A.I. in detailed battles (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [American Civil War] >> Forge of Freedom: The American Civil War 1861-1865 >> Forge of Freedom - Support



Message

steveuk -> A.I. in detailed battles (12/11/2006 2:41:29 PM)

I am playing the CSA July 1861 start, advanced rules with near start at Captain level.

Every turn my small force in Fredricksburg is attacked. This is fine but the problem is that the Union forces very rarely attack me once the forces have been set up on the tactical map? (see image below).
In this particular battle, the union had 23 brigades to my 6. He launched one suicide attack at my artillery which resulted in him sustaining over 400 casualties plus a wounded leader. My casualties were 1!
For the remainder of the day his forces did not move until after night time when they all routed.
This is happening on every turn with varying amounts of forces so is becoming very boring.
Can you look at the code and at least get an army to attack if they have initiated a battle?
I this instance the Union's will to fight started at 4 and mine was 20....if this is the cause of the Union's troops reluctance to engage then surely they should not start it on the strategic map.

[image][/image]

[image]local://upfiles/16660/32E27713D66B4562A082214F157196AC.jpg[/image]



Knu -> RE: A.I. in detailed battles (12/11/2006 3:33:23 PM)

Hi

I have the same complaint. Most of my battles are just clicking over and over again the "pass turn on all units" button, while drinking coffee.

There doesn't seem to be any coherent plan for AI to use its troops. Those detailed battles where some fighting actually occurs, the AI sends three to five units piecemeal to my lines, which of course gets killed and whiped out. After that the AI units are in panic and battle is over. This is like North & South "back then", where there was no challenge.

I know I know, I can always play multiplayer, but unfortunately my timetable isn't such, that I could reasonably agree with someone to play via emails etc.

Good thing is, that I dug up all my other Civil War games and enjoying those again. I just wish that the detailed combat would also function, then I/We would have a very good Civil War game.

Kimmo



MT Melon -> RE: A.I. in detailed battles (12/11/2006 5:11:32 PM)

Hey guys

I had the same question some time ago - see this link    http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=1318391 .



Knu -> RE: A.I. in detailed battles (12/11/2006 5:34:45 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Private Parts
Hey guys
I had the same question some time ago - see this link    http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=1318391 .


Hello

Yes I saw that thread a while ago, but I've now played till December 1862 and the Union side still acts the same way. I´m playing 1st Sgt.? level and Steveuk above says, that he is playing Captain level.

In my game, it also seems to me, that Union isn't producing any troops, its armies in practise are only pieces from what they were in November 1861, due to its piecemeal attacks.

There are also unrests here and there, because AI isn't answering to "any" governor requests, or so it seems. I can see from the governor screen, that AI (Union) side has several demands from the governors, which it disregards, I assume?. This of course eats its income and thus the armies shrink and shrink. There are starting to be more and more angry governors in the Union side due to this, even when no major battles have been fought. Biggest one was over 12000 Union casualties and about 5000 Confederacy casualties. The battle lines are still the same: Missouri - Kentycky - Maryland and I haven't really invaded anything else than Maryland, Missouri and few areas around Pittsburg, trying to see if AI would act, which it doesn't. No cities has changed hands.



steveuk -> RE: A.I. in detailed battles (12/11/2006 5:58:04 PM)

Thanks Private Parts for the link.  I read the replies to your question and it seems to me that the problem is the Union's will to fight and/or morale.  If this is the case then I wonder why the A.I. initiates the attack to begin with which I'm sure can be adjusted by a patch? 
My last battle in Fredricksburg had 4 CSA brigades against 28 Union.  The Union launched one attack with a leader (who was killed) and then sat out the rest of the day until nightfall.  They continued waiting for the remainder of the next day until rout time at 00:10.
I'm not sure that the difficulty level matters as I play on Captain, also the suggestion of far start is not applicable as I play on near start.
This is an excellent game design which is why I suppose we all hope it can be made even better.  I certainly do not expect to be beaten by an A.I. but I would at least like the opportunity to be pushed [:'(]
I suppose the most annoying thing is that if the above battle was resolved in quick combat....I would have lost, so please Gil and Co....work on this problem.



steveuk -> RE: A.I. in detailed battles (12/11/2006 6:13:55 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Knu

Hi

I have the same complaint. Most of my battles are just clicking over and over again the "pass turn on all units" button, while drinking coffee.

