Not impressed with the A.I so far (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Order of Battle : World War II



Message

KarlXII -> Not impressed with the A.I so far (12/22/2015 10:16:22 PM)

I have now played the first five scenarios in the Japanses campaign. Here is my comments about the A.I in the game:

1. It seems all maps have the enemy units divided into "zones" which are only activated when you get near. Otherwhise the enemy just wait for you to arrive. If it would use all available troops on the battlefield from the start the A.I would be much harder to beat because it could retreat to strengthen defensive lines or pull forward reinforcements from the back. As it is now, it is like a finnish "motti" where I just divide the enemy into small potions to eat bit by bit. Is this because of its scripted and not dynamical A.I ?

2. Often the A.I moves into river hexes and attacks from there even though it could have attacked from a better position. Also it seems to favour river hexes overall, not trying to avoid them but exposes its units and make them very vulnerable.

3. Many times I have seen the A.I leave the players crippled units and abstained from destroying them and instead move away or spreading its attacks instead of destroying one of your units.

4. The A.I overall is too passive in my opinion. The only scenario in which I noticed some sort of medium counterattack was in scenario 5 and then only in the last part of the map. That was the first time my land battles met some sort of difficulty. I lost more units in the last third of that map than on the other previous maps combined.

The difficulty so far is to achieve the primary goals and within time. Not to outmanouver the A.I. Its competence just lies in slowing you down. I have to say though that I love the variety in objectives and the dynamic events of the scenarios.

Is this because the A.I is scripted and what is the pros and cons of this method ? Is it easier to program a "fake" A.I by scripting it instead of reacting more dynamically. Could someone with more insight elaborate on this ?

Finally, will the A.I be improved in any further patches or is it just set as is ?



Myrddraal -> RE: Not impressed with the A.I so far (12/23/2015 8:19:32 AM)

Hi Karl,

Sorry you're not finding it enough of a challenge. The AI will never be as good as a human player, but we do try to have it give you a run for your money.

The AI in OOBP is dynamic at the tactical level, but scripted at high level strategy. The scenario designer sets ups teams of units and gives each of those teams high level objectives. These objectives are changed by high-level triggers that are also scripted.

At the tactical level, the AI is completely dynamic, and teams can and do dynamically support each other.

We're currently working on a Skirmish mode, which will introduce a more dynamic strategic AI.

Also note that currently, the AI does not purchase new units. Instead, as you've noticed, it starts with on-map reserves which are not committed until certain in-game triggers. This gives the scenario designer a bit more control over the possible flows of battle. We generally think it would be unfair for the AI to throw all of it's units at the player in one go, as these extra units will only come to the player as the player purchases them.

This is something else we are changing for Skirmish AI.



KarlXII -> RE: Not impressed with the A.I so far (12/23/2015 12:17:07 PM)

Thank you for your answer.
I am aware that an AI will never be as good as a human player but that still leaves much room for improvements since all strategy games out there differs in how well the A.I is implemented.
I suppose Panzer Corps worked in a similar way. I am more worried about the strategic AI since if you bypass the enemy on a large map the enemny units that has been bypassed 10-15 hexes away just
stay where they are and are not withdrawn to help defend the objectives which helps me win. For me that is a major flaw.




KarlXII -> RE: Not impressed with the A.I so far (12/28/2015 1:43:50 PM)

I am playing the Japanese campaign at Guadalcanal (scenario #8) right now and enemies with 1 in strength counterattacks from river hexes. Suicide. I also see the AI leaving my weakest troops and attacks stronger ones when they have a chance to eliminate mine. The tactical AI should be improved as well. I donīt know how the scripting works but the tactics repeated in every scenario is to amass your troops to get local superiority in numbers. Then you take on each single echelon of enemy forces one at a time. In that way you could defeat a much larger enemy since the enemy forces further ahead just wait for your to come passively. The troops you have bypassed just stand there watching me take the primary objectives without interferring because their have their own local objectives I suppose.



Rosseau -> RE: Not impressed with the A.I so far (12/29/2015 1:05:47 AM)

The Panzer Corps AI is good at finishing off the cripples. Of course, these speed bumps will also slow the AI advance.

