Continuous Play in AI vs Human broken? (Full Version)

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



Message

skrielow -> Continuous Play in AI vs Human broken? (5/9/2015 7:02:12 AM)

Is there an issue with trying to use the Continuous turn cycle length in AI vs human games?

Every time I try to use this setting in WitP:AE specifically, only a single day plays out and the setting gets reverted back to one day turns. Multiple day turns work fine. This setting works as intended and described in the original WitP.

I have confirmed this to be not working (like WitP original) in both the stock install and with the latest patch.

Useless background commentary:

I have been trying to learn "War in the Pacific" on and off since 2008, even picking up WitP:AE at it's release, but would always get hung up on something seemingly small and give up. A week ago, now on my tenth or so attempt, something "clicked" and I am now completely hooked in that I understand it enough to enjoy playing a full scenario...and I can't stop thinking about it.

After spending the last 3 days finishing the Guadalcanal scenario from start to finish, I am now wanting to experiment with the game system a bit before I commit to playing a full campaign. The only thing I feel I do not have a grasp of yet is the sense of time passing in turns of some of the more abstract concepts like repairs points being repaired and pilot training. Thus, I would like the ability to setup something in the middle of a game, make a save, and then let the game run to see the consequences of my actions (either good or bad).

WitP:AE won't just won't let me do it...

Thanks in advance for all of your help!
Stewart



Bullwinkle58 -> RE: Continuous Play in AI vs Human broken? (5/9/2015 9:44:35 PM)

Continuous works when you set the game as computer-vs-computer. I just tested it. But then you're getting scripts firing and not executing your last human strategy.

When you set it to play Human vs. Japan Computer or Human vs. Allied Computer the game assumes you the human wants to "play"--give orders--at the end of the turn cycle. It looks like the Preferences and Options tab will allow the Continuous setting to be selected when in one of these two modes, and it probably shouldn't. When you choose Continuous it does stop after each 1-day cycle and wait for orders.

It might be a bug that it allows the selection to be made, but I'm not sure what you would expect it to do if it "worked"? It would be exactly as if you selected computer-vs-computer. Scripts.



skrielow -> RE: Continuous Play in AI vs Human broken? (5/9/2015 11:35:43 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58
It might be a bug that it allows the selection to be made, but I'm not sure what you would expect it to do if it "worked"?


If it "worked", I could play the game as normal with set day turns until I reach a point where I want to let the turns just run and play out while I watch for something that needs my attention. When I see something, I press F9 and set my orders, then let the game run again. This is both how it is explained in the current user manual as well as how "Continuous" turn cycles work in the original "War in the Pacific:The Struggle Against Japan".

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58
It would be exactly as if you selected computer-vs-computer. Scripts.

Not necessarily (if I understand the concepts of scripts correctly). In AI vs Human, the AI will not create Task Forces and follow scripts beyond the first turn for the Human side no matter what the turn length is. It should only follow your orders. In AI vs AI games, I would expect the scenario AI scripts for both sides to fire off when their triggers are met.

Rather than to try and understand the peculiarities of AI vs Human or AI vs AI, I would prefer that the feature worked as it did in the game I learned to play the system with.

To me, being able to resolve many turns in a single sitting and to see the bigger picture unfolding makes the game infinitely more enjoyable. I have my delays set as low as they will go and I am able to run a complete turn in less than 10-20 secs, stopping only for Combat Summaries if/when they happen. The "bean counter" approach to the game is why I was never successful in my initial attempts to learn the system.



michaelm75au -> RE: Continuous Play in AI vs Human broken? (5/10/2015 4:12:09 AM)

I honestly don't understand the logic behind playing a game in 'continuous' mode for human v AI, when the human player issues one set set of commands and then nothing, while AI merrily issues and executes commands each day.
Playing with a turn lasting a set number of days makes more sense.

Yes, the Continuous play was changed to only AI at the start of AE due to a number of factors that cause the more detailed actions of the game to misbehave.
No one must have tried to use continuous mode with a human player to notice that it no longer applied.



skrielow -> RE: Continuous Play in AI vs Human broken? (5/10/2015 6:12:26 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: michaelm
Yes, the Continuous play was changed to only AI at the start of AE due to a number of factors that cause the more detailed actions of the game to misbehave.
No one must have tried to use continuous mode with a human player to notice that it no longer applied.

Good deal, thanks for the heads up.

quote:

ORIGINAL: michaelm
I honestly don't understand the logic behind playing a game in 'continuous' mode for human v AI, when the human player issues one set set of commands and then nothing, while AI merrily issues and executes commands each day.
Playing with a turn lasting a set number of days makes more sense.

And I don't honestly understand why you should feel forced to play a strategic level game as though it were a tactical, squad-level game with having to issue commands for every single unit, on every single turn. While it may be necessary for winning in PBEM, playing this way on every turn makes me hate this beautiful game.

Sure the level of detail is there IF and WHEN you so choose to take advantage of it (and I do when I feel it REALLY matters), but there are also adequate facilities to automate your forces for short periods of time for the purposes of achieving some short term objective beyond three day turns.

I am under no illusion about the depth and scope of this game either. It actually took getting a copy of GG's War in the West before I was able to truly appreciate WitP:AE. No matter if I'd won or lost, the fact that I could complete a scenario in a reasonable amount of time, to any level of detail that I desired, and to be able to try again before I forgot why I lost in the first place meant that I was actually PLAYING and ENJOYING my copies of the most expensive and detailed games in existence...

quote:

ORIGINAL: michaelm
...when the human player issues one set set of commands and then nothing, while AI merrily issues and executes commands each day.

Nor do I. This isn't at all what I am advocating for a full scenario either, just for the times in between major operations when playing versus the AI. If I set up adequate orders, the units should generally do as they are told until they are done or until major combat breaks out and I need to manually interrupt. If I failed to plan correctly and the big moment comes, then shame on me. I'll take notice of my mistake and pay more attention next time.

The point is, I want that "next time" to be one with enough frequency to let me correct mistakes before I forget why I lost to begin with.

In conclusion, I got WitP to simulate WW2 in the Pacific, and not to spend all of my time micromanaging numbers. When played operationally by making similar decisions as an admiral would, I am utterly addicted to WitP. Even if I suck terribly, I'm still having way more fun with WitP than any human should be allowed to.

There's nothing more I could ask of 2by3 and Matrix.

Thanks a bunch!



CaptBeefheart -> RE: Continuous Play in AI vs Human broken? (5/12/2015 7:21:18 AM)

Could I humbly suggest playing four-day turns and then hitting the turn button right away each time the four-day turn finishes? I think that would give you the same effect that you desire, but with a slight delay due to having to hit that button on the top row.

Cheers,
CC



skrielow -> RE: Continuous Play in AI vs Human broken? (5/12/2015 7:37:29 AM)

Yup, that's what I'm doing now. From what Michael tells above, it looks like there is no other choice! "Continuous" is not essential to my enjoyment of the game, though it would be nice. Just thought it was a bug and felt obligated to report it.

Thanks for the suggestion!
Stewart



JamesHunt -> RE: Continuous Play in AI vs Human broken? (12/11/2019 7:53:37 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: skrielow
If it "worked", I could play the game as normal with set day turns until I reach a point where I want to let the turns just run and play out while I watch for something that needs my attention. When I see something, I press F9 and set my orders, then let the game run again.

I perfectly understand the logic behind playing the game like proposed by OP here years ago and was looking for it myself and found this thread.

However the 4 Turn cylce with pressing F9 to interrupt is a good enough workaround too.




Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.6855469