Matrix Games Forums

 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

About AI...

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> About AI... Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
About AI... - 2/15/2008 9:22:56 PM   
Pyrrhos1976

 

Posts: 38
Joined: 1/22/2008
Status: offline 		Hello,

It seems that AI is not very good when playing the overall campaign. At strategic level, Ai is just a good partner for training, but doesn't offer a great challenge.
But what do you think of AI in short scenarios (Coral Sea, Marianas, Guadalcanal) ? Tactically does it offer some challenge, maybe like a human opponent ?
At your opinion, at which level is the AI the best ?
Post #: 1
RE: About AI... - 2/15/2008 9:25:01 PM   
Terminus


Posts: 41459
Joined: 4/23/2005
From: Denmark
Status: offline 		It isn't.

_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to Pyrrhos1976)
Post #: 2
RE: About AI... - 2/15/2008 10:17:41 PM   
HansBolter


Posts: 7704
Joined: 7/6/2006
From: United States
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Terminus

It isn't.



That non sequitur is certainly useful.

(in reply to Terminus)
Post #: 3
RE: About AI... - 2/15/2008 10:21:07 PM   
Ursa MAior

 

Posts: 1416
Joined: 4/20/2005
From: Hungary, EU
Status: offline 		When playing against the AI treat it as a tutorial. It will attack in a very lame way (if at all), and defend like an oak (rooted to the spot). 

_____________________________


Art by the amazing Dixie

(in reply to HansBolter)
Post #: 4
RE: About AI... - 2/15/2008 10:39:14 PM   
Pyrrhos1976

 

Posts: 38
Joined: 1/22/2008
Status: offline 		Ok. No hope.

For my scenario projects, I will try with "Carriers at War"...

But I'm surprise. I thougth that, at least for short scenario with accurate goals, the AI could offer some challenge.

(in reply to Ursa MAior)
Post #: 5
RE: About AI... - 2/15/2008 11:03:04 PM   
Joe D.


Posts: 4004
Joined: 8/31/2005
From: Stratford, Connecticut
Status: offline 		CaW has a much better AI, but the scenarios aren't as complicated, and last only days, not months or years. W/the WitP/UV engine, the longer the scenario, the lamer the AI as it progresses.

_____________________________

Stratford, Connecticut, U.S.A.

"The Angel of Okinawa"

Home of the Chance-Vought Corsair, F4U
The best fighter-bomber of World War II

(in reply to Pyrrhos1976)
Post #: 6
RE: About AI... - 2/15/2008 11:18:35 PM   
bradfordkay

 

Posts: 8683
Joined: 3/24/2002
From: Olympia, WA
Status: offline 		The other aspect is, the bigger the map the harder it is for the AI to cope. Thus in playing against the AI, you are better off playing the partial map scenarios - but then tht's not why we purchased  this game, so we are regularly asking the AI to provide us with an enjoyable game and  are getting upset when we run afoul of its limitations. It's kind of like expecting a competitive game of Trivial Pursuit from a parrot...

_____________________________

fair winds,
Brad

(in reply to Joe D.)
Post #: 7
RE: About AI... - 2/15/2008 11:35:29 PM   
Pyrrhos1976

 

Posts: 38
Joined: 1/22/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Joe D.

W/the WitP/UV engine, the longer the scenario, the lamer the AI as it progresses.


It's why I asked for short scenarios. Usually, in wargame, AI has the greatest problem when scenario becomes longer and bigger. But sometimes, tactically, it offers a good challenge, in shorter scenarios.
I'd like to create a little campaign, with a "bordgame" for strategic aspects and PC game for operational: thus I can counterbalance AI's difficulty with strategy. I thought that maybe with short scenarios (=operational aspect of my campaign) WITP's AI could be a good partner. I just want a good opponant for scenarios which simulate a single operation (like invading an atoll or trying to intercept an invader's force with maybe a major naval battle: a duration between some days and a month). Do you think that WITP'AI can be good for this (scenarios which have the same size that Corail Sea) or CAW is better ?