There doesn't seem to be any coherent plan for AI to use its troops. Those detailed battles where some fighting actually occurs, the AI sends three to five units piecemeal to my lines, which of course gets killed and whiped out. After that the AI units are in panic and battle is over. This is like North & South "back then", where there was no challenge.

I know I know, I can always play multiplayer, but unfortunately my timetable isn't such, that I could reasonably agree with someone to play via emails etc.

Good thing is, that I dug up all my other Civil War games and enjoying those again. I just wish that the detailed combat would also function, then I/We would have a very good Civil War game.

Kimmo


Hi Kimmo,

It seems that the 'pass turn on all units' button is going to wear out at this rate [:D]
Like in your game, the Union in mine appear to be in dire straits. They have lost 2 leaders killed in their punitive attacks against me for no gain. Their units in Maryland have a strength of around 400,000 yet they are unable to beat my 4 brigades in Fredricksburg [X(]
A lot of my brigades are now approaching full strength as my casualties are minimal. Even in the West the Union are not doing a great deal.
To try to even things up and cut down on the boring detailed battles which are not really battles at all. I have been playing all conflicts in quick mode unless Lee is involved or Fredericksburg is attacked which it is every turn [>:]



Hard Sarge -> RE: A.I. in detailed battles (12/11/2006 6:15:28 PM)

How are you getting a Will of 20 with only 6 units ?

if for what ever reason, the AI thinks you have a strong, unbreakable line, it will hold off, or it may be waiting on its troops, which from what you are saying, it should be trying to flank you





steveuk -> RE: A.I. in detailed battles (12/11/2006 7:05:55 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hard Sarge

How are you getting a Will of 20 with only 6 units ?

if for what ever reason, the AI thinks you have a strong, unbreakable line, it will hold off, or it may be waiting on its troops, which from what you are saying, it should be trying to flank you





Hi Sarge,

Here is the will allocation, CSA to Union;

Unit Quality: 6 - 3
Unit Strength: 1 - 0
Disposition: 4 - 2
Defender Bonus: 4 - 0
General: 5 - 1

Morale values: 6336 - 2253

Why is the Union strength listed as 0?

The particular battle from above consisted of my 4 brigades v 23 Union brigades and ended with the one attack by the Union General stack inflicting 10 casualties on the CSA. They suffered 561 casualties. For the remaining two days I did not see any further Union troops.

It is obvious that the Union will to fight is not high enough which is fine but then the Union should either withdraw after the first day or they should not initiate combat in the first place. It is getting really boring turn after turn having to keep pressing the 'pass all units' button.



Feltan -> RE: A.I. in detailed battles (12/11/2006 7:16:11 PM)

In general terms, there seems to be a bias in favor of the South -- both on the strategic level and in detailed battles. I am not sure if design decisions were made to make things "fair," but the Union seems handicapped in many ways either as the AI, or as the human player.

Regards,
Feltan



Hard Sarge -> RE: A.I. in detailed battles (12/11/2006 7:53:31 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: steveuk

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hard Sarge

How are you getting a Will of 20 with only 6 units ?

if for what ever reason, the AI thinks you have a strong, unbreakable line, it will hold off, or it may be waiting on its troops, which from what you are saying, it should be trying to flank you





Hi Sarge,

Here is the will allocation, CSA to Union;

Unit Quality: 6 - 3
Unit Strength: 1 - 0
Disposition: 4 - 2
Defender Bonus: 4 - 0
General: 5 - 1

Morale values: 6336 - 2253

Why is the Union strength listed as 0?

The particular battle from above consisted of my 4 brigades v 23 Union brigades and ended with the one attack by the Union General stack inflicting 10 casualties on the CSA. They suffered 561 casualties. For the remaining two days I did not see any further Union troops.