If you are a PC player, do not miss out on this mod campaign. First time I ever felt any tension against the AI:

http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=3900302

Hopefully, they will take a look at these issues, Karlxii. I had a great pbem with OoB:P. I am just not a huge pbem player, though [;)]



MTTODD -> RE: Not impressed with the A.I so far (12/29/2015 10:01:30 AM)

In the JAVA scenario I have observed similar poor A.I.

Units attacking with a strength of 1, airplanes remanining above anti-air unit just waiting to be shot down.

Understand that A.I will never be as good as a human player, but would of hoped that it would not make such basic errors.

Hopefully this will be improved upon.




KarlXII -> RE: Not impressed with the A.I so far (12/29/2015 5:14:07 PM)

I am sure A.I in strategy games have evolved since the golden days of SSI and SSG. Even then with such limited CPU power and memory A.I could be quite competent. There is no reason not to put major efforts into making the best A.I possible unless a game is made specifically for human vs human play.

I agree with above observations. Another thing which affects the strategic AI is that enemy units cut of from supply far away donīt seem to react to it by trying to reconnect to supply sources. They just stand around idle.

I love the game in hotseat mode and all the rules and settings so the developers should have much credit in having created a game that in my opinion supercedes Panzer Corps. At least according to rules and realism. I just hope the AI engine would get some improvements before all new add-ons and theaters will be announced.



norvandave -> RE: Not impressed with the A.I so far (12/30/2015 9:16:11 PM)

I liked what I read about this game but I am the type of player that usually plays single player. I need a good AI before I can buy this.



Erik2 -> RE: Not impressed with the A.I so far (12/31/2015 11:00:49 AM)

The AI will normally put up a good fight. Is uses flanking attacks and tried to cut off enemy supply.
But there are still some tactical problems similar to the ones reported here. These have been reported by several players.

Attacking against unfavourable odds.
Attacking infantry units with AT units.
Putting artillery units in the front-line.
Not withdrawing low-strength/low-efficiency units.

These behaviors are governed by the game engine.
The scenario designer can influence AI behavior to a certain degree, like assigning/changing target types by triggers/events.






MTTODD -> RE: Not impressed with the A.I so far (12/31/2015 12:22:44 PM)

Add to that, airplane units remanning above any-air units just waiting to be shot down.

I would of thought it would be better for the developers to fix these issues before releasing the China-Japanese game.

Otherwise might these same tactical issues be in the next game ?



Erik2 -> RE: Not impressed with the A.I so far (12/31/2015 12:38:54 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: MTTODD

Add to that, airplane units remanning above any-air units just waiting to be shot down.

I would of thought it would be better for the developers to fix these issues before releasing the China-Japanese game.

Otherwise might these same tactical issues be in the next game ?



This specific has been reported during Morning Sun beta testing.
It may be something simple like the AI fighter-team has only land units as targets. So fighters belonging to this AI team will ignore enemy air units. I can't check this as the beta version has expired.



MTTODD -> RE: Not impressed with the A.I so far (1/2/2016 10:39:20 AM)

Firstly I really like the game, and feel bad keeping finding fault, but have found another really poor example of the A.I

Playing Coral Sea as Japanese, where the crucial goal is to defeat each other's Carriers.

When the A.I finally found one of my Carriers it sent a Devastator torpedo aircraft towards it(good so far), but then inexplicably the plane then just stayed where it was!
not going any where, when it would of had a good chance of attacking my Carrier.

Similarly other air units just stay where they are, not attacking my units or going back to their Carriers.

I have a save file, if someone wants to investigate.

Point these things out, in the hope that the game can be improved.





Erik2 -> RE: Not impressed with the A.I so far (1/2/2016 6:48:34 PM)

That torpedo plane may have been reloading (?)



