Question about computer AI (Full Version)

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



Message

abalido -> Question about computer AI (8/10/2004 6:01:55 AM)

I have just a quick question. In UV the computer AI got bad after about 6 months is the AI in WITP more competitive?



Tankerace -> RE: Question about computer AI (8/10/2004 6:18:45 AM)

Well, I'm about 5 months into scen 15 (well, my modded version), and it seems to be doing resonable. I've lost the PI, and the AI is securing the Dutch East Indies pretty efficently. In addition, it is making a desparate attempt to seize Rangoon. It hasn't launched any massive attacks, but it was smart enough to bring his carriers in to force my warships in the DEI to India and Australia. Just what I have experienced.



usecase -> RE: Question about computer AI (8/10/2004 9:36:31 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: abalido

I have just a quick question. In UV the computer AI got bad after about 6 months is the AI in WITP more competitive?



You have to stick to a somewhat historical plan if you are playing as the Allies. Going straight across the Central Pacific completely bamboozles the AI. If you want any kind of game, it seems that you have to follow the two-pronged approach, kicking off with the Solomons.

Cheers,

John



Barlock -> RE: Question about computer AI (8/10/2004 9:57:58 AM)

I've got the situation in Malaya in early '42 where I'm still holding Singapore and still maintain significant numbers of Vengenance TB's and Blenheim/Beaufort LB's there.

The IJN keeps sending unescorted groups of small AK's and AP's around the peninsular to Tavoy - but along the way they are getting mauled firstly by my LBA out of Palembang and Singapore and then by surface combat task forces sortying from the same bases.

For some reason the AI has made little or no attempt to knock my airforces down and the IJN BB's, CA's and CV's are no-where to be seen to deal with my surface forces.

So far the IJN has wasted around 30 ships and god knows how many troops to no good effect and - wait - yes there's another 3x small convoys coming into range now... [8|]

Not complaining - but at this rate, the IJN is going to be short of transports for this part of the war soon.



Tankerace -> RE: Question about computer AI (8/10/2004 10:21:38 AM)

Wow Barlock, i wish I was that lucky. Around late January, early Feb the whole of the Japanese carrier force came down on me, and several times my Dutch CLs narrowly escaped destruction. Of course, they did catch the Sumatra and give her dozens upons dozens of bombs and torpedoes.



Barlock -> RE: Question about computer AI (8/10/2004 10:36:02 AM)

Yeah - I keep looking over my shoulder (so to speak) waiting for the inevitable...

By nowhere to be seen - I mean _nowhere! [X(] I haven't seen a IJN CV since Dec 7! (and believe me - I've been looking!)

I don't think I can hold Singapore much longer - if nothing else - those 2x IJA divisions are getting mighty close and I've largely completed the evac of the nicer RN BF's, the RAF HQ, and the 2x ANZAC brigades so to be blunt there's little point to hang around with my newly experienced LBA and the only decent RN battle group...

The IJN fixation on Tavoy is certainly interesting and troubling...I suspect the KB is on the way so it might be time to get out of dodge... I just can't understand why the AI persist with sending them un-escorted time and time again



Sneer -> RE: Question about computer AI (8/10/2004 10:40:14 AM)

Unfortunately Ai is down as Japan after initial 5-6 months.
I abandoned game as allies in Nov/42 because Ai lost control on almost every front
Playing as Japan is much more challenging but in Feb/42 I have 4x point advantage and do not see factors which would cause me to loose.
So I should win as Japan tha Pacific War at the first day of victory counting



Sneer -> RE: Question about computer AI (8/10/2004 10:42:49 AM)

I forgot
when I played as Allies I sunk enormous amount of ships close to Singapore (capt. early Feb)
Ai do not even try to cover its transports
By Nov/42 Ai lost sth close 600 ships



Top Cat -> RE: Question about computer AI (8/10/2004 12:44:04 PM)

I agree with usecase. If you deviate too much from historical Allied plans the AI seems to get pretty wobbly.

I decided to make a stand at Rangoon. The Japanese have bled themselves white in terms of ground and air units there. Late May 42 and I'm advancing on Bangkok on 2 fronts.

Sending 1 regiment to Rabaul delayed the Japanese long enough so that they never landed in PNG or Guadalcanal.

Sending 1 CA to Tarawa seemed to deter the AI altogether in that region.

Dutch Air Force inflicted such heavy losses on Japanese shipping that their timetable was thrown by 2 - 3 months. Tarakan, Balikpakan and East Timor region are still being held by a couple of Dutch battalions in late May 42. The oil loss to the AI must hurt.

And KB has sailed a few loops around Borneo bombing ground units. No attempt to neutralise the Dutch Air Force.