< Message edited by Pyrrhos1976 -- 2/15/2008 11:39:55 PM >

(in reply to Joe D.)
Post #: 8
RE: About AI... - 2/16/2008 12:50:31 AM   
Joe D.


Posts: 4004
Joined: 8/31/2005
From: Stratford, Connecticut
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: bradfordkay

... It's kind of like expecting a competitive game of Trivial Pursuit from a parrot...


LOL - the AI and the parrot are both scripted!

CaW to WitP/UV has been compared as checkers is to chess, but although the game is simpler, the AI is more challenging in CaW.

It's also nice to fire up a scenario and not spend an hour or two on your first move. Besides, in CaW you can't micromanage your subs and you have the option of setting airbases and fleets to AI control; now that I'm older, I do that as much as possible


_____________________________

Stratford, Connecticut, U.S.A.

"The Angel of Okinawa"

Home of the Chance-Vought Corsair, F4U
The best fighter-bomber of World War II

(in reply to bradfordkay)
Post #: 9
RE: About AI... - 2/16/2008 1:23:03 AM   
Pyrrhos1976

 

Posts: 38
Joined: 1/22/2008
Status: offline 		Let's take an example of short scenario: the battle of Corail sea. Is it more easy to win against AI in WITP than with CAW ?? How is the AI in this scenario of WITP ?

(in reply to Joe D.)
Post #: 10
RE: About AI... - 2/16/2008 3:38:57 AM   
Joe D.


Posts: 4004
Joined: 8/31/2005
From: Stratford, Connecticut
Status: offline 		The WitP/UV Coral sea scenario is more involved, but when it comes to carriers, the CaW scenario is more realistic and has mystery/alternative variants.

Once you beat Coral Sea in UV, that's pretty much it, but CaW is unpredictible, so I'd have to say it's harder.

Realize that I'm comparing a turn-based WEGO w/a pausable real time game.

_____________________________

Stratford, Connecticut, U.S.A.

"The Angel of Okinawa"

Home of the Chance-Vought Corsair, F4U
The best fighter-bomber of World War II

(in reply to Pyrrhos1976)
Post #: 11
RE: About AI... - 2/16/2008 6:35:05 PM   
Pyrrhos1976

 

Posts: 38
Joined: 1/22/2008
Status: offline 		So, Ai is worst when the size of the game is bigger.
At your opinion, what's the duration and the size at which AI is at his (poor) best ?
It's important for me because I want to create some small hypothetical scenarios for playing against AI and I need to have an idea of the best size for this (just a battle of some days: CAW is better for this, a little campaign of some weeks, a campaign of some months ??).

< Message edited by Pyrrhos1976 -- 2/16/2008 7:01:08 PM >

(in reply to Joe D.)
Post #: 12
RE: About AI... - 2/17/2008 12:28:28 AM   
Joe D.


Posts: 4004
Joined: 8/31/2005
From: Stratford, Connecticut
Status: offline 		If you want a game to "mod" its scenarios, CaW is your best bet, but as I am not a modder, I suggest you go to the CaW forum on Matrix and ask the experts who run it.

_____________________________

Stratford, Connecticut, U.S.A.

"The Angel of Okinawa"

Home of the Chance-Vought Corsair, F4U
The best fighter-bomber of World War II

(in reply to Pyrrhos1976)
Post #: 13
RE: About AI... - 2/17/2008 11:07:46 AM   
Pyrrhos1976

 

Posts: 38
Joined: 1/22/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Joe D.

If you want a game to "mod" its scenarios, CaW is your best bet, but as I am not a modder, I suggest you go to the CaW forum on Matrix and ask the experts who run it.


