RE: Very confused

RE: Very confused (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition

Message

Canoerebel -> RE: Very confused (10/17/2009 7:30:29 PM)
The innate human need to complain is the bain of nearly everybody who creates for a living - game designers, preachers, writers, musicians, artists, etc. Complainers have no idea how destructive their complaints can be to morale. Most folks are sensitive enough to criticism that one sharply worded complaint can override a dozen or dozens of compliments. It's just human nature to recoil at criticism. (No, not everbody is like that - some folks are calloused against or contrarian to criticism by nature and some folks learn and adjust). The shame of it is that most people are so encouraged by compliments that they double their efforts and will bend over backwards to do more. So complaints tend to dampen productivity and compliments encourage productivity. When people are paying you I guess they have the right to complain, although the same things hold true. But it's really bad when complaints are showered on volunteers - people who donated their time out of a sense of duty or a love of what they are doing. How unthoughtful of people who weep and gnash their teeth and in so doing prove that "no good deed goes unpunished." AE was a labor of love by nearly all involved. They've received plenty of well-deserved and well-earned kudos, but also a ton of unthoughtful petty griping by ungrateful people. Anybody with a lick of sense realizes that programming AI for a game as complex as this one is essentially an impossible task. The AI is remarkable working within inherent constraints imposed by the nature of the beast. If you don't like AI, play against HI (human intelligence). I'm engaged in a PBEM and have found AE magnificent as has my opponent.

Chickenboy -> RE: Very confused (10/17/2009 8:12:15 PM)
Canorebel, I appreciate your point of view and your typically gentlemanly and congenial way on the boards. I like your writing style in your AAR and enjoy your strategic mindset. Your tone is usually measured and refined. I follow most of your posts because of these traits. Perhaps my initial post(s) were a bit caustic. In hindsight, I may have been hurting some of the Devs (particularly Andy Mac) feelings with my language and criticism. But I think this forum is the place to express oneself. This forum is the place to talk these issues through and, if possible, derive satisfaction for Devs and customers / players alike. The absolute WORST thing, IMO, for a game like this is to fade into obscurity because 'new blood' has been chased off for voicing legitimate concerns. With rare exception, I do not consider this to be unthoughtful petty griping. A devolution to fanboyism, glad handing and back slapping for delivering a work of perfection this should not be. Asking people with legitimate concerns about their gaming experience to STFU (albeit in genteel terms) is every bit as detrimental to the long-term well-being of a vibrant forum community. Matrix Games and WiTP-AE benefits from an active forum community, complete with whiners, fanboys, volunteer stalwarts and lurkers. Anybody with a lick of sense should realize the valuable opinion of all stakeholders. There's a place here for all opinions and, where necessary, criticism and critique.

pad152 -> RE: Very confused (10/17/2009 8:24:17 PM)
Look I'm not complaining, I defined the issues I see with the AI and gave Andy some suggestions to his quandry. PBEM is not for everyone, I've tried but, too many players quit when things do go their way, that never happens with the AI. I like many just want the AI to play by or try to look likes it playing with the same rules as the player.

JWE -> RE: Very confused (10/17/2009 8:55:41 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Canoerebel The innate human need to complain is the bain of nearly everybody who creates for a living - game designers, preachers, writers, musicians, artists, etc. Complainers have no idea how destructive their complaints can be to morale. Canoerebel, for myself and those compatriots I can speak for, I sincerely thank you for your kind words. It reminds me much of the critiques of Patrick O’Brian, whose works display a staggering erudition on almost all aspects of 18th century life. But certain Amazon reviewers flush him down the toilet because his description of Boston in 1812 (200 years ago) is not specifically and exactly precise. Oh, what a simple set of scrubs; what a pack of delectacious gonodynes; what hoofs; what baggage; what a rum lot of sea-lawyers brought aboard from the assizes, or out of the bilboes of the old Resolute. Aye, there’s always them. Them as resents their salt pork for a lobscouse. Them as would rather speak idle than trip on the mizzen topsail futtocks. Them as is grum and chuff and have no tenaille. Aye, we know them.

