John Tiller and AI (Full Version)

All Forums >> [General] >> General Discussion



Message

FAA -> John Tiller and AI (6/23/2020 9:29:34 PM)

quote:

I would like to know the game, of this type, that doesn’t have silly AI. I’ve decided it’s just not possible to make AI – with the resources available to the typical developers of this type of game – that is complex and dynamic enough to not look dumb. I only ever play my dumb self now, single player, in these JTS games, in hot seat mode. That works very well. For a challenge a PBEM opponent is very easy to find over in The Blitz, normally.

The only game I know, of this type, which takes seriously the AI challenge, is Command Ops 2. And even that’s a continual work in progress.

Mr Tiller, on the other hand, seems very hands off about AI refinement, so I wouldn’t expect any changes. Davids team here at WDS are not responsible for that kind of coding, I believe. So the AI limits are nothing to do with them or their work.


https://www.wargamedesignstudio.com/2020/06/20/wds-lockdown-update-2/

That’s very interesting, too bad they still don’t highlight this on their website. Some of their games are almost unplayable against the AI.



Rosseau -> RE: John Tiller and AI (6/23/2020 9:54:20 PM)

I have almost all of the Tiller/HPS games. I think the Nappy series may be the worst - AI sitting next to a key objective and not taking it, etc. However, when creating or editing a scenario, you can program initial AI orders and it works fairly well.

Otherwise, I've had great fun with the Squad Battles series, for one, but tend to mod them heavily. Also, do not play PBEM.

HPS Tigers Unleashed is now fully playable (imo) and is a unique in its depth of simulation. However, one must be willing to create scenarios, as it is more of a "test tube" type game for WW2 rather than a "beat the AI" type game. For me, this is the fun part: creating an engagement and seeing what happens after giving orders to maneuver groups and then leaving them alone rather than micromanaging. This would also be historically correct when playing as a regimental commander.

Point of Attack 2 (Modern) is less polished, with less units, and runs with only an occasional error.

But yes, WDS has done an excellent job with the free updates, but the AI has certainly not been touched, afaik.

Best regards

Mike






Ekaton -> RE: John Tiller and AI (6/23/2020 10:03:32 PM)

Many games have decent AI these days - Shadow Empire, Decisive Campaigns, War in the West, War in the East, even War in the Pacific can be somewhat decent with mods. Open General, which is an improvement over the old Panzer General is much better as well. JTS is about a decade behind other companies when it comes to AI. I wouldn't call Command Ops 2 great, but it's lightyears ahead of them.

I second that most of JTS games are unplayable against the AI.



Rosseau -> RE: John Tiller and AI (6/23/2020 10:28:07 PM)

Best AI in a game (for me) is Field of Glory 2. I've put more hours in that one than any other game besides the old Steel Panthers. If you open the AI files, you can see how well it's coded.



Ekaton -> RE: John Tiller and AI (6/23/2020 10:29:19 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Rosseau

Best AI in a game (for me) is Field of Glory 2. I've put more hours in that one than any other game besides the old Steel Panthers. If you open the AI files, you can see how well it's coded.


I completely forgot about FoG2. It's absolutely wonderful.



gamer78 -> RE: John Tiller and AI (6/23/2020 10:48:39 PM)

How do you program France'14 'Race to the sea' and 'Campaign Early' scenario? Besides when to deploy artillery and machine guns for hundreds tactically, elevation advantage, digging in inf vs.. able to use roads effectively for regiments. Also operational thinking more complicated. None of this in GG games at this scale. Still tactical side of things could be improved for Tiller games.



FAA -> RE: John Tiller and AI (6/23/2020 10:55:12 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: gamer78

How do you program France'14 'Race to the sea' and 'Campaign Early' scenario? Besides when to deploy artillery and machine guns for hundreds tactically, elevation advantage, digging in inf vs.. able to use roads effectively for regiments. Also operational thinking more complicated. None of this in GG games at this scale. Still tactical side of things could be improved for Tiller games.


Many games on a similar scale have very good AIs. Shadow Empire is infinitely more complex and has great AI.



Strelaoz -> RE: John Tiller and AI (6/24/2020 12:15:58 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: FAA

quote:

I would like to know the game, of this type, that doesn’t have silly AI. I’ve decided it’s just not possible to make AI – with the resources available to the typical developers of this type of game – that is complex and dynamic enough to not look dumb. I only ever play my dumb self now, single player, in these JTS games, in hot seat mode. That works very well. For a challenge a PBEM opponent is very easy to find over in The Blitz, normally.

