Matrix Games Forums

 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread II

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

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread II Page: <<   < prev  7 8 [9] 10 11   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread II - 12/25/2008 3:35:11 PM   
Apollo11


Posts: 24082
Joined: 6/7/2001
From: Zagreb, Croatia
Status: offline 		Hi all,

quote:

ORIGINAL: jwilkerson

Right, the main "deathspiral" I think we've been workin on - over the past 6 months - is preventing the AI from getting stuck and doing "nothing" from some point forward. Now if you send everything including the kitchen sink to Java (as I did in a recent test) you can still (well could then anyway) stall the AI out at Java, but it will keep going in Burma, China, Solomons, CENPAC, etc. A good human player will usually be able to beat the AI, but the AI did kill my carriers in two prior games, so it isn't a "walk over" by any means.


Great news Joe!

BTW, when WitP was first published my fruiend Oleg (he posted quite often here) made few AI vs. AI tests at work (after he went home during the night) for many many days...

The original WitP AI (both Allied and Japanese) almost perfectly followed the historic WWII in the Pacific!

How is that nowadays with WitP-AE?

Did you guys run such long AI vs. AI games to see what is happening (and with ocassional "break into" to see situation, positions and stocks)?


Leo "Apollo11"

_____________________________



Prior Preparation & Planning Prevents Pathetically Poor Performance!

A & B: WitW, WitE, WbtS, GGWaW, GGWaW2-AWD, HttR, CotA, BftB, CF
P: UV, WitP, WitP-AE

(in reply to jwilkerson)
Post #: 241
Christmas Present - 12/25/2008 3:52:08 PM   
Don Bowen


Posts: 8183
Joined: 7/13/2000
From: Georgetown, Texas, USA
Status: offline 		This may get posted as part of an ongoing AAR, but it is a little rare and I thought it would make a nice Christmas present:

Sub attack near Port Moresby  at 98,130

Japanese Ships
     DD Mutsuki
     DD Yayoi
     E Asanagi
     E Oite
     CL Yubari

Allied Ships
     SS S-42, hits 19, and is sunk



SS S-42 launches 4 torpedoes at DD Mutsuki
S-42 bottoming out ....
DD Yayoi fails to find sub, continues to search...
DD Mutsuki fails to find sub and abandons search
E Asanagi fails to find sub and abandons search
E Oite fails to find sub and abandons search
DD Yayoi attacking submerged sub ....
DD Yayoi attacking submerged sub ....
SS S-42 forced to surface!
DD Mutsuki firing on surfaced sub ....
E Asanagi firing on surfaced sub ....
E Oite firing on surfaced sub ....
CL Yubari firing on surfaced sub ....
DD Mutsuki firing on surfaced sub ....
E Asanagi firing on surfaced sub ....
E Oite firing on surfaced sub ....
CL Yubari firing on surfaced sub ....
Sub slips beneath the waves
 
 

(in reply to jwilkerson)
Post #: 242
RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread II - 12/25/2008 10:04:40 PM   
m10bob


Posts: 8622
Joined: 11/3/2002
From: Dismal Seepage Indiana
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: jwilkerson


quote:

ORIGINAL: Andy Mac
I think we have licked the old AI deathspirals


Right, the main "deathspiral" I think we've been workin on - over the past 6 months - is preventing the AI from getting stuck and doing "nothing" from some point forward. Now if you send everything including the kitchen sink to Java (as I did in a recent test) you can still (well could then anyway) stall the AI out at Java, but it will keep going in Burma, China, Solomons, CENPAC, etc. A good human player will usually be able to beat the AI, but the AI did kill my carriers in two prior games, so it isn't a "walk over" by any means.





Excellent and appreciated descriptions with an obvious knowledge of past problems guiding the cure of those problems.Thank you.

_____________________________




(in reply to jwilkerson)
Post #: 243
RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread II - 12/31/2008 12:42:12 AM   
mlees


Posts: 2263
Joined: 9/20/2003
From: San Diego
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Barb

How many main battery salvoes could be fired by old battlewagon until magazines become empty IRL? Has someone any idea?


I think they expected about a hundred shots per gun.

The USS Idaho was ordered, as a test on 10 October 1942, to "fire to exhaustion" by Admiral King. The account is detailed on page 352 of U.S. Battleships, by Friedman, in five paragraphs. I don't feel like typing them all in their entirety now... sorry. heh

Highpoints: 20 6-gun, 47 5-gun, 22 4-gun, 31 3-gun, 25 2-gun, 11 1-gun salvoes were fired (only the two forward 3-gun turrets were used).