KarlXII -> RE: Not impressed with the A.I so far (1/2/2016 8:10:43 PM)

I am playing NewCaledonia (scenario #9 in the Japanese campaign) now and this scenario i really interesting. I love the dynamic events. I was first shocked about the lack of command points to accomplish my objectives but are allowed reinforcements from time to time. Anyway. It seems the AI almost never heals its own units. I have seen retreating fighters with strenght 2 and 3 return to attack me several turns after they have been withdrawn. That seems really strange. The same goes for ground units. If I have slashed a unit down to a few strength points it is never healed. It just stays there or moves around. Sometimes retreating and then attacking once again. Seems very unrational. If these basic AI flaws that have been mentioned in this thread was fixed the A.I would really benefit.



MTTODD -> RE: Not impressed with the A.I so far (1/2/2016 9:58:53 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Erik Nygaard

That torpedo plane may have been reloading (?)



No none of the US planes had attack any ships yet, so they could not of been reloading.



AP514 -> RE: Not impressed with the A.I so far (1/3/2016 3:36:59 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: karlxii

I am sure A.I in strategy games have evolved since the golden days of SSI and SSG. Even then with such limited CPU power and memory A.I could be quite competent. There is no reason not to put major efforts into making the best A.I possible unless a game is made specifically for human vs human play.




the Reason those games were good/great is the DEV's had to have the best AI possible due to no EYE CANDY...Now days they think the Candy is all that is needed to sell a game....they are so VERY WRONG....

I WILL PASS on this GAME Just for that reason.
If you Fix/Introduce a good AI and I might look at this GAME again.



norvandave -> RE: Not impressed with the A.I so far (1/3/2016 3:42:32 AM)

Are there plans to fix the AI problems?



Erik2 -> RE: Not impressed with the A.I so far (1/3/2016 10:13:02 AM)

Despite the criticism I and other players have raised with the AI, it actually is quite good.
The problems I have reported are the 'only' ones that bugs me.
The devs do listen, I hope we see some fixes to the AI when they launch the Morning Sun Campaign.
All the AI problems were discussed during beta testing of MS.

Don't give up on a very fine game. And there is always multiplayer if you want a more unpredictable opponent.



KarlXII -> RE: Not impressed with the A.I so far (1/6/2016 9:28:29 AM)

I thought I would fill up this thread with other issues. I just finished scenario #9 in the campaign as Japan.
Itīs a large map with an enourmous amount of enemy units. There are numerous Sherman tanks that are very tough opponents.

- It has already been mentioned but one of the easiest thing to get across rivers (which are hard when there always are heavy defense lines behind them) is to lure
out enemy troops (especially the Sherman tanks) to move into river hexes and attack from there. That has been my strategy several times and the only way to destroy
these beasts. In general the AI never hesitates to move across rivers for counterattacking. Even giving up his high fortification level. I think the AI should only counterattack in such cases if it would be sure of destroying one of my own weak units.

- The AI donīt seem to take massive artillery bombardment into account from my artillery units. Thats the only way to slowly crush all defenselines. The AI just wait
every turn to be moulded down by artillery fire. It does not retreat or move away outside my range or take any measures to destroy my artillery. With four artillery units hammering I often almost destroy one infantry each turn. Yet, they just stay and wait for their destruction.

- The tactical AI radius seems too small. It seems like only the nearest troops (say 5-6 hexes) are used for counterattack although there could be massive amounts of units just a few more hexes away ready to participate in a counterattack and that are not defending any primary or secondary objective. With such a small radius, I have never seen the AI been able to outflank me except when I only have a small corridor of supply line. In fact I can use this to my favour. Any non-scripted enemy would never be activated unless I move close enough to it so I can bypass them entirely.

- I donīt see the AI coordinate his artillery fire. Naval bombardment could strike one unit and landbased artillery another (yet they could reach the same unit) and then it is not even sure the target unit would be attacked by groundforces even if it is exposed for it. Makes no sense. Air units also could stay within my AA-range without moving.