Andy Mac -> RE: Very confused (10/17/2009 9:05:57 PM)
Guys fortunately I dont take this stuff personally I am just unable to give you what you want without making the AI back to stock which is what you dont want although I find it hard to be 100% sure that you dont want the moron back. Basically rthere is a reason for what we have. Every time you guys ask the question I get the question from those higher in the food chain than me can we do anything about X and more often than not the answer is Yes but the AI will be worse - we listen we look but sometimes things are the way they are and its a straight choice Cheat X helps the AI and is obvious if you peek can we tone it down hide it ? Answer yes but Ai will be minor/major/critical worse and typically yhe things that bug folks are int eh majopr critical camp. Now I have beer and a poker tournament tonight so I will see you all later. Pad A few specific responses 1. An AI that looks like it's playing by the same rules as the player (no more 4 engine bombers flying from level 1 or 2 bases, etc.) Teleporting AI task forces, add some random delay so the player doesn't see a ship/TF on one place on the map and than half way across the map on the next turn. I don't mind the AI getting bonuses just having it look like it's playing by the same rules as the player. Limit the load outs for carrier strikes, sometimes it seems AI carrier groups can bomb a location for weeks, (hitting Pearl Harbor of 14 days straight) These are the biggest issues I have with the AI. a. Ai TF's do not ever teleport ships do sometimes but only if in port disbanded this is fundamental tot he AI change it and Ai will be materially worse b/ Remove a cheat on carrier strikes and a lot of the randomness to the AI is gone - not going to get into technical detauils as to why that is by I guarantee jap Ai will be worse and USN AI will be unplayable late war the AI is a MORON it does not say TF A is low on strikes lets send it to replenish AND replace it with another TF for the duration that the incredibly vulnerable invasion TF is now uncovered its not possible to get the AI to think of consequences so this is the best of bad set of options. c. Never seen PH for 14 days straight and have never coded a set of scripts to do that please send save of Ai bombing PH on Dec 21st 4. 4E from 1 and 2 is incredibly rare and only occurs under two circumstances if we stop it sortieing we also stop it moving and this will also materially worsen the Ai - it is a rare occurence that mostly happens when you over run an AI base and th egroup evacs - so my advice is to play through it 2. Sometime after patch2, some discussions/help/how too's in player designed AI scripting (example: how to get the AI to invade Midway, and/or the Aleutians during a campaign and how to get the AI to defend (respond to an invasion of x base.). This way players can develop more historic and/or non-historic AI scripts over time. There is an manual for the editor hasnt anyone read it ? 3. I want an AI that is some what random and dynamic, one that doesn't always do the same thing (big issue with WITP, the AI was so scripted it always did the same thing, at the same point in each campaign). Your idea of multiple scripts randomly selected at the start of a new campaign sounds like it will fit the bill. Maybe a AI script depo/library and how to randomly select scripts. Um the AI that we released with has 13 seperate random scripts and players may add more up to 99 in another thread I pointed out that if you delete 7 - 12 subvariants you will lost all chance of the Ai exploiting attacks - its boring but can be done and the Ai will play a more defensive game 4. Some How to's with the editor on removing some of these restrictions,(reducing restricted commands, # of static units, high garrison levels, etc.) let the players play the way they want. I hope we get a AE version of Witpchk, for checking player made scenarios/campaigns. There is an editor manual....

BigJ62 -> RE: Very confused (10/17/2009 9:26:28 PM)
Some of what everyone has been complaining about the ai cheating on normal level has been corrected for patch 2. No production cheats. No plane upgrade cheats. Reduced planning bonus (35). No more 1s and 2s af for bombers. Factory expansion has been curbed to more reasonable limits based entirely on % of need depending on plane type, also ai will stop production if pool has enough. Fixed bugs that appeared to be cheats, river crossing to name one. Ai cbt TFs now are checked for damage, no planes, no ammo and so forth and rtb if there is a problem. Just so we are clear TFs do not teleport only ships disbanded can be moved to another friendly port if they meet the requirements. In order to make this less noticeable without disrupting the timing of the scripts we would have to write code to anticipate when a script might need ships and then move them there via some delay, I do not anticipate this being done for patch 2 as this can get a little complicated, perhaps patch 3. I play against the ai and knowing that it can move ships from one port to the other does not bother me at all. The way I see it if this had been a human he would have moved them to an advanced base a couple weeks prior to the offensive. Been running a ai vs ai game on normal level and the Japanese ai is surprisingly doing ok. Andy just saw your post and some of that has been fixed.

oldman45 -> RE: Very confused (10/17/2009 9:57:50 PM)
I never minded the cheats, I knew from day one that the AI had to cheat to give me a good game. My only complaint was the AI ships parking at a port and allowing me to sink them all. That seems to have been fixed. In my game for the first time I am having quite a challenge using my old strategies and loving it. Bottom line, I know that in the end I will beat the AI, just going to have to figure out a different way to do it. There are combat results that sometimes don't feel right, there are little things that happen that cause me to kick the cat, but over all, this game has proved to me that it was worth the cost. Thanks! besides, there are people here that still remember pushing ships around on the gym floor [;)]