It is obvious that the Union will to fight is not high enough which is fine but then the Union should either withdraw after the first day or they should not initiate combat in the first place. It is getting really boring turn after turn having to keep pressing the 'pass all units' button.


not sure what is going on here, from that strength number, those units may be pretty torn up to start with, and while the Union has a lot of units, they do not have a lot of troops in them

I have seen where the AI will try to get a battle in its favor and then call for help, if it does not like the battle, it will not call for help, but

overall, not sure what or why this is going on

it may not be a good answer, you can always move forward a few hexes and "get" the AI to see you



Hard Sarge -> RE: A.I. in detailed battles (12/11/2006 8:01:14 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Feltan

In general terms, there seems to be a bias in favor of the South -- both on the strategic level and in detailed battles. I am not sure if design decisions were made to make things "fair," but the Union seems handicapped in many ways either as the AI, or as the human player.

Regards,
Feltan


I will say that I spent most of my time testing the CSA side, but the time I played as the Union, I was able to steamroll the CSA, and there were some concern that maybe the Union was too strong and still needed to be toned down some more

beginning game, early/mid 62, the Union is going to have trouble on the battlefield, late 62, early 63, you should be more then able to hold your own, and be able to mass of any battle you want



Joram -> RE: A.I. in detailed battles (12/11/2006 8:20:48 PM)

I'll also just post I've seen the same behaviour. I changed start to "Near" which helped a little bit but I was still noticing the AI holding significant portions of the army in reserve. I usually demolish the AI because they attack piecemeal.

I will note that defensively, the AI seems decent, but offensively it is horrible.

As far as the play balance comment, I don't have a lot of hours but I also thought it seemed to be favoring the south. But time will tell.



steveuk -> RE: A.I. in detailed battles (12/11/2006 8:30:19 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Hard Sarge

quote:

ORIGINAL: steveuk

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hard Sarge

How are you getting a Will of 20 with only 6 units ?

if for what ever reason, the AI thinks you have a strong, unbreakable line, it will hold off, or it may be waiting on its troops, which from what you are saying, it should be trying to flank you





Hi Sarge,

Here is the will allocation, CSA to Union;

Unit Quality: 6 - 3
Unit Strength: 1 - 0
Disposition: 4 - 2
Defender Bonus: 4 - 0
General: 5 - 1

Morale values: 6336 - 2253

Why is the Union strength listed as 0?

The particular battle from above consisted of my 4 brigades v 23 Union brigades and ended with the one attack by the Union General stack inflicting 10 casualties on the CSA. They suffered 561 casualties. For the remaining two days I did not see any further Union troops.

It is obvious that the Union will to fight is not high enough which is fine but then the Union should either withdraw after the first day or they should not initiate combat in the first place. It is getting really boring turn after turn having to keep pressing the 'pass all units' button.


not sure what is going on here, from that strength number, those units may be pretty torn up to start with, and while the Union has a lot of units, they do not have a lot of troops in them

I have seen where the AI will try to get a battle in its favor and then call for help, if it does not like the battle, it will not call for help, but

overall, not sure what or why this is going on

it may not be a good answer, you can always move forward a few hexes and "get" the AI to see you


The strength value does seem strange but when I do come across Union units they are normally 'whole' according to the graphic icon which dimishes as units take casualties.
I wish I could resolve the battles in Fredericksburg using quick combat but I know I would lose as I only have the 4 brigades defending.
I also know that I can 'seek out' the Union forces which I have done, but with only the 4 brigades, I leave myself open to defeat especially when movement goes astray at the wrong time.

To my mind the simple answer is to have the Union A.I. check each evening on the 'Will to fight' figures and either withdraw or not to initiate combat in the first place. Please have a word with the powers that be Sarge and get this sorted [;)]

FELTON....

Not sure if the A.I. is biased against the Union as I only play the CSA. The problem I have is easily solved by the A.I. making a simple If/and/or check before engaging and during tactical battles.
The game design overall is great but just let down at the moment by some silly niggles that can hopefully be rectified.



Hard Sarge -> RE: A.I. in detailed battles (12/11/2006 8:58:38 PM)

still am not sure what is going on in your battles, unless you really got a dog of a General in charge of the Union army

sometimes I have seen the AI hang back, but most times it is very agressive, and with only 4 or so units, it should be trying to flank you



steveuk -> RE: A.I. in detailed battles (12/11/2006 10:02:41 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Joram

I'll also just post I've seen the same behaviour. I changed start to "Near" which helped a little bit but I was still noticing the AI holding significant portions of the army in reserve. I usually demolish the AI because they attack piecemeal.

I will note that defensively, the AI seems decent, but offensively it is horrible.

