AI and containers (Full Version)

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



Message

tiredoftryingnames -> AI and containers (3/23/2007 4:06:12 PM)

I have fog of war on but from what I can tell just from what I can see the AI seems to build more containers than it can fill and looks to be misusing it's resources. All it's units are centered in VA with 1 small corps in northern GA along with 1 empty division. West of that there isn't 1 AI unit to confront my forces that are moving at will.

[image]local://upfiles/4959/7A171667B2E547558A27CD150F7B7FF4.jpg[/image]



Erik Rutins -> RE: AI and containers (3/23/2007 4:47:07 PM)

Could you post a save of this game please?



tiredoftryingnames -> RE: AI and containers (3/23/2007 5:40:55 PM)

This is farther along than the screenshot. One army has started filling with troops but it still has 2 armies I can see that are empty. I don't know how many others are out there empty with FOW on. This save shows more how the AI has abandoned the western areas. The forum only allows uploading of text and pictures so I've provided a link to the save.

http://members.cox.net/jtaz/Save_AI.zip



Greyhunterlp -> RE: AI and containers (3/23/2007 5:50:27 PM)

I've seen this in my current game as well, three armies sitting on the river, but no troops in them.



Erik Rutins -> RE: AI and containers (3/23/2007 6:04:32 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Grey Hunter
I've seen this in my current game as well, three armies sitting on the river, but no troops in them.


The fact that it builds some extra containers doesn't concern me too much. It does use them eventually and containers are cheap. While it's still much better than in previous versions, we need to tweak the AI to protect its national capital better and not ignore the west while doing so. The comment about the west being ignored while the AI build up the east is what really caught my attention. Thanks for the save.



Gil R. -> RE: AI and containers (3/23/2007 6:27:04 PM)

Building extra containers makes sense if the AI is hoping to get lucky and produce containers with superior officers than the ones it currently has. But of course, it shouldn't be going nuts in building those.



dude -> RE: AI and containers (3/23/2007 8:40:56 PM)

In the three games I've played so far the AI has done the exact same thing each time... build a large force in Virginia, build lot's of empty army containers (I've seen as many as five empty ones sitting in Richmond), and fill forts and cities with troops.  Then at some point, in each case shortly after Kentucky entered (twice for USA once for CSA) it shifts it one and only army with units out of Virginia and marches it to western Kentucky and there it sits.  Meanwhile its new empty armies just sit in Richmond.  It slowly fills up all the forts and cities it can but leaves all the containers empty.

I've been playing with FoW off so I could see what it was doing and it likes to build lots of empty containers (particullary ivisions and armies.)  It then never fills any of them.  Richmond seems to be the gathering place of the empty armies while I've seen the Divsions just sit throughout the south moving back and forth... empty.

There should be limit of some type on the number of containers it will build.  Building a lot of empty armies just to fill it with nothing but a four star is dumb.  It shouldn't actually build armies or corps unless there are units to put into those.  Have the AI construct divsions first for its brigades, then if there are two divsions sitting around not in another container, build a corps, and once there are two corps sitting around then build an army.  Building Armies just because you can is not a good tactic. 

The only good point when playing as the Union vs a confederate AI... I'll never have to face Lee, Longstreet, etc... in one force... they're all busy commanding their own paper armies... [:D] 

Dude



Erik Rutins -> RE: AI and containers (3/23/2007 9:22:57 PM)

Dude,

In my 1.9.4 test games, I'm seeing Lee and Longstreet in command and the AI is generally filling those extra containers up after the first year or so of war. Which scenario are you playing and how for along are you?

Regards,

- Erik



dude -> RE: AI and containers (3/24/2007 9:55:16 AM)

I've been playing Southern Steel... and by the time I get to Jan 1863 there are usually a number of empty armies in Richmond and all of the cities and fort are filling with troops... there would be more but usually by this time I've taken Fredericksburg or have been there laying seige . The only army with troops always marches off to Kentucky.



[image]local://upfiles/16511/03A43E4D88764E2E98248DD8520CD7D6.jpg[/image]

This is Sept. 1862. The only reason there are any troops here is he ran out of places to put them. I took all the forts in Frdkbrg. However there are still two other totally empty armies. They shouldn't have been built until needed. It's a waste of good generals.




dude -> RE: AI and containers (3/24/2007 9:59:45 AM)

Here a shot from another game I played before the current one:

[image]local://upfiles/16511/103FF81F81554805BA6129A398847AEC.jpg[/image]

Again this would have been about mid 1862. All the troops were sitting in Frdkbrg. Even still, if you were to have placed the troops in those forts and nearby cities into these armies, you wouldn't of had enough men for even one full army... so what was the point of building 4? Not to mention 6 empty divisions, and an empty corps???[&:]

I would tweak when it builds containers. Only build when there's a need... not just because you can. They don't take that long to build; so once there's some spare brigades sitting around... build a division... then when there's some divisions sitting around, build a corps... etc...

It's a shame that Lee, Staurt, and the Johnston's are wasted. In this particular game there were two other armies at this time... one in Kentucky with all the troops and another down south that was making its way to Richmond...it had just be built. Six armies was a bit much.

just my 2 cents... [:)]

Dude



tiredoftryingnames -> RE: AI and containers (3/25/2007 10:02:26 PM)

Well I finished the game that screenshot came from. The summary review of how the war went goes as follows. The AI abandoned the West early and the only units I encountered were cavalry and indian units forming in Indian Territory. I was able to use small divisions with siege artillery to move at will from Kentucky westwards reducing forts and capturing cities. By the end of the game I controlled all land west of the states on the atlantic coast, with the exception of some provinces in TX and LA that had cities and forts. I controlled a good part of NC and SC. I just ran out of time. I also completely blockaded the southern ports. I had to not build my army up that fast early on to get the frigates and fleets going. But eventually I had 5 naval units outside every port. The AI never built any ships to challenge the Navy so I could have went for the minimum and saved resources.