JamesM -> RE: Very disappointed (10/17/2009 11:16:12 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Chickenboy quote: ORIGINAL: Tankist Been playing WitP forever. Have been greatly enjoying the first 3 days of my AE copy. And then... This thread totally took the wind out of my sales. I play the AI because that's what I like. Am now demoralized about the game and am setting it aside for awhile until I get re-inspired. Very sad. Tankist, Don't take it too hard. I think some of the major issues that I encountered were the result of playing on 'very hard' for some time. I think the game will be more manageable after patch II (soon) on historical settings of difficulty. I'll give it another crack then. Stick with it. If the service and support exhibited by Matrix et. al. in WiTP is any indication, it will get better with a few iterations and tincture of time. I have to agree, I have not played it in the last month and can not find the enthusiasm to go back to it. In some ways the original WitP was harder to play especially in the first 6 months (playing the allied side), after you figure out that the AI send invasions forces with little or no carrier escort and if you keep your carrier forces concentrated I can wreak havoc with the Japanese shipping. The original WitP AI seemed to keep carriers more concentrated. As a result I can be more aggressive with early war use of the US carriers in the WitP-AE than I could be with WitP. I cannot make any comments after the first six months as I have yet to get past that poit of time in WitP-AE.

Canoerebel -> RE: Very confused (10/17/2009 11:36:44 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Chickenboy Canorebel, I appreciate your point of view and your typically gentlemanly and congenial way on the boards. I like your writing style in your AAR and enjoy your strategic mindset. Your tone is usually measured and refined. I follow most of your posts because of these traits. Perhaps my initial post(s) were a bit caustic. In hindsight, I may have been hurting some of the Devs (particularly Andy Mac) feelings with my language and criticism. But I think this forum is the place to express oneself. This forum is the place to talk these issues through and, if possible, derive satisfaction for Devs and customers / players alike. The absolute WORST thing, IMO, for a game like this is to fade into obscurity because 'new blood' has been chased off for voicing legitimate concerns. With rare exception, I do not consider this to be unthoughtful petty griping. A devolution to fanboyism, glad handing and back slapping for delivering a work of perfection this should not be. Asking people with legitimate concerns about their gaming experience to STFU (albeit in genteel terms) is every bit as detrimental to the long-term well-being of a vibrant forum community. Matrix Games and WiTP-AE benefits from an active forum community, complete with whiners, fanboys, volunteer stalwarts and lurkers. Anybody with a lick of sense should realize the valuable opinion of all stakeholders. There's a place here for all opinions and, where necessary, criticism and critique. My comments weren't directed at you, Chickenboy. I've read most of the posts in this thread, and noted a strong undercurrent of griping and negative nitpicking, but to be honest I haven't even noted the names of the posters. There are so many new, regular posters, and so many of the old WitP posters are absent right now, that I can't keep mental track of who says what and don't even try. I don't even know which comments belong to you - positive or negative - though I think the title of the post ("Very Disappointed") isn't the kind of observation that would encourage people.

Chickenboy -> RE: Very confused (10/17/2009 11:37:22 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BigJ62 Some of what everyone has been complaining about the ai cheating on normal level has been corrected for patch 2. No production cheats. No plane upgrade cheats. Reduced planning bonus (35). No more 1s and 2s af for bombers. Factory expansion has been curbed to more reasonable limits based entirely on % of need depending on plane type, also ai will stop production if pool has enough. Fixed bugs that appeared to be cheats, river crossing to name one. Ai cbt TFs now are checked for damage, no planes, no ammo and so forth and rtb if there is a problem. Just so we are clear TFs do not teleport only ships disbanded can be moved to another friendly port if they meet the requirements. In order to make this less noticeable without disrupting the timing of the scripts we would have to write code to anticipate when a script might need ships and then move them there via some delay, I do not anticipate this being done for patch 2 as this can get a little complicated, perhaps patch 3. I play against the ai and knowing that it can move ships from one port to the other does not bother me at all. The way I see it if this had been a human he would have moved them to an advanced base a couple weeks prior to the offensive. Been running a ai vs ai game on normal level and the Japanese ai is surprisingly doing ok. Andy just saw your post and some of that has been fixed. Very nice BigJ62 and Andy Mac. Thank you for your thoughtful responses.