The average salvo time was 67 seconds, but by the last 20 or so salvos, the rate of fire slowed down to once every two minutes, due to the slow arrival of powder or shell from the magazines (the crews of which were manually moving the bags/shell to the hoists).

2400 bags of powder were handled without incident, and each shell in the magazine was "walked" to wherever they needed to go to get to the hoists by rocking and turning the shells so that their points moved in a horizontal circle about 6 inches in diameter.

< Message edited by mlees -- 12/31/2008 2:50:10 PM >

(in reply to Barb)
Post #: 244
RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread II - 12/31/2008 1:26:27 AM   
JWE

 

Posts: 6580
Joined: 7/19/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: m10bob
quote:

ORIGINAL: jwilkerson
quote:

ORIGINAL: Andy Mac
I think we have licked the old AI deathspirals

Right, the main "deathspiral" I think we've been workin on - over the past 6 months - is preventing the AI from getting stuck and doing "nothing" from some point forward. Now if you send everything including the kitchen sink to Java (as I did in a recent test) you can still (well could then anyway) stall the AI out at Java, but it will keep going in Burma, China, Solomons, CENPAC, etc. A good human player will usually be able to beat the AI, but the AI did kill my carriers in two prior games, so it isn't a "walk over" by any means.

Excellent and appreciated descriptions with an obvious knowledge of past problems guiding the cure of those problems.Thank you.

To amplify just a touch on Joe, testing is pretty rigorous. You got the Coral Sea AAR going, there's other H2Hs going on; play against JP AI, play against Allied AI, all multi day turns, and an ongoing AI v AI, all designed to get to 1944 so as to slow down a bit and wring out anything that crops up in those "later years" that not many people get to.

Also, there's a ton of sandboxes for this & that. We got LCI(R)s that actually work! We've diddled with multiple matrix invasions from a Bn on a Div, 1, 2, 3 Rgts hitting 3, 2, 1 Rgts, to a Div on a Bn, with forts from 0 to lots. Woof !

My personal timer is on how long it takes the JP economy to come to a grinding halt if merchies aren't replaced. I'm assuming lots of high value merchies were converted to auxiliaries (in the historical course), making the remainder more interesting as sub targets.

Taking bets.


_____________________________

Home of DaBabes

(in reply to m10bob)
Post #: 245
RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread II - 12/31/2008 8:10:28 AM   
herwin

 

Posts: 6059
Joined: 5/28/2004
From: Sunderland, UK
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: jwilkerson


quote:

ORIGINAL: Andy Mac
I think we have licked the old AI deathspirals


Right, the main "deathspiral" I think we've been workin on - over the past 6 months - is preventing the AI from getting stuck and doing "nothing" from some point forward. Now if you send everything including the kitchen sink to Java (as I did in a recent test) you can still (well could then anyway) stall the AI out at Java, but it will keep going in Burma, China, Solomons, CENPAC, etc. A good human player will usually be able to beat the AI, but the AI did kill my carriers in two prior games, so it isn't a "walk over" by any means.



Given that you're updating a game rather than redesigning it, I suspect death spirals are unavoidable. My experience in chess is that strategy is like tactics, just more general. That suggests the basic approach to AI in WiTP II should be to work on a number of levels of abstraction, such as:

1. The first question is the strategic direction. Top-level HQs are assigned to strategic directions.
2. The second question what objectives in the chosen direction.
3. The third question is the order of operations (including bypasses, alternatives, and switches) in the chosen direction. Operations in secondary directions need to be identified as well. This can probably be programmed.
4. The fourth question is the required resources for the operations.
5. The fifth question is how to organise each operation.
6. The sixth question is the tactics to be employed for each operation.
7. The seventh question is the real-time management and co-ordination of each operation.

From time to time, each level of decision is revisited.

The Japanese error was to misjudge the answer to question 3 for a secondary direction where the real goal was defensive. So make the surprise attack on Pearl Harbor a high-probability alternative operation with an unexpected side-effect on the length of the war.

_____________________________

Harry Erwin
"For a number to make sense in the game, someone has to calibrate it and program code. There are too many significant numbers that behave non-linearly to expect that. It's just a game. Enjoy it." herwin@btinternet.com

(in reply to jwilkerson)
Post #: 246
RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread II - 12/31/2008 1:53:41 PM   
John Lansford

 

Posts: 2662
Joined: 4/29/2002
Status: offline 		Have the effects of torpedoes been adjusted to more accurately reflect real life results?  There are many, many RL examples of merchant ships sinking with only one torpedo hit, but there have been very few instances of that in my game vs the AI.  Similarly, DD's weren't all that resistant to single torpedo hits either, while cruisers could absorb one Long Lance torpedo without sinking (although two tended to sink them).