The only game I know, of this type, which takes seriously the AI challenge, is Command Ops 2. And even that’s a continual work in progress.

Mr Tiller, on the other hand, seems very hands off about AI refinement, so I wouldn’t expect any changes. Davids team here at WDS are not responsible for that kind of coding, I believe. So the AI limits are nothing to do with them or their work.


https://www.wargamedesignstudio.com/2020/06/20/wds-lockdown-update-2/

That’s very interesting, too bad they still don’t highlight this on their website. Some of their games are almost unplayable against the AI. Too bad they wouldn’t publish my response to that, they restricted comments - mine is apparently still awaiting approval.


FFS, I live in Singapore and was asleep. I approved your comment as soon as I woke up. We restrict comments because of the extensive spam received, but we do not censor any ‘genuine’ comments submitted.



FAA -> RE: John Tiller and AI (6/24/2020 3:47:14 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Strelaoz


quote:

ORIGINAL: FAA

quote:

I would like to know the game, of this type, that doesn’t have silly AI. I’ve decided it’s just not possible to make AI – with the resources available to the typical developers of this type of game – that is complex and dynamic enough to not look dumb. I only ever play my dumb self now, single player, in these JTS games, in hot seat mode. That works very well. For a challenge a PBEM opponent is very easy to find over in The Blitz, normally.

The only game I know, of this type, which takes seriously the AI challenge, is Command Ops 2. And even that’s a continual work in progress.

Mr Tiller, on the other hand, seems very hands off about AI refinement, so I wouldn’t expect any changes. Davids team here at WDS are not responsible for that kind of coding, I believe. So the AI limits are nothing to do with them or their work.


https://www.wargamedesignstudio.com/2020/06/20/wds-lockdown-update-2/

That’s very interesting, too bad they still don’t highlight this on their website. Some of their games are almost unplayable against the AI. Too bad they wouldn’t publish my response to that, they restricted comments - mine is apparently still awaiting approval.


FFS, I live in Singapore and was asleep. I approved your comment as soon as I woke up. We restrict comments because of the extensive spam received, but we do not censor any ‘genuine’ comments submitted.


Alright then, sorry. A lot of companies censor their forums/blogs these days to avoid negative opinions, great that you’re not like that.



FAA -> RE: John Tiller and AI (6/24/2020 4:03:33 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: gamer78

How do you program France'14 'Race to the sea' and 'Campaign Early' scenario? Besides when to deploy artillery and machine guns for hundreds tactically, elevation advantage, digging in inf vs.. able to use roads effectively for regiments. Also operational thinking more complicated. None of this in GG games at this scale. Still tactical side of things could be improved for Tiller games.


In Serbia ‘14 the AI has no idea how to use machine guns, doesn’t keep units close to HQ, cannot use artillery properly, and cannot even move properly. It doesn’t retreat properly either. Nothing works. At least in my experience.

WWI may be a bit more difficult to program than WWII, but that’s a whole new level of bad.



Simulacra53 -> RE: John Tiller and AI (6/24/2020 6:04:02 AM)

Maybe rename thread FAA and JTS games, as it seems to be about some grudge.



demyansk -> RE: John Tiller and AI (6/24/2020 9:35:21 AM)

I don't play enough of the games to worry about a bad AI. It allows me to win once in a while[:)]



Lobster -> RE: John Tiller and AI (6/24/2020 11:46:42 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Simulacra53

Maybe rename thread FAA and JTS games, as it seems to be about some grudge.


Or "Why I Hate John Tiller's Games But Keep Buying Them Anyway". [:D]

I don't mind mediocre Programmed Opponents. They make me look like a bloody military genius. [8D]


[image]local://upfiles/45799/91D9E2D2628B4F12A8C5408B679E3CF2.jpg[/image]



eastwindrain -> RE: John Tiller and AI (6/24/2020 1:37:31 PM)

Come on guy's give the AI a chance, under set advantage move the slider to at least plus 50%, or what the heck try plus 100%.
The vanilla AI advantage setting is zero which is equal to easy, so what setting do you use.



gamer78 -> RE: John Tiller and AI (6/24/2020 2:24:32 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: FAA

quote:

ORIGINAL: gamer78

How do you program France'14 'Race to the sea' and 'Campaign Early' scenario? Besides when to deploy artillery and machine guns for hundreds tactically, elevation advantage, digging in inf vs.. able to use roads effectively for regiments. Also operational thinking more complicated. None of this in GG games at this scale. Still tactical side of things could be improved for Tiller games.