Mobeer -> RE: Very disappointed (10/17/2009 11:59:00 PM)
I am struck by the number of posts that give the impression that Andy and Andy alone is or was responsible for the quality of the AI. For me, Canoerebel comes closest to noting that the complexity of the game affects the standard of the AI. I generally wonder how much the needs of the AI was considered when increasing the number of hexes (by making them smaller), or by other such changes. As a simple example, if the player had no limits on bases with torpedoes and no limits on torpedo sorties, then two big AI cheats would be solved with no AI development required.

Bradley7735 -> RE: Very confused (10/18/2009 12:19:34 AM)
Personally, I think you guys (Andy) did a kick ass job on the AI. I didn't think it was horrible in WITP, and AE is an extreme improvement over WITP. Could it still be better? Of course. But that doesn't mean that the improvements have sucked. They rock. I have very fun games vs the AI, and I like that there are settings that you can pick to make it harder (not realistic), and easier (more realistic). Please keep up the good work. I appreciate it.

medicff -> RE: Very confused (10/18/2009 12:29:49 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Chickenboy quote: ORIGINAL: BigJ62 Some of what everyone has been complaining about the ai cheating on normal level has been corrected for patch 2. No production cheats. No plane upgrade cheats. Reduced planning bonus (35). No more 1s and 2s af for bombers. Factory expansion has been curbed to more reasonable limits based entirely on % of need depending on plane type, also ai will stop production if pool has enough. Fixed bugs that appeared to be cheats, river crossing to name one. Ai cbt TFs now are checked for damage, no planes, no ammo and so forth and rtb if there is a problem. Just so we are clear TFs do not teleport only ships disbanded can be moved to another friendly port if they meet the requirements. In order to make this less noticeable without disrupting the timing of the scripts we would have to write code to anticipate when a script might need ships and then move them there via some delay, I do not anticipate this being done for patch 2 as this can get a little complicated, perhaps patch 3. I play against the ai and knowing that it can move ships from one port to the other does not bother me at all. The way I see it if this had been a human he would have moved them to an advanced base a couple weeks prior to the offensive. Been running a ai vs ai game on normal level and the Japanese ai is surprisingly doing ok. Andy just saw your post and some of that has been fixed. Very nice BigJ62 and Andy Mac. Thank you for your thoughtful responses. Concur and appreciate all the work that has been put into the AI. It is so much improved over WITP. In such a complicated game with so many options, I wouldn't know how any kind of real AI could be accomplished. I think it is a great balance, a stupid AI (normal computer brain) that gets enough advantages and random scripts to surprise the human and make the game somewhat of a challenge (especially if you take advantage of the AI weaknesses). The only way to play a real intelligence is to play another human. I also understand that may not be possible or have limitations (logistics of long game, etc) but the AI does make an interesting game if you are not able to PBEM.

treespider -> RE: Very confused (10/18/2009 12:48:47 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: JWE quote: ORIGINAL: Canoerebel The innate human need to complain is the bain of nearly everybody who creates for a living - game designers, preachers, writers, musicians, artists, etc. Complainers have no idea how destructive their complaints can be to morale. Canoerebel, for myself and those compatriots I can speak for, I sincerely thank you for your kind words. It reminds me much of the critiques of Patrick O’Brian, whose works display a staggering erudition on almost all aspects of 18th century life. But certain Amazon reviewers flush him down the toilet because his description of Boston in 1812 (200 years ago) is not specifically and exactly precise. Oh, what a simple set of scrubs; what a pack of delectacious gonodynes; what hoofs; what baggage; what a rum lot of sea-lawyers brought aboard from the assizes, or out of the bilboes of the old Resolute. Aye, there’s always them. Them as resents their salt pork for a lobscouse. Them as would rather speak idle than trip on the mizzen topsail futtocks. Them as is grum and chuff and have no tenaille. Aye, we know them. Funny you should bring up O'Brian. I was doing some rearranging of the bookshelves today and decided I would start over from the beginning w/ Aubrey and Maturin....maybe with some Spotted Dog.