(in reply to herwin)
Post #: 247
RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread II - 12/31/2008 2:33:21 PM   
wild_Willie2


Posts: 2934
Joined: 10/8/2004
From: Arnhem (holland) yes a bridge to far...
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: John Lansford

Have the effects of torpedoes been adjusted to more accurately reflect real life results?  There are many, many RL examples of merchant ships sinking with only one torpedo hit, but there have been very few instances of that in my game vs the AI.  Similarly, DD's weren't all that resistant to single torpedo hits either, while cruisers could absorb one Long Lance torpedo without sinking (although two tended to sink them).


The damage model in the game is quit conservative in the damage level per weapon hit.

IRL 1-2 bomb hits would damage a merchant beond repair, In WITP most merchants shrug of a single bomb hit. To compensate for this low level of damage per bomb, the amound of hits that are scored in game are also higher than IRL (until a certain exp level is gained, then a miss has a lower probability than that of a hit. Luckely this is fixed in AE).

I asked this question some time ago, and from the answers I understood that this high hit/damage ratio was done deliberatly to "spice" up the game.

< Message edited by wild_Willie2 -- 12/31/2008 2:39:46 PM >

_____________________________

In vinum illic est sapientia , in matera illic est vires , in aqua illic es bacteria.

In wine there is wisdom, in beer there is strength, in water there are bacteria.

(in reply to John Lansford)
Post #: 248
RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread II - 12/31/2008 3:28:22 PM   
Panther Bait


Posts: 654
Joined: 8/30/2006
Status: offline 		IIRC, one of the reasons for merchant ships ability to shrug off damage is that a ship's durability (sort of like their "hit points" to borrow an RPG term) is based in large part on displacement, but the stock game does not factor in their basic construction.  Warships have much better compartmentalization versus a merchant ship, so they should have more "hit points" per unit displacement than merchant ships, but in stock at least, that is not the case.

I think that some of the mods played around with durability to try and make merchants more fragile, but I think there were unintended consequences.  I can't remember seeing if anything was done with this for AE or not.

Warship survivability depended a lot on where the hit was, at least for torpedoes.  Hits in the bow were typically less of a problem, although US Cruisers had a tendency to loss the whole bow from single hits.  I have read of some DDs that were so thin at the bow that a torpedo would pass right through and explode on the other side. Hits in the rear were bad for cruisers, IIRC, since the penetrations for the propeller shafts tended to weaken the overall structure of the hull, but relatively, a little better for DDs since it restricted the damage to one end.  Hits in the middle could break a DD in half, but in a cruiser were more likely to only flood several compartments (very possibly in the engineering spaces).  They might need a drydock, but at least they could still operate.  Of course, a TT hit near a cruiser's turrets had a chance of a magazine explosion, which would be almost certainly fatal (or severely damaging at least).

_____________________________

When you shoot at a destroyer and miss, it's like hit'in a wildcat in the ass with a banjo.

Nathan Dogan, USS Gurnard

(in reply to wild_Willie2)
Post #: 249
RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread II - 12/31/2008 5:20:16 PM   
Andy Mac

 

Posts: 15222
Joined: 5/12/2004
From: Alexandria, Scotland
Status: offline 		being brutally honest for once it varies - if I have thought of it and programmed a counter then you will be met by opposition but the further out the game goes the harder it is to forsee every eventuality or more importantly the strength of the option

The AI does not think and pick an appropriate response it uses the forces I tell it to to counter an invasion.

So if I misjudge the likely time or force then t could be a sledgehammer response or possibly insufficient force

All the likely regions have counterattack forces specified but will they be enough only time will tell
Post #: 250
RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread II - 12/31/2008 5:21:28 PM   
Andy Mac

 

Posts: 15222
Joined: 5/12/2004
From: Alexandria, Scotland
Status: offline 		p.s. I cannot and will not over promise on the AI I hope its better than stock but as good as is all we said it would be so I really don't want to build expectations to high

(in reply to Andy Mac)
Post #: 251
RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread II - 12/31/2008 9:37:44 PM   
Enforcer

 

Posts: 320
Joined: 3/14/2002
From: New Smyrna Beach, Fla
Status: offline 		HEY ANDY MAC Please email me - thomaslukemills@gmail.com

I tried your email link but it bounced back and your PM is full

_____________________________
Post #: 252
RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread II - 1/2/2009 2:15:40 AM   
Tanaka


Posts: 4378
Joined: 4/8/2003
From: USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Grognerd

That's all anyone can ask for! Thanks for the response. Can't wait to try it! PS I have two PBEM friends waiting too.


With all the improvements being made there is no way the AE AI could be worse than stock! And asking for a better AI than stock is definitely not asking too much!