Yes, for a single naval battle, but not for a more complicated operation. With WITP it's possible to combine air and land battles (to provide an aerial support to ground units was an important mission for carriers...). It's why I would prefer to use this game for short scenarios, with acurate objective (like in the Marianas scenario, or a little more): the AI will not disperse too much. Don't you think that AI can perform well in this kind of scenario (ok, it's not for this that the game was conceive, but I'm free to practice it as I want !!) ? Or should I lost all my illusion ?

[I'm sorry to insist on this, but modding take a lot of time, and I don't want to create something that AI will spoil. I thank you to take time for responding].

< Message edited by Pyrrhos1976 -- 2/17/2008 11:10:52 AM >

(in reply to Joe D.)
Post #: 14
RE: About AI... - 2/17/2008 2:58:45 PM   
Joe D.


Posts: 4004
Joined: 8/31/2005
From: Stratford, Connecticut
Status: offline 		CaW scenarios are short by default, so I can't compare a CaW "campaign" w/WitP. But as a rule of thumb, w/the Grigsby engine, the shorter the scenario, the better the (scripted) AI peforms.

_____________________________

Stratford, Connecticut, U.S.A.

"The Angel of Okinawa"

Home of the Chance-Vought Corsair, F4U
The best fighter-bomber of World War II

(in reply to Pyrrhos1976)
Post #: 15
RE: About AI... - 2/17/2008 5:16:11 PM   
Shark7


Posts: 7937
Joined: 7/24/2007
From: The Big Nowhere
Status: offline 		Honestly the only thing the AI is really good at is being ready to play any time you are day or night. It is nice that I can turn on the game and run through several turns in an afternoon against the AI as opposed to a PBEM where 1 or 2 turns in a day is usually the limit.

But as far as presenting a real challenge, nope the AI in WITP is just as bad as any other game AI. It practically garrauntees the player will win.

Should the AI in any game be referred to as the AS (Artificial Stupidity)?

_____________________________

Distant Worlds Fan

'When in doubt...attack!'

(in reply to Joe D.)
Post #: 16
RE: About AI... - 2/17/2008 5:24:22 PM   
treespider


Posts: 9796
Joined: 1/30/2005
From: Edgewater, MD
Status: offline 		Reading through this thread I don't believe anyone actually answered Pyrrhos1976's question....

For a small short scenario that is limited in scope is the AI at least somewhat competent???

We all know for a full map extravaganza the AI is lacking....but for a small short and limited in scope scenario - I don't know....as I haven't played them.

_____________________________

Here's a link to:
Treespider's Grand Campaign of DBB

"It is not the critic who counts, .... The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena..." T. Roosevelt, Paris, 1910

(in reply to Shark7)
Post #: 17
RE: About AI... - 2/17/2008 5:26:32 PM   
Mike Scholl

 

Posts: 9349
Joined: 1/1/2003
From: Kansas City, MO
Status: offline 		In my experiance, the AI is never competant. But it's incompetancy shows up less in a smaller, shorter scenario.

(in reply to treespider)
Post #: 18
RE: About AI... - 2/17/2008 5:30:58 PM   
Shark7


Posts: 7937
Joined: 7/24/2007
From: The Big Nowhere
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: treespider

Reading through this thread I don't believe anyone actually answered Pyrrhos1976's question....

For a small short scenario that is limited in scope is the AI at least somewhat competent???

We all know for a full map extravaganza the AI is lacking....but for a small short and limited in scope scenario - I don't know....as I haven't played them.


It has been my experience, that even with smaller, very specific scenarios the AI will invariably do something that leaves you scratching your head and saying "What was it thinking?" Unless you can completely script out the way the AI should behave so that it actually has a human brain behind it, and is not thinking for itself, it just never seems quite up to the task.

I think the resupply routine is really weak in this area, as I have seen the AI dump off troops for an invansion, and if it doesn't take the objective in a timely manner it will just leave the troops there to starve without resupply. Maybe other players have had better luck?

I wouldn't mind an improved AI, in fact I would love a more robust AI because that is mainly what I play against.