mjk428 -> RE: Very confused (10/18/2009 12:55:43 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ckk Andy Go take your well deserved break.[&o] I came back to WITPAE as an AI opponent only player BECAUSE of the new IMPROVED AI and the more realistic resrictions e.g. air combat It certainly was not for the increased micromanaging and the loss of computer controlled theaters[8\|] Same here. I'm happy with the AI's ability to put forth a reasonable effort and it surely keeps me honest with its moves. My biggest complaint has been that while the AI became more aggressive, my ability to counter it became even more restricted. Mostly lack of mines, AC replacements, and especially making parts of the Americal Division and the entire 41st Division restricted. I don't like paying PPs for units that were used in '42. These gripes have nothing to do with the AI and I'd be unhappy with these design choices no matter how the AI performed. It's these latter choices that have caused me to put the game on the shelf - at least for the moment. When the next patch comes out I'll fix it with the editor. Although it would be nice if a more realistic campaign scenario was available "out of the box", sadly that's been sacrificed on that altar of "play balance". But I bought AE because the AI was actually getting some much needed attention and I thank Andy & Co for the results they've achieved in that area.

pad152 -> RE: Very confused (10/18/2009 1:43:40 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Andy Mac Guys fortunately I dont take this stuff personally I am just unable to give you what you want without making the AI back to stock which is what you dont want although I find it hard to be 100% sure that you dont want the moron back. Basically rthere is a reason for what we have. Every time you guys ask the question I get the question from those higher in the food chain than me can we do anything about X and more often than not the answer is Yes but the AI will be worse - we listen we look but sometimes things are the way they are and its a straight choice Cheat X helps the AI and is obvious if you peek can we tone it down hide it ? Answer yes but Ai will be minor/major/critical worse and typically yhe things that bug folks are int eh majopr critical camp. Now I have beer and a poker tournament tonight so I will see you all later. Pad A few specific responses 1. An AI that looks like it's playing by the same rules as the player (no more 4 engine bombers flying from level 1 or 2 bases, etc.) Teleporting AI task forces, add some random delay so the player doesn't see a ship/TF on one place on the map and than half way across the map on the next turn. I don't mind the AI getting bonuses just having it look like it's playing by the same rules as the player. Limit the load outs for carrier strikes, sometimes it seems AI carrier groups can bomb a location for weeks, (hitting Pearl Harbor of 14 days straight) These are the biggest issues I have with the AI. a. Ai TF's do not ever teleport ships do sometimes but only if in port disbanded this is fundamental tot he AI change it and Ai will be materially worse b/ Remove a cheat on carrier strikes and a lot of the randomness to the AI is gone - not going to get into technical detauils as to why that is by I guarantee jap Ai will be worse and USN AI will be unplayable late war the AI is a MORON it does not say TF A is low on strikes lets send it to replenish AND replace it with another TF for the duration that the incredibly vulnerable invasion TF is now uncovered its not possible to get the AI to think of consequences so this is the best of bad set of options. c. Never seen PH for 14 days straight and have never coded a set of scripts to do that please send save of Ai bombing PH on Dec 21st 4. 4E from 1 and 2 is incredibly rare and only occurs under two circumstances if we stop it sortieing we also stop it moving and this will also materially worsen the Ai - it is a rare occurence that mostly happens when you over run an AI base and th egroup evacs - so my advice is to play through it 2. Sometime after patch2, some discussions/help/how too's in player designed AI scripting (example: how to get the AI to invade Midway, and/or the Aleutians during a campaign and how to get the AI to defend (respond to an invasion of x base.). This way players can develop more historic and/or non-historic AI scripts over time. There is an manual for the editor hasnt anyone read it ? 3. I want an AI that is some what random and dynamic, one that doesn't always do the same thing (big issue with WITP, the AI was so scripted it always did the same thing, at the same point in each campaign). Your idea of multiple scripts randomly selected at the start of a new campaign sounds like it will fit the bill. Maybe a AI script depo/library and how to randomly select scripts. Um the AI that we released with has 13 seperate random scripts and players may add more up to 99 in another thread I pointed out that if you delete 7 - 12 subvariants you will lost all chance of the Ai exploiting attacks - its boring but can be done and the Ai will play a more defensive game 4. Some How to's with the editor on removing some of these restrictions,(reducing restricted commands, # of static units, high garrison levels, etc.) let the players play the way they want. I hope we get a AE version of Witpchk, for checking player made scenarios/campaigns. There is an editor manual.... Looking forward to patch two.[;)] Yes, I've read the editor manual and have used it, unfortunately if you try to report a bug/issues after using the editor, you are told no support if you used the editor!!![8\|]

Andy Mac -> RE: Very confused (10/18/2009 1:47:27 AM)
BigJ62 is the real brains behind the AI as he dod most of the coding it was very very very far from a one man effort everyone was involved. I havent seen any editor type questions on the Ai

Reg -> RE: Very disappointed (10/18/2009 2:03:14 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Mike Scholl quote: ORIGINAL: Tankist I mean I just love this game but if the AI cheats, then I loose enthusiasm. Tankist. The truth is that virtually every "AI" cheats..., o And not just the AI who 'cheats' (takes unfair advantage)... I'm sure you have a favorite footballer/sportsman. No doubt this guy can run faster or kick a ball further than everyone else. Is this within the narrow definition of 'cheating' and should we make everyone on the field run at the same pace and kick the ball the same distance to be fair? Make a pretty dull superbowl...... The AI needs to be able to do what it needs to do take advantage of its strengths in order to be competitive for your entertainment....

