmmm...tough one. Perhaps removing the free occupancy intel we get when aircraft are based at airbases or when ships are disbanded in port would help in the short term. This intel should not be automatic. Perhaps also adding conditions for disbandment...minimum size of port, minimum CAP requirement, out of range of enemy LBA, and a combination of above conditions.

That or just make ships in port invulnerable when playing vs AI to compensate for AI shortcomings.

Any suggestions?

quote:

ORIGINAL: The Gnome

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker

I wonder if possible?

1) The IJ AI sending AP/AKs through Malacca Strait or other deadly zones. As soon as Tavoy or some other Indian Ocean base with a port is captured, the auto convoy routine starts sending lemmings. Perhaps if there could be some set of conditions which must be met before a base is included in auto convoy network, such as secure route (out of range of enemy bases-airzones of control- of a minimum size, within range of friendly air bases of a minimum size)

Or, more simply, have the AI transport TFs react away from enemy bases (much like they did vs CVs in UV).

2) Non-crippled ships disbanding in ports close to enemy LBA. Hmmm...tough one. Perhaps removing the free occupancy intel we get when aircraft are based at airbases or when ships are disbanded in port would help in the short term. This intel should not be automatic. Perhaps also adding conditions for disbandment...minimum size of port, minimum CAP requirement, out of range of enemy LBA, and a combination of above conditions.

That or just make ships in port invulnerable when playing vs AI to compensate for AI shortcomings.

Any suggestions?

Good questions Ron.... I gave a lot of thought to the ship problem during my time in UV. If I were coding the AI I would put a code value on every base (a number) the higher the number the less secure the base is.

I would increment the security value based on the following:
- Within range of enemy LBA adds 2
- Within range of enemy Bombers not including FB’s (for every 20 AC)
- Within range of enemy torpedo bombers (for every 10 AC)
- Within 2 turns sailing (at 20kts) of a major enemy port (Size 4+) adds 2.

I would decrement the number for:
- every 10 fighters present

Let's take Shortland as an example.
It has a Squadron of 30 A6M3's.
It is in range of Lunga which has 24 F4F's, 24, P-38's, 27 B-25's and 30 B-26's.
It is in range of Buna which has 20 F4U's, 16 TBM's and 30 SBD's

Shortland is in range of enemy air. Adds 2
There are a total of 103 Bombers. Adds 103/20 = 5.150
There are a total of 16 torpedo bombers = 16/10 = 1.600
It is within 2 turns sailing of Lunga a size 4 port. Adds 2.
It has 30 fighters stationed here. 30/10 = 3

So that gives Shortland the nice number of ( 2 + 5.150 + 1.600 + 2 ) – 3 = 7.75. Whenever the AI needs to make a decision based around Shortland it can use that number to aid the evaluation. With a very low number it could know to move out fighters for better use elsewhere. It could use the base as a supply hub or whatever. If the number becomes high, it could move shipping, reinforce with more air cover – or maybe even start an operation to remove the threat. ;)

It could also be used to evaluate the safety of a given hex for determining TF paths. You can make a decision on what’s too high a number to feel safe, say 5 (or any number that works after evaluating results). Then you can make decision, like that port is too hot to dock at or it can reroute at transport TF.

Theses are just some off the cuff ideas, and you can always adjust the numbers. For shipping you could add things like the presence of mines, or spotted enemy TF’s.

Something like this would have a major impact on the speed of turn resolution but would be worth the tradeoff I think.

Yammas from The Apo-Tiki Lounge. Future site of WITP AE benders! And then the s--t hit the fan

quote:

I like how you think, big guy (Gnome crack)! I would also rather have longer turn execution for better gaming.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker

I wonder if possible?

1) The IJ AI sending AP/AKs through Malacca Strait or other deadly zones. As soon as Tavoy or some other Indian Ocean base with a port is captured, the auto convoy routine starts sending lemmings. Perhaps if there could be some set of conditions which must be met before a base is included in auto convoy network, such as secure route (out of range of enemy bases-airzones of control- of a minimum size, within range of friendly air bases of a minimum size)

Or, more simply, have the AI transport TFs react away from enemy bases (much like they did vs CVs in UV).

2) Non-crippled ships disbanding in ports close to enemy LBA. Hmmm...tough one. Perhaps removing the free occupancy intel we get when aircraft are based at airbases or when ships are disbanded in port would help in the short term. This intel should not be automatic. Perhaps also adding conditions for disbandment...minimum size of port, minimum CAP requirement, out of range of enemy LBA, and a combination of above conditions.

That or just make ships in port invulnerable when playing vs AI to compensate for AI shortcomings.