- Last thing. The allied have at least one BB and CA in the southwest that support The immediate land area. But when I have passed this area they just remain idle instead of following me through the coast. I even attacked With a torpedobomber and The BB just stood There waiting to be sunk


I love this game and I have much fun with it but these basic AI issues must be fixed or I would never feel satisfied enough in winning against the AI. Right now it is only the time limit that is my problem. As a multiplayer game this one is excellent tough but we are many that for different reasons prefer to play it in single player mode and it is too bad if many neglect to buy the game because of the AI flaws right now.






norvandave -> RE: Not impressed with the A.I so far (1/15/2016 8:10:07 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Erik Nygaard

Despite the criticism I and other players have raised with the AI, it actually is quite good.
The problems I have reported are the 'only' ones that bugs me.
The devs do listen, I hope we see some fixes to the AI when they launch the Morning Sun Campaign.
All the AI problems were discussed during beta testing of MS.

Don't give up on a very fine game. And there is always multiplayer if you want a more unpredictable opponent.


I see the announcement today about this month's release of OOB Morning Sun, but not one word about any AI improvements. [:(]



Rosseau -> RE: Not impressed with the A.I so far (1/17/2016 1:26:45 AM)

I played one great pbem and that was it.

Still playing through Panzer Corps Soviet Storm mod, and the AI never makes poor attacks and even shifts its focus operationally. Is this a result of good scripting by the modders? I don't know if the PC editor is capable of that.

Morning Sun might be worth it based on content alone. However, the devs should address the difficulty (or not) of fixing the issues you see with the AI.



norvandave -> RE: Not impressed with the A.I so far (1/25/2016 10:58:14 PM)

bump



balto -> RE: Not impressed with the A.I so far (2/6/2016 3:13:08 AM)

On normal setting I was totally defeated by the AI on the Shanghai scenario. I think what I am seeing is the AI is earning a lot of replacement pool money each turn if I do not take Shanghai right away. I say that because I was watching the Youtubers play this and I faced a much more significant Chinese force. In other words, I think AI and scenario design is very entertaining.

I think most of us on here played several hundred hours of Pz Corp (which is great). No question these two are very very very similar. But this has enough changes to keep you interested for many hours, so I would think it would be a good idea to buy this. Thus far I have about 20 hours on this, I probably will go another 20 hours at least which works out that I am paying a little more than a dollar an hour for excellent entertainment. That is a good deal to me.

I hope they stay with this, its a good system.



KarlXII -> RE: Not impressed with the A.I so far (2/6/2016 1:02:38 PM)

Today it is a very good multiplayer game but less good single player game because of the A.I. and its restrictions. It would be nice to have some clarifications from the developers if they will improve the A.I vs the Skirmish mode they have talked about for months. On the Steam forum a developer recently stated they are not near completion.If no A.I improvements will be included then I donīt know for how long we will have to wait. Until then I will continue playing this game in hotseat mode only. Too bad.



norvandave -> RE: Not impressed with the A.I so far (2/6/2016 8:14:00 PM)

+1



Rosseau -> RE: Not impressed with the A.I so far (2/6/2016 11:49:31 PM)

I did buy Morning Sun for the new content. I remember pondering over pbem moves for a while, so think of what the AI is going through. However, yes, some blatant bad stuff should be fixed or an explanation why not should be provided. Would probably help sales, too.



Myrddraal -> RE: Not impressed with the A.I so far (2/9/2016 1:01:38 PM)

We are still working on the AI, but principally this is for Skirmish mode.

If you see behaviour which is clearly nonsense, please send us a savegame and we can use that to analyse and see what we could do to improve.



MTTODD -> RE: Not impressed with the A.I so far (2/9/2016 4:00:33 PM)

I have mentioned examples of poor A.I behaviour, but had no response from developers.

Which was disappointing.



IainMcNeil -> RE: Not impressed with the A.I so far (2/9/2016 4:54:39 PM)

Myrddraal is the AI programmer. ^



stormbringer3 -> RE: Not impressed with the A.I so far (5/3/2016 8:03:06 PM)

I've been looking at this title since it was released. I haven't purchased because of AI complaints and certain comments about the Pacific Campaign which is my interest in this game. What mystifies me is why efforts are being expended to expand this game into areas such as the Winter War instead of beefing up the AI and perfecting the Pacific Campaign. I only play vs. the AI and ther're a lot of games on this site that I consider to have a very good AI.



Page: [1] 2   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.21875