_____________________________

Distant Worlds Fan

'When in doubt...attack!'

(in reply to treespider)
Post #: 19
RE: About AI... - 2/17/2008 5:42:21 PM   
Mike Scholl

 

Posts: 9349
Joined: 1/1/2003
From: Kansas City, MO
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Shark7
I wouldn't mind an improved AI, in fact I would love a more robust AI because that is mainly what I play against.



Everybody would LOVE a robust and competant AI. But I won't hold my breath. Stop and thing of the number of unit types and systems in the game. And how they must interact just to play at all. Then the hoops that must be negotiated to make that interaction tactically sound. And when you have all that, you have to make it capable of both developing and pursuing a strategy, and reacting effectively to the player's. And if it's Japanese, doing production effectively.

I'm amazed it does as well as it does..., and it doesn't do all that well. The ideal AI is still a long way off as I see it.

(in reply to Shark7)
Post #: 20
RE: About AI... - 2/17/2008 8:51:44 PM   
bradfordkay

 

Posts: 8683
Joined: 3/24/2002
From: Olympia, WA
Status: offline 		"I think the resupply routine is really weak in this area, as I have seen the AI dump off troops for an invansion, and if it doesn't take the objective in a timely manner it will just leave the troops there to starve without resupply."

Rather similar to what the Japanese did IRL... okay, they sent in about 1/10th the supply needed, as opposed to none.

_____________________________

fair winds,
Brad

(in reply to Mike Scholl)
Post #: 21
RE: About AI... - 2/17/2008 9:18:18 PM   
Shark7


Posts: 7937
Joined: 7/24/2007
From: The Big Nowhere
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: bradfordkay

"I think the resupply routine is really weak in this area, as I have seen the AI dump off troops for an invansion, and if it doesn't take the objective in a timely manner it will just leave the troops there to starve without resupply."

Rather similar to what the Japanese did IRL... okay, they sent in about 1/10th the supply needed, as opposed to none.


Yes that is true. However the problem is that I usually play as Japan against an ALLIED AI, so it should be resupplying its troops to be historically accurate.

_____________________________

Distant Worlds Fan

'When in doubt...attack!'

(in reply to bradfordkay)
Post #: 22
RE: About AI... - 2/17/2008 9:20:46 PM   
Pyrrhos1976

 

Posts: 38
Joined: 1/22/2008
Status: offline 		Is this problem systematic ?

(in reply to Shark7)
Post #: 23
RE: About AI... - 2/17/2008 9:30:50 PM   
Joe D.


Posts: 4004
Joined: 8/31/2005
From: Stratford, Connecticut
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: treespider

Reading through this thread I don't believe anyone actually answered Pyrrhos1976's question....

For a small short scenario that is limited in scope is the AI at least somewhat competent???


... "W/the WitP/UV engine, the longer the scenario, the lamer the AI as it progresses."

Therefore, the shorter the scenario, the less lame/more competent the AI. By inference, the answer is "yes".



_____________________________

Stratford, Connecticut, U.S.A.

"The Angel of Okinawa"

Home of the Chance-Vought Corsair, F4U
The best fighter-bomber of World War II

(in reply to treespider)
Post #: 24
RE: About AI... - 2/17/2008 9:34:10 PM   
Shark7


Posts: 7937
Joined: 7/24/2007
From: The Big Nowhere
Status: offline 		I don't know if the problem is based on the GE itself, or on the way that I play the game.

Any time I see an AK/AP task force headed anywhere, I will dispatch my carriers and as much LBA as is feasible to sink as much of it as possible. I just wonder if this is affecting the AI's decision making on whether to send follow on supply TFs or not, being that I usually end up with a large number of air and surface forces in the attack area. It could just be that it is doing the smart thing by not trying to force a lightly escorted tranport TF into the teeth of the dragon, so to speak.

Which is why I was wondering about other players experiences in this situation.