Any suggestions?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Black Cat

quote:

ORIGINAL: Stavka_lite

I am not at all impressed by the AI and here is why. It is the end of December 1941 and the British are defending Singapore and the Malaccan straits. The AI (Japan) continues to send 2-4 transports up the strait daily for some unknown reason. I have a TF consisting of 4 cruisers and 4 destroyers in the straits sinking those transports. To date 12 transports have been sunk and I can see at least 3 more groups steaming int that direction. You would think that the AI would send some sort of SAG to eliminate this little issue or at least stop sending transports to their doom. It is to the point that this particular game( scen 15) needs a restart to try to reset this bug. hhumpf...

On my VS japanese AI Game with the same thing happening with the Japanese Transport TF`s, a Japanese AC TF with 2 CV`s showed up at 12/30 and now just sits off Singapore to end that little Game, so it does respond to that problem rather well, although not always it seems ???

I suspect after it captures a base, as in your example, they have probably taken Northern Malayisa, the AI sends in Transports to get the Troops out and redeploy them. It`s just a little early around Singapore, and for some reason the deadly Betty`s and Nell`s LBA in Indo China don`t see your SF TF`s.

Just FWIW.

quote:

ORIGINAL: The Gnome

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker

I wonder if possible?

1) The IJ AI sending AP/AKs through Malacca Strait or other deadly zones. As soon as Tavoy or some other Indian Ocean base with a port is captured, the auto convoy routine starts sending lemmings. Perhaps if there could be some set of conditions which must be met before a base is included in auto convoy network, such as secure route (out of range of enemy bases-airzones of control- of a minimum size, within range of friendly air bases of a minimum size)

Or, more simply, have the AI transport TFs react away from enemy bases (much like they did vs CVs in UV).

2) Non-crippled ships disbanding in ports close to enemy LBA. Hmmm...tough one. Perhaps removing the free occupancy intel we get when aircraft are based at airbases or when ships are disbanded in port would help in the short term. This intel should not be automatic. Perhaps also adding conditions for disbandment...minimum size of port, minimum CAP requirement, out of range of enemy LBA, and a combination of above conditions.

That or just make ships in port invulnerable when playing vs AI to compensate for AI shortcomings.

Any suggestions?

Good questions Ron.... I gave a lot of thought to the ship problem during my time in UV. If I were coding the AI I would put a code value on every base (a number) the higher the number the less secure the base is.

I would increment the security value based on the following:
- Within range of enemy LBA adds 2
- Within range of enemy Bombers not including FB’s (for every 20 AC)
- Within range of enemy torpedo bombers (for every 10 AC)
- Within 2 turns sailing (at 20kts) of a major enemy port (Size 4+) adds 2.

I would decrement the number for:
- every 10 fighters present

Let's take Shortland as an example.
It has a Squadron of 30 A6M3's.
It is in range of Lunga which has 24 F4F's, 24, P-38's, 27 B-25's and 30 B-26's.
It is in range of Buna which has 20 F4U's, 16 TBM's and 30 SBD's

Shortland is in range of enemy air. Adds 2
There are a total of 103 Bombers. Adds 103/20 = 5.150
There are a total of 16 torpedo bombers = 16/10 = 1.600
It is within 2 turns sailing of Lunga a size 4 port. Adds 2.
It has 30 fighters stationed here. 30/10 = 3

So that gives Shortland the nice number of ( 2 + 5.150 + 1.600 + 2 ) – 3 = 7.75. Whenever the AI needs to make a decision based around Shortland it can use that number to aid the evaluation. With a very low number it could know to move out fighters for better use elsewhere. It could use the base as a supply hub or whatever. If the number becomes high, it could move shipping, reinforce with more air cover – or maybe even start an operation to remove the threat. ;)

It could also be used to evaluate the safety of a given hex for determining TF paths. You can make a decision on what’s too high a number to feel safe, say 5 (or any number that works after evaluating results). Then you can make decision, like that port is too hot to dock at or it can reroute at transport TF.

Theses are just some off the cuff ideas, and you can always adjust the numbers. For shipping you could add things like the presence of mines, or spotted enemy TF’s.

Something like this would have a major impact on the speed of turn resolution but would be worth the tradeoff I think.

quote:

I agree, but only with the caveat that the number arrived at is based on the AI's own recon and intel and NOT on a "cheat".

quote:

an "airbal" factor was added to the game a long time ago to help prevent some of the symptoms being seen here. IIRC, it "works" but given the complexity of the AI routines...its been theorized that other factors sometimes act to cancel the feature out.

Its a thorny problem.

quote:

If it's there it definately seems not to be working... or doesn't have a strong enough say in the AI decision tree. I think if this got tuned the ship->port->sunk death spiral could be avoided.