As far as the play balance comment, I don't have a lot of hours but I also thought it seemed to be favoring the south. But time will tell.


I have also noticed in areas where a victory location is available the A.I. does advance on it even with a low will factor. This does not help my Fredericksburg situation though as it has no victory hexes there or not to my knowledge anyway.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hard Sarge

still am not sure what is going on in your battles, unless you really got a dog of a General in charge of the Union army

sometimes I have seen the AI hang back, but most times it is very agressive, and with only 4 or so units, it should be trying to flank you


Well I just killed another one....McClerren or something like that was his name. Thats three Union Generals killed now in there attempts to take Fredericksburg.
If the A.I. has the ability to outflank that would be great....but will it ever use it?

EDIT: Why does the spare supply wagon seem to always start a long way from your main force and normally within a few hexes of enemy units? I have just lost another one owing to this and it seems strange that a non combatant unit would be left on it's own in a RL situation.



carnifex -> RE: A.I. in detailed battles (12/11/2006 10:04:18 PM)

I have the same problem as CSA, or rather two :

1) The Union insists on attacking Fredericsburg every turn.  Most of the time it will send something like 45k to my 55k and then lose.  What's worse is it also insists on sending very small forces, from 1 to 4 brigades or such, and those guys just get chased out of there, usually with pursuit casualties.

2) I've stopped playing detailed battles because the AI just sits there most of the time.  It will attack with one or two units and then nothing - when I scout I see the rest of the army just sitting there a couple of hexes back.  I've actually had to bait the US into attacking by marching my cavalry up and down their line - they would attack my cav and then I would move it back - eventually I could lead them to my line.  If the low morale is responsible for this inaction, shouldn't the US not be getting into such fights in the first place?

In my latest game (Major diff setting), the US is -10vp and I'm up 9vp just from pressing "pass turn all units" in Fredericsburg.   I've had a couple of smaller indecisive battles out west, but eventually the Union is going to lose the game simply because they're butting their heads into Fredericsburg launching attacks they can't win.  



steveuk -> RE: A.I. in detailed battles (12/11/2006 10:12:53 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: carnifex

I have the same problem as CSA, or rather two :

1) The Union insists on attacking Fredericsburg every turn.  Most of the time it will send something like 45k to my 55k and then lose.  What's worse is it also insists on sending very small forces, from 1 to 4 brigades or such, and those guys just get chased out of there, usually with pursuit casualties.

2) I've stopped playing detailed battles because the AI just sits there most of the time.  It will attack with one or two units and then nothing - when I scout I see the rest of the army just sitting there a couple of hexes back.  I've actually had to bait the US into attacking by marching my cavalry up and down their line - they would attack my cav and then I would move it back - eventually I could lead them to my line.  If the low morale is responsible for this inaction, shouldn't the US not be getting into such fights in the first place?

In my latest game (Major diff setting), the US is -10vp and I'm up 9vp just from pressing "pass turn all units" in Fredericsburg.   I've had a couple of smaller indecisive battles out west, but eventually the Union is going to lose the game simply because they're butting their heads into Fredericsburg launching attacks they can't win.  



Well as you have probably read above, this is also my problem but can be resolved by a simple check before combat starts.

Regarding the difficulty settings....When I increase them I only notice a change in the Unions technology advances which seem to come thick and fast. I would imagine it also increases their resources but apart from that....does it improve their combat prowess?



ericbabe -> RE: A.I. in detailed battles (12/12/2006 12:13:37 AM)

If their unit strength is listed as zero, then it doesn't seem likely that they have 23 brigades in the battle.  Since their will-to-fight is 2 to your 20, the AI is "reluctant" to engage your units.  Perhaps the AI should withdraw from the battle in situations such as this rather than wait it out?  Thanks for the report.

By the way, the AI does have a few definite strategies that it uses when attacking and each are attempts to avoid piecemeal attacks.



Hard Sarge -> RE: A.I. in detailed battles (12/12/2006 12:22:53 AM)

yes, some of the reports here are odd

I wish you could see the battle I got running now, I got two waves of Union troops hitting me at the same time, some of his attacks are hitting some 3-400 losses from me and my return fires are doing 2-500 on him, I got two forts and 2 Guns, so that should tilt it a little bit shortly, but the AI has just brought up one of his guns

the AI has brought in 2 of the AoPs and has decent troops and morale, and is pushing the battle

pushing it pretty good too !





