RE: About AI... (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945



Message

Joe D. -> RE: About AI... (2/23/2008 10:39:07 PM)

The AI is capable of forming TFs for bombardment, transport, etc., but I've never seen it coordinate or concentrate any of them together for an invasion.



Pyrrhos1976 -> RE: About AI... (2/23/2008 11:20:09 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Joe D.

The AI is capable of forming TFs for bombardment, transport, etc., but I've never seen it coordinate or concentrate any of them together for an invasion.


[X(] But how can it succeed an invasion ??

At least, after the landing, is it able to support the offensive (reenforcement, air or bombardment TFs) ?



Joe D. -> RE: About AI... (2/24/2008 1:23:50 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Pyrrhos1976

quote:

ORIGINAL: Joe D.
The AI is capable of forming TFs for bombardment, transport, etc., but I've never seen it coordinate or concentrate any of them together for an invasion.


[X(] But how can it succeed an invasion ??

At least, after the landing, is it able to support the offensive (reenforcement, air or bombardment TFs) ?


It doesn't always succeed, and rarely ever supports an invasion. Why do you think PBEM is so popular w/this game?



Pyrrhos1976 -> RE: About AI... (2/24/2008 10:50:50 AM)

I know.
And on the defensive, is it worst ? I have the impression that AI sends TFs with CA and BB to bombard ennemy invaders without air support: in the Marianas scenario, the japanese BB (Musashi, Yamato) are destroyed in suicide mission (june 1944, it's a little too soon for this kind of mission...), while japanese CVs remain far from allied CVs and offer no air protection at all.

But maybe, in the Marianas scenario, is it partly the consequence of the overwhelming allied air power: there's no solution for the japanese player (as historically)... and if this is the AI then [sm=fighting0045.gif]



Zebedee -> RE: About AI... (2/25/2008 7:32:50 AM)

The AI is just as dumb as the AIs in any other very complex strategy games. Not really a criticism, just a comment on how difficult it is to script an AI which behaves in any way rationally.

But for the first couple of grand campaigns, it can be quite good fun as you're just learning the game too.

Oh about scattering CVs - yes the AI does tend to throw in reinforcements piecemeal. So once you've broken the first Air combat TF, you'll see the AI send single CV tfs steaming up to Truk with only a cruiser and dd for company. It will bomb every island on the way there and run out of fuel half-way there. You'll find that by mid-1942 the 'big fist' of Japanese CVs can go anywhere and do anything without having to worry about Allied airpower unless a stray bomb from a B-17 flying at 18000 ft interferes.

After your first grand campaign against the AI with each side, consider implementing house rules to help even things up a bit. eg I force myself to pay political points in order to use a unit outside of its 'normal' area of operations, even if it isn't required by the rules (eg a division assigned to Southern Area has to be paid for in order to be used in Burma Area).

Other than that, there's not much to be done. Hopefully the new expansion with its moddable AI modules should add a bit more spice. But even then, I'm not expecting miracles.




hvymtl13 -> RE: About AI... (2/26/2008 8:03:01 AM)

The AI gave a good showing in the Gilbert Islands, and somewhat but increasingly less so in the Marshalls. I couldn't say if the AI's actions in the Gilbert Islands was scripted or what but it was effective in those battles.
After Makin Tarawa and Kwajelein were occupied and built up it seemd the AI did not detect the danger or make the neccesary adjustments to it's tactics to protect surface fleets and or invasion fleets. I believe it is at least a capable opponent in the Gilbert/Marshall Island Battles.  But doesn't know the meaning of the phrase -one to many trips to the well..

I've never played the japs but from US player perspective it seems to concentrate it's CV forces fairly well. At least into Early 43.



jwilkerson -> RE: About AI... (2/26/2008 8:57:12 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Mike Scholl

In my experiance, the AI is never competant. But it's incompetancy shows up less in a smaller, shorter scenario.


I disagree.


For me the amazing thing about the WITP AI only shows up in the campaign game. When I play Allies against AI Japan and Japan can actually take the SRA in a historically reasonable timeframe.




jwilkerson -> RE: About AI... (2/26/2008 9:05:08 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Joe D.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Pyrrhos1976

quote:

ORIGINAL: Joe D.
The AI is capable of forming TFs for bombardment, transport, etc., but I've never seen it coordinate or concentrate any of them together for an invasion.


[X(] But how can it succeed an invasion ??

At least, after the landing, is it able to support the offensive (reenforcement, air or bombardment TFs) ?


It doesn't always succeed, and rarely ever supports an invasion. Why do you think PBEM is so popular w/this game?





PBEM is not popular. According to the experts

Joel Billings says: "By the way, my guess is that 80% of WitP buyers play AI only"

http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/fb.asp?m=1629218



Mike Scholl -> RE: About AI... (2/26/2008 12:42:02 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: jwilkerson


quote:

ORIGINAL: Mike Scholl

In my experiance, the AI is never competant. But it's incompetancy shows up less in a smaller, shorter scenario.


I disagree.


For me the amazing thing about the WITP AI only shows up in the campaign game. When I play Allies against AI Japan and Japan can actually take the SRA in a historically reasonable timeframe.





I made that point earlier in the thread. But how often can you play the first 5 months of the war from the Allied side before getting bored? After that the poor AI "loses itself in the forest" and begins bumping into the trees. Not it's fault perhaps, but not much fun either.



Mike Scholl -> RE: About AI... (2/26/2008 12:47:48 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: jwilkerson
PBEM is not popular. According to the experts

Joel Billings says: "By the way, my guess is that 80% of WitP buyers play AI only"

http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/fb.asp?m=1629218



Could well be correct..., but what are the figures for those who continue to play WITP? While it's obvious that this forum over-represents the PBEM crowd, it's not at all obvious that they don't constitute at least 50% of those who still have the game on their systems...



Zebedee -> RE: About AI... (2/26/2008 6:45:14 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: jwilkerson
PBEM is not popular. According to the experts

Joel Billings says: "By the way, my guess is that 80% of WitP buyers play AI only"

http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/fb.asp?m=1629218


That's because some 80% of us learn from our mistakes and stop at one divorce [;)]



Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.640625