In Serbia ‘14 the AI has no idea how to use machine guns, doesn’t keep units close to HQ, cannot use artillery properly, and cannot even move properly. It doesn’t retreat properly either. Nothing works. At least in my experience.

WWI may be a bit more difficult to program than WWII, but that’s a whole new level of bad.


What I rank AI levels in JTS games:
1-WW1
2-WW2
3-Napoleonic

I didn't play Panzer Battles that could be different.

I think main advantage for AI in WW1 games are both AI and player can not choose specific targets. Although it was changed in recent patch field guns can fire specific targets; but only direct artillery. And forces don't divide into smaller ones like in Napoleonic skirmishers. Not against AI but also in pbem I didn't like opponent making all light infantry into skirmishers. I think Napoleonic series needs the most house rules than other.

Anyway the other problem I see about AI it doesn't know when to shoot and assault. Typically a player would fire once and see it is disrupted. Then assault.

Serbia'14 seems to be cool.Early 'Çetnik' Serbian militia&partizans in game.




loki100 -> RE: John Tiller and AI (6/24/2020 2:31:06 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Lobster

quote:

ORIGINAL: Simulacra53

Maybe rename thread FAA and JTS games, as it seems to be about some grudge.


Or "Why I Hate John Tiller's Games But Keep Buying Them Anyway". [:D]

I don't mind mediocre Programmed Opponents. They make me look like a bloody military genius. [8D]


...


+1

and as ever it depends, I've played some of the Minsk 44 scenarios on the standard settings and the AI is fine, but then its essentially a puzzle game if you take the Soviets, can you break through a multiple defensive field at a certain speed or not?



eastwindrain -> RE: John Tiller and AI (6/24/2020 3:26:29 PM)

I have been playing the new Minsk'44 Gold campaign as the Germans with the Russian AI set at 50% advantage, got half way thro this mega game with all Axis reinforcements finally arrived, what a fantastic detailed map and OOB.

When I play these games against the AI I do some modding, here is a link to a complete game mod I did earlier.
If you decide to use it please don't overwrite your original copy, copy the game to another location and install the mod.
download link
https://1drv.ms/u/s!AtveAAprCcpnbK8Oj2uHq3PubwU?e=bFgXZJ

Better to read about it first here http://www.theblitz.org/message_boards/showthread.php?tid=73509



Lobster -> RE: John Tiller and AI (6/24/2020 5:01:59 PM)

Oh, Task Force Games: East Wind Rain. I have that one. [:)]



Zorch -> RE: John Tiller and AI (6/24/2020 9:34:26 PM)

My experience with Tiller games is that the AI is good in situations where it can sit back and kill units. It can be confuzzled by maneuvering. Overall I would rate the Tiller AI as average.



eastwindrain -> RE: John Tiller and AI (6/24/2020 9:43:50 PM)

Ok, and what percentage of advantage do you give the AI.



Zorch -> RE: John Tiller and AI (6/25/2020 12:16:28 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: eastwindrain

Ok, and what percentage of advantage do you give the AI.

Depends how well I know the scenario. I play mostly Early American and Civil Wars.



Ekaton -> RE: John Tiller and AI (6/25/2020 10:16:24 AM)

AI can be decent on the defence. Playing Normandy '44 as Allies, you could get a decent playthrough if AI had just a few more limitations - don't put divisional and corps HQs on the front line, don't put or leave artillery units on the front line without infantry, and keep your units relatively close to their HQ. More HQs in general should be static - Moscow '41 always moves very high HQs to the front line immediately, in a very piecemeal fashion. Also, move whole units to different places, so we don't get regiments from different units just completely mixed and spread around the front.

More and more games out there have decent AIs, even games made by just one person. It's a matter of will and talent, perhaps the engine as well, but it is certainly doable.