_____________________________

Distant Worlds Fan

'When in doubt...attack!'

(in reply to Pyrrhos1976)
Post #: 25
RE: About AI... - 2/17/2008 9:52:18 PM   
Joe D.


Posts: 4004
Joined: 8/31/2005
From: Stratford, Connecticut
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Shark7

... Any time I see an AK/AP task force headed anywhere, I will dispatch my carriers and as much LBA as is feasible to sink as much of it as possible. I just wonder if this is affecting the AI's decision making on whether to send follow on supply TFs or not, being that I usually end up with a large number of air and surface forces in the attack area. It could just be that it is doing the smart thing by not trying to force a lightly escorted tranport TF into the teeth of the dragon, so to speak.


Isn't WitP based on the PacWar game engine, which had (bomber) Air Zones of Control to prevent the passage of routine convoys; these same convoys would "never be run into areas where naval and air combat were to be expected."

In my experience, this never really worked in PacWar, so why would it be expected to work in WitP?

_____________________________

Stratford, Connecticut, U.S.A.

"The Angel of Okinawa"

Home of the Chance-Vought Corsair, F4U
The best fighter-bomber of World War II

(in reply to Shark7)
Post #: 26
RE: About AI... - 2/18/2008 5:33:59 AM   
Shark7


Posts: 7937
Joined: 7/24/2007
From: The Big Nowhere
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Joe D.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shark7

... Any time I see an AK/AP task force headed anywhere, I will dispatch my carriers and as much LBA as is feasible to sink as much of it as possible. I just wonder if this is affecting the AI's decision making on whether to send follow on supply TFs or not, being that I usually end up with a large number of air and surface forces in the attack area. It could just be that it is doing the smart thing by not trying to force a lightly escorted tranport TF into the teeth of the dragon, so to speak.


Isn't WitP based on the PacWar game engine, which had (bomber) Air Zones of Control to prevent the passage of routine convoys; these same convoys would "never be run into areas where naval and air combat were to be expected."

In my experience, this never really worked in PacWar, so why would it be expected to work in WitP?


Well if that is the case, then it does explain why the AI never makes any attempt to resupply assault forces.

_____________________________

Distant Worlds Fan

'When in doubt...attack!'

(in reply to Joe D.)
Post #: 27
RE: About AI... - 2/19/2008 1:19:31 AM   
Gem35


Posts: 3420
Joined: 9/12/2004
From: Dallas, Texas
Status: offline 		If you play on hard setting the AI is always supplied so it doesnt really matter, add to the fact the AI is scripted and will do the same things every game again it doesnt matter. Name a game who's AI can think and react like a competent human being.
If you want that challenge start a pbem with somebody.
How many threads are there about how lame the AI is?
Shut up already.

_____________________________

It doesn't make any sense, Admiral. Were we better than the Japanese or just luckier?


Banner By Feurer Krieg

(in reply to Shark7)
Post #: 28
RE: About AI... - 2/19/2008 2:31:11 AM   
Joe D.


Posts: 4004
Joined: 8/31/2005
From: Stratford, Connecticut
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Gem35

... Name a game who's AI can think and react like a competent human being.


BoA, GoA, etc.


_____________________________

Stratford, Connecticut, U.S.A.

"The Angel of Okinawa"

Home of the Chance-Vought Corsair, F4U
The best fighter-bomber of World War II

(in reply to Gem35)
Post #: 29
RE: About AI... - 2/23/2008 9:57:55 PM   
Pyrrhos1976

 

Posts: 38
Joined: 1/22/2008
Status: offline 		Other questions about AI. In your experience:
1) has AI a tendency to scatter his carriers or is he able to concentrate them for striking ?
2) how does he manage the different TFs (bombardment, transport, air) for an invasion ?

< Message edited by Pyrrhos1976 -- 2/23/2008 9:58:01 PM >

(in reply to Joe D.)
Post #: 30
Page:   [1] 2   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> About AI... Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

2.531