Reg -> RE: Very confused (10/18/2009 2:12:02 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: dpazuk quote: ORIGINAL: Andy Mac After patch 2 I think I need a break I am going to play some PBEM and enjoy the game and stop reading these kinds of threads because I simply don't get it - I apologise to everyone that doesnt like what the Ai is or how it operates but I have no idea what to say any more You do not need to apologize to anyone Andy. You and others have done one heck of a job given the limitations of what you had to work with. Anyone who has owned, played and followed the development of the game from the beginning knows only full well the differences between the original AI and what you and others have been able to develop it into for the single player crowd. [&o] Take a well deserved break and know that your efforts have not been in vain! +100000000000... Exactly what dpazuk said!!! Thanks a million Andy!!!

Knavey -> RE: Very confused (10/18/2009 2:29:43 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: JWE quote: ORIGINAL: Canoerebel The innate human need to complain is the bain of nearly everybody who creates for a living - game designers, preachers, writers, musicians, artists, etc. Complainers have no idea how destructive their complaints can be to morale. Canoerebel, for myself and those compatriots I can speak for, I sincerely thank you for your kind words. It reminds me much of the critiques of Patrick O’Brian, whose works display a staggering erudition on almost all aspects of 18th century life. But certain Amazon reviewers flush him down the toilet because his description of Boston in 1812 (200 years ago) is not specifically and exactly precise. Oh, what a simple set of scrubs; what a pack of delectacious gonodynes; what hoofs; what baggage; what a rum lot of sea-lawyers brought aboard from the assizes, or out of the bilboes of the old Resolute. Aye, there’s always them. Them as resents their salt pork for a lobscouse. Them as would rather speak idle than trip on the mizzen topsail futtocks. Them as is grum and chuff and have no tenaille. Aye, we know them. O'Brian books have a whole top shelf dedicated to them in my library! They are must reads. My GRANDMOTHER just told me that she wanted to read them!

LoBaron -> RE: Very confused (10/18/2009 1:56:19 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Reg quote: ORIGINAL: dpazuk quote: ORIGINAL: Andy Mac After patch 2 I think I need a break I am going to play some PBEM and enjoy the game and stop reading these kinds of threads because I simply don't get it - I apologise to everyone that doesnt like what the Ai is or how it operates but I have no idea what to say any more You do not need to apologize to anyone Andy. You and others have done one heck of a job given the limitations of what you had to work with. Anyone who has owned, played and followed the development of the game from the beginning knows only full well the differences between the original AI and what you and others have been able to develop it into for the single player crowd. [&o] Take a well deserved break and know that your efforts have not been in vain! +100000000000... Exactly what dpazuk said!!! Thanks a million Andy!!! I can only say that this is as close to the point you can actually get. Theres a reason why it took 25 years to develop a software that could beat an experienced human in a game of chess. Just think a minute and compare chess to this baby. [8D] Cudos to all who tried to make the AI a challenge, i have a very high opinion of your work!

Chickenboy -> RE: Very confused (10/18/2009 2:19:03 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BigJ62 Ai cbt TFs now are checked for damage, no planes, no ammo and so forth and rtb if there is a problem. BigJ62, Thanks again for your response and efforts to address these concerns. Can you shed a little more light on this comment above? Will this include Air Combat TFs? Will there be a sortie limit or ammo (e.g., torpedo) limit now?

BigJ62 -> RE: Very confused (10/18/2009 5:51:38 PM)
yes

Chickenboy -> RE: Very disappointed (bumped for newcomers) (2/12/2011 3:46:36 PM)
Guys, I'm not one to resurrect old threads from the grave. But we've seen a lot of new faces lately talking about AI-related issues and PBEM starts. I think this thread may be useful for some of them to read... Also note some old timers that we haven't heard from in a while...[:(]

Page: << < prev 3 4 5 6 [7]

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

1.314453