VA was a different story. All the AIs army ended up there by 1864 so to match him all my armies and new units slowly moved there so DC wouldn't fall. Then it became a boring stalemate. I was running wild in the west, and doing nothing in VA. I had over 350,000 troops i could move together into the disputed provinces. The AI usually had between 280 and 315,000. But with the game limits on troops in battle my superior numbers never seemed to matter and the attacker always lost. If the AI got bold and attacked me I won. If I sent every troop I had into Fredricksburg it was bloody and I lost in the end. I outflanked the AI and could win smaller battles reducing what it controlled but sooner or later we'd be back to all our armies fighting for 1 province and the defender always won. So I could not shatter his field army or take VA. VA is all the AI cares about. With all the improvements to the game I have to say until the AI puts up a fight in more than 3 provinces the human player will quickly learn to let the stalemate happen and just surround VA and blitz through the rest of the south. Not attacking an unwinnable battle and giving the AI points for a decisive victory I could have probably won just on taking every city outside of VA.



Erik Rutins -> RE: AI and containers (3/25/2007 10:10:15 PM)

tiredoftryinggames,

This seems to only really happen in Southern Steel as I do see the AI contesting the West in Coming Fury. I'm guessing the increased forts in Southern Steel make the over-garrisoning worse than in the July scenario and lead it to have more of those empty containers as well.



Gil R. -> RE: AI and containers (3/25/2007 10:12:00 PM)

Thank you for your feedback, which is quite useful. Could you tell us which difficulty level you were on? Also, were you playing only quick battles, or a mixture of quick and detailed?

Eric's tweaking the strategic AI, and we'll get a new build up soon -- perhaps that will solve some of these problems.

Your post raises an issue I've been meaning to ask about -- is the defender terrain bonus too strong? If it's impossible for the attacker to win without overwhelming superiority, that's bad. Is this something that needs to be adjusted, either in provinces that have forts (and thus the forts bonus) or don't, or both?



Gil R. -> RE: AI and containers (3/25/2007 10:12:51 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Erik Rutins

tiredoftryinggames,

This seems to only really happen in Southern Steel as I do see the AI contesting the West in Coming Fury. I'm guessing the increased forts in Southern Steel make the over-garrisoning worse than in the July scenario and lead it to have more of those empty containers as well.


Interesting point. Yet another reason that we should test the game when it's not going garrison-happy.



ericbabe -> RE: AI and containers (3/25/2007 10:54:09 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Gil R.
Eric's tweaking the strategic AI, and we'll get a new build up soon -- perhaps that will solve some of these problems.


DISCLAIMER!!!!!

Gil doesn't actually know when the new build is coming. Gil is not promising or implying that a new build is coming soon. I am working on a new build. It may be ready soon. It might not be ready soon. I don't know when the new build will be ready. I'm not promising or implying that a new build is coming soon.



dude -> RE: AI and containers (3/25/2007 11:25:42 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: ericbabe


quote:

ORIGINAL: Gil R.
Eric's tweaking the strategic AI, and we'll get a new build up soon -- perhaps that will solve some of these problems.


DISCLAIMER!!!!!

Gil doesn't actually know when the new build is coming. Gil is not promising or implying that a new build is coming soon. I am working on a new build. It may be ready soon. It might not be ready soon. I don't know when the new build will be ready. I'm not promising or implying that a new build is coming soon.




... so just to clarify... when where you promising the new build? [:D]



Gil R. -> RE: AI and containers (3/25/2007 11:35:24 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: ericbabe

quote:

ORIGINAL: Gil R.
Eric's tweaking the strategic AI, and we'll get a new build up soon -- perhaps that will solve some of these problems.


DISCLAIMER!!!!!

Gil doesn't actually know when the new build is coming. Gil is not promising or implying that a new build is coming soon. I am working on a new build. It may be ready soon. It might not be ready soon. I don't know when the new build will be ready. I'm not promising or implying that a new build is coming soon.



Well, of course, "soon" is a nebulous term, just like "seems" -- need I quote the dictionary entry on the word to you? [:D]




tiredoftryingnames -> RE: AI and containers (3/26/2007 12:53:54 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Gil R.

Thank you for your feedback, which is quite useful. Could you tell us which difficulty level you were on? Also, were you playing only quick battles, or a mixture of quick and detailed?

Eric's tweaking the strategic AI, and we'll get a new build up soon -- perhaps that will solve some of these problems.

Your post raises an issue I've been meaning to ask about -- is the defender terrain bonus too strong? If it's impossible for the attacker to win without overwhelming superiority, that's bad. Is this something that needs to be adjusted, either in provinces that have forts (and thus the forts bonus) or don't, or both?


Sergeant. The one where there's no bonus or subtraction for the human player.

A mixture of both. Mostly Quick as I wanted to see how the whole scenario played out. I did a few detailed just to see the improvements there. Once the armies got to 300K+ I just didn't see any use as it played out. With terrain and forts and the limit on how many troops the attacker can field at the start I could never win as long as the AI had 250K to 300K troops. I was buying attributes and improved weapons like mad and could never win. If the AI attacked me I slaughtered even if all my armies weren't together.



Walloc -> RE: AI and containers (3/26/2007 2:57:07 AM)

Tired,

Can i ask if u noticed ur disposition of ur armies in the East?

Kind regards,

Rasmus



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.71875