Ultimately, it is a business decision. They clearly don't perceive players who play solely against the AI and won't buy their games because of their reputation in that area as important enough to justify the cost. They're not running a charity so they're doing their best to use resources available to them efficiently.



eastwindrain -> RE: John Tiller and AI (6/25/2020 12:53:31 PM)

I will concede that it's not a great AI, no better or worse than the vast majority of other games, however we have got to utilise the set advantage option.
I used to play table-top wargames at a club level in various periods and participated in competitions against other clubs before switching to PBEM, however now it's only the AI.
Regarding any scenario or campaign game it's a impossible task to program the AI script to deal with all the probabilities that will be thrown at it by us humans.
My PBEM games, only one mega campaign game went the full distance, most games ended half way through, so for me setting the AI advantage to 50% is a very satisfying campaign game experience, the downside is it's a click fest.

Still awaiting feedback on the AI advantage setting from other gamers.



Ekaton -> RE: John Tiller and AI (6/25/2020 1:35:12 PM)

I always play with advantage set for the enemy, usually around 30-50% range, depending on the game/scenario. This is a must for the AI to be a challenge, but it doesn't fix the more blatantly stupid things, like HQs on the front line. Advantage makes the game better, but doesn't improve the feeling of playing against dumb AI rather than simulating warfare. This is not the feeling I have in many other wargames.

Shadow Empire, which I'm binging at the moment, is really good vs AI. It's not perfect, but it doesn't behave like an idiot - it won't put HQs on the front line, usually manages to avoid exposing fragile units like artillery, and maintains a proper, continuous line of defence. It is also capable of retreating, trading land for time when it's hopeless, which to me is a mark of quality in itself - few games do that properly, with most just stubbornly holding onto meaningless ground, provoking excessive losses. JTS games never do it right. Decisive Campaigns and Gary Grigsby are other examples of quality - AI won't defend France or Italy till the end in WitW - it will retreat to more defensible positions, shortening the line. Sure, it's pre-programmed, but it's pre-programmed in a way that makes sense and seems plausible. You feel like you're playing a proper simulation of warfare, with the enemy making decisions that are, for the most part, understandable. And when it makes mistakes, real commanders also made mistakes, but no sane man would put an army or corps HQ on the front line - that's the main difference.



eastwindrain -> RE: John Tiller and AI (6/25/2020 3:22:31 PM)

There are numerous examples of unit commanders throughout military history being KIA including WW2 which is the period in question, but I have experienced what you described.
I still think these games give you a feel of the battle in question and the terrain over which the action was fought better than any video or book on the subject.
Just remembered you can actually enter the AI and order it to move to a location, but I have never personally done this.



Lobster -> RE: John Tiller and AI (6/25/2020 3:49:15 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: eastwindrain

There are numerous examples of unit commanders throughout military history being KIA including WW2 which is the period in question...


Aye, in the opening says of the Barbarossa campaign it was common for Soviet division commanders to be directly involved in the fighting. Driving tanks into battle even up to the point of ramming enemy tanks. They were chastised for this hands on approach and ordered to remain in the command area. It was not uncommon for Corps commanders to have to send couriers out looking for division commanders. However, the entire HQ staff did not march off to combat.



eastwindrain -> RE: John Tiller and AI (6/25/2020 7:07:06 PM)

Tongue in cheek, after encountering loads of parodies on the subject, what a situation hitler manoeuvred himself into.



gamer78 -> RE: John Tiller and AI (6/25/2020 11:00:55 PM)

I think for the last games designers try to eliminate faults of AI and designing scenarios with a time limit for human player. Tunisia'43 one of them in grand campaign. Vic designs both Advanced Tactics and Shadow Empire can be good about AI but they are&will be in Steam. AI should be more important in there.In here this is niche wargaming devs don't care about how much sold people much enjoy about maps and OOB I believe. But still these games more enjoyable with trusted human opponent.

And what is AI advantage about? I think it is about reinforcement chance or any more advantage?



Simulacra53 -> RE: John Tiller and AI (6/26/2020 7:07:53 AM)

Warts and all I am going to get myself Scheldt 44 the moment it is released.
Besides that I am going to get Waterloo during the summer sale to try out the new features.

That’s it for the summer campaign.

Although I have been eyeballing their Strategic War titles, I may try one or both.



eastwindrain -> RE: John Tiller and AI (6/26/2020 8:10:35 AM)

I assume the AI advantage will increase morale, plus attack and defence values, I cannot find any specific detailed explanation within the latest manual rewrite, however the latest updated manual is available for download from the John Tiller update page.



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.578125