Hard Sarge -> RE: A.I. in detailed battles (12/12/2006 12:25:39 AM)

which he is going to break soon, nobody can take those losses (which if he can make another round like the last one, I can not take them either)

[image]local://upfiles/1438/E88320A46B6F4DDB87D89969EBFB8303.jpg[/image]



Joram -> RE: A.I. in detailed battles (12/12/2006 12:29:17 AM)

Kudos to you for adding in some real tactics. I did lose one battle when I was totally outflanked and they took my one VP hex (this was before I realized that would immediately rout your army!). Other than that though, they still by and large attack piecemeal even if nominally part of the same group.




Hard Sarge -> RE: A.I. in detailed battles (12/12/2006 12:31:04 AM)

the AI just broke my southern flank, close to 3000 losses from that area

I need a rush counter attack in the middle to break them now, or I will also lose one of my guns

I lose Gardner

(dang, why do you always lose the commanders you like ?)





[image]local://upfiles/1438/6E9815EEE00E46448184A0497C9216AB.jpg[/image]



Hard Sarge -> RE: A.I. in detailed battles (12/12/2006 12:37:25 AM)

gonna be close

rush out a Inf Bde that is past the breaking point to put pressure on the Union Gun, I need one round of good Vollies, before the Union can pull off another round of charges, or I lose the southern flank (don't care about the land, the troops will be slaughtered)



[image]local://upfiles/1438/CB9B75243C34438D8C548359A22E62B5.jpg[/image]



Hard Sarge -> RE: A.I. in detailed battles (12/12/2006 1:05:20 AM)

and just in case, trying to show, that not all battles are going the way it is being reported, now why, we getting the odd ones, I am not sure

this was a good battle



steveuk -> RE: A.I. in detailed battles (12/12/2006 1:18:42 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: ericbabe

If their unit strength is listed as zero, then it doesn't seem likely that they have 23 brigades in the battle.  Since their will-to-fight is 2 to your 20, the AI is "reluctant" to engage your units.  Perhaps the AI should withdraw from the battle in situations such as this rather than wait it out?  Thanks for the report.

By the way, the AI does have a few definite strategies that it uses when attacking and each are attempts to avoid piecemeal attacks.



The figure of 23 brigades were from the military advisor screen. It must have been correct because when the Union routed it list's all the brigades one by one and there were a lot [:D]
The issue is definately down to will to fight so I hope you can adjust this please Eric.

Hard Sarge....thanks for enclosing some screen shots. I have just fought my first major battle in Fredericksburg as the A.I. actually started with a will of 7....I even had to call on reinforcements for my 4 elite brigades [X(]

Do you know how generals can increase there star rating apart from when you assign one at the end of each turn? Also, does this assigning of stars stop at any point as a couple of times the option never appears?



Malagant -> RE: A.I. in detailed battles (12/12/2006 1:20:25 AM)

I've also run across several fights where the AI will force an engagement that it really has no hope of winning...but instead of withdrawing it just sits there, or maybe sends a small attack (which to me seems like it's a probe to try to find me?) which is beaten badly, then a lot of waiting.

As the others have posted, I've found myself hitting the Skip All button quite a bit. I've also recently learned to place all my units on Sentry once I have my position established...then I can do something constructive that I haven't done since I bought this evil game...bathe, eat, speak to my family, sleep... [&o]




Knu -> RE: A.I. in detailed battles (12/12/2006 7:43:17 AM)

If someone wants, I can send my saved game via email.

It is not just the detailed battle that is worrying me, but the whole shape of the Union army. There is about 400.000 men in and around of Washington, which do nothing at all.

However in the West (Kentucky), the disposition for the Union army is getting lower and lower. Now it is -3 (Dec. 1862), when in the Autumn of 1862 it was -2. It isn't launching the piecemeal attacks in Fredericksburg anymore, but in Kentucky and as far as I can see, it isn't receiving replacements, at least not as much as I am.

I'm not experiencing anything like shown in Hard Sarges screenshots. The only major battle was when I moved most of the Army of N.Virginia to Maryland. Only then the Union army moved with a force to Fredericksburg and I had a one major battle.



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.234375