Cheers
Top Cat



Hard Sarge -> RE: Question about computer AI (8/10/2004 3:46:32 PM)

I have only played the later Campaigns (42/43) but from what I have seen, the AI is decent as long as it is in a postion of strength, once it loses that, it don't know what to do, and most times, just keeps on moving as if it was still strong

IE, you blow away the fighter cover at Rabaul, the AI will keep moving in Bomber units, even though the airfield is not flyable

it will move ship units into ports right next to your airpower, which if it had fighter cover in the area, fine, but times it don't

it will put up a fight, and at times, a pretty good fight, but it will lead with it's chin, just when it shouldn't

HARD_Sarge



abalido -> RE: Question about computer AI (8/10/2004 4:34:36 PM)

I do appreciate all the info. The next question is does anybody know if Matrix is going to work on the AI for their next patch or any subsiquent patch. The reason I ask this is because they never really fixed the AI on UV and I loved playing that game when it first came out but now its collecting dust but I still keep bringing out my copy of Gary Grigsby's Pacific War. I want so much to play UV but I know that the computer is going to eventually send all of its transports into one of my airdromes and get slaughtered.



Grotius -> RE: Question about computer AI (8/10/2004 11:36:31 PM)

I think the AI in WITP is better than the AI in UV. Not light-years better, but better. As others have said, if you play a historical game, the AI gives you a reasonably good game. Especially if you play on Very Hard. ("Historical" is supposedly the newb "training" level.) If you do something out of the box, it doesn't know how to respond. And it does occasionally make odd mistakes. In my game, it keeps bombing Sinkep Island even though it could've taken it weeks ago. Maybe it's using the bomb raids as a way of training pilots?

As for fighter cover, again I think it's better than UV but still needs work. In my game, though, it seems to "remember" that it needs to add fighter a cover after a day or two of being pounded. I haven't seen a spiral of AI death yet. Considering that my AI is playing Japan, I'm pretty impressed that it's made pretty good progress against me. It's taken most of the PI and DEI and half of Burma.

Also, keep in mind that most of us seem to be playing the Allies, which gives the AI the toughest challenge for any AI -- going on the offensive, making amphibious landings, etc. I'm pretty curious to see how the AI does when it's playing defense, either as the Allies in the big campaign or as Japan in one of the later scenarios.



DrewMatrix -> RE: Question about computer AI (8/10/2004 11:54:21 PM)

quote:

keep in mind that most of us seem to be playing the Allies, which gives the AI the toughest challenge for any AI


I would have thought it the other way. The IJ side has to do one huge preprogammed lunge to take the SRA and a defensible perimeter then sit and die slowly (they don't even have the resources to do a real central-position-counterattack late game). That is pretty much what the real life Japanese did (constrained in the late war by lack of resources).

The Allies pick where to attack (eventually) and have lots more options due to more assets to put into play.



Caltone -> RE: Question about computer AI (8/10/2004 11:55:23 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Grotius
Also, keep in mind that most of us seem to be playing the Allies, which gives the AI the toughest challenge for any AI -- going on the offensive, making amphibious landings, etc. I'm pretty curious to see how the AI does when it's playing defense, either as the Allies in the big campaign or as Japan in one of the later scenarios.


In addition to a few PBEM's, I restarted a game against the AI with ver 1.21. In this game I'm Japan and the AI is playing the Allies. I've just gotten to the end of Jan '42 but so far I've seen no glaring errors by the AI. It is evacuating troops in an orderly manner and harrassing me in Malaya. I suspect he is withdrawing ships and troops from Singapore too. While I was unloading on one of the bases in Malaya, it attacked me first while it had a numerical advantage. I've seen the same behavior in China.

I'm playing things pretty much along historical lines and on a "Hard" setting. I'll be curious to see how it does once it regains strength and starts on offense.



DrewMatrix -> RE: Question about computer AI (8/11/2004 12:01:09 AM)

quote:

I restarted a game against the AI with ver 1.21


Me too. I am playing Scen 16 as Allies. The AI is doing _much_ better in this game (better at keeping it's forces covered with air units as they advance, better at using surface/CV units to cover the advance into the SRA).

The start of Scen 16 is very different from my limited experience with Scen 15: a slower and more orderly advance by the AI Japanese. Closer to the historic timetable. In Scen 15 they lept right at Singapore/some of Borneo/PI and I hacked their shipping to pieces.

Maybe Scen 15 allows such a lunge forward the AI has trouble seeing how to cover its advance?

I have been aggressive going after AI shipping and it has badly whacked some of the surface TFs and airbases I was using to hit the AKs.



BlackVoid -> RE: Question about computer AI (8/11/2004 12:13:21 AM)

I am sorry to say this, but the AI is almost nonexistent in the game. It is just totally scripted, it does not really evaluates threats/priorities, but sticks to a scripted timetable.

In the end though, it does not matter at all. With the amount of time this game needs, there really is no point playing the AI. It is good to learn the mechanics, then you must go PBEM. Human competition adds motivation, beating up the AI is no challenge and no fun for me (in any wargame).



Nikademus -> RE: Question about computer AI (8/11/2004 12:20:57 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: abalido

I do appreciate all the info. The next question is does anybody know if Matrix is going to work on the AI for their next patch or any subsiquent patch. The reason I ask this is because they never really fixed the AI on UV and I loved playing that game when it first came out but now its collecting dust but I still keep bringing out my copy of Gary Grigsby's Pacific War. I want so much to play UV but I know that the computer is going to eventually send all of its transports into one of my airdromes and get slaughtered.


A thread is open on the dev forum for AI saves highlighting particularily bad/poor AI attributes. No guarntee that there will be any major tweaks but it 'is' being looked at. Keep the faith



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
2.34375