_____________________________
Post #: 253
RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread II - 1/3/2009 3:11:15 AM   
Dili

 

Posts: 4708
Joined: 9/10/2004
Status: offline 		How sonar will be factored in AE?

(in reply to Tanaka)
Post #: 254
RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread II - 1/4/2009 12:03:57 PM   
Terminus


Posts: 41459
Joined: 4/23/2005
From: Denmark
Status: offline 		No change.

_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to Dili)
Post #: 255
RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread II - 1/5/2009 4:18:44 AM   
Dili

 

Posts: 4708
Joined: 9/10/2004
Status: offline 		Thanks.

(in reply to Terminus)
Post #: 256
RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread II - 1/5/2009 4:43:19 AM   
jwilkerson


Posts: 10525
Joined: 9/15/2002
From: Kansas
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Dili

How sonar will be factored in AE?


yeah, my bathothermometers got axed too!



_____________________________

AE Project Lead
New Game Project Lead

(in reply to Dili)
Post #: 257
RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread II - 1/5/2009 6:00:07 AM   
Dili

 

Posts: 4708
Joined: 9/10/2004
Status: offline 		Well sonar was a crucial device in ASW. So it should have been there and could be just a bonus tick in ship anti-submarine detection capacity. Since i don't know maybe it required to much resources to do it. Not perfect but one option is to edit anti-submarine weapons making w/ sonar and without sonar versions.

(in reply to jwilkerson)
Post #: 258
RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread II - 1/5/2009 8:50:57 AM   
m10bob


Posts: 8622
Joined: 11/3/2002
From: Dismal Seepage Indiana
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Dili

Well sonar was a crucial device in ASW. So it should have been there and could be just a bonus tick in ship anti-submarine detection capacity. Since i don't know maybe it required to much resources to do it. Not perfect but one option is to edit anti-submarine weapons making w/ sonar and without sonar versions.


Maybe with the editor, you will be able to assimilate?.I figured out how to make Goliath s and Piper J 3's in SPWAW.

_____________________________




(in reply to Dili)
Post #: 259
RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread II - 1/5/2009 10:43:38 AM   
Dili

 

Posts: 4708
Joined: 9/10/2004
Status: offline 		That is what i wrote, edit those weapons making a version with factored Sonar input, or do you mean something diferent?

(in reply to m10bob)
Post #: 260
RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread II - 1/5/2009 12:26:59 PM   
m10bob


Posts: 8622
Joined: 11/3/2002
From: Dismal Seepage Indiana
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Dili

That is what i wrote, edit those weapons making a version with factored Sonar input, or do you mean something diferent?


I meant you (as an individual) might look for ways to do this, which would not delay the AE team.

This suggestion in no way indicates you might not have a good idea, but the AE product is far enough in its' development any further modifications might be saved for possible future patching.

Why...heck....I even know how to make my Bob Hope USO travelling tour show!

< Message edited by m10bob -- 1/5/2009 12:30:02 PM >

_____________________________




(in reply to Dili)
Post #: 261
RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread II - 1/5/2009 1:37:52 PM   
Terminus


Posts: 41459
Joined: 4/23/2005
From: Denmark
Status: offline 		For "might be saved", read "must be saved"...

_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to m10bob)
Post #: 262
RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread II - 1/5/2009 2:22:22 PM   
witpqs


Posts: 26087
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: m10bob

Why...heck....I even know how to make my Bob Hope USO travelling tour show!


Will a future patch include units equipped with the Red Ryder BB Gun?

(in reply to m10bob)
Post #: 263
RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread II - 1/5/2009 2:51:56 PM   
Shark7


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

ORIGINAL: witpqs

quote:

ORIGINAL: m10bob

Why...heck....I even know how to make my Bob Hope USO travelling tour show!


Will a future patch include units equipped with the Red Ryder BB Gun?



I doubt it, you'll shoot your eye out!

_____________________________

Distant Worlds Fan

'When in doubt...attack!'

(in reply to witpqs)
Post #: 264
RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread II - 1/5/2009 6:15:32 PM   
m10bob


Posts: 8622
Joined: 11/3/2002
From: Dismal Seepage Indiana
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs

quote:

ORIGINAL: m10bob

Why...heck....I even know how to make my Bob Hope USO travelling tour show!


Will a future patch include units equipped with the Red Ryder BB Gun?



They told me I'd poke my eye out.

_____________________________




(in reply to witpqs)
Post #: 265
Tidbit - 1/5/2009 6:30:12 PM   
Don Bowen


Posts: 8183
Joined: 7/13/2000
From: Georgetown, Texas, USA
Status: offline
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Night Time Surface Combat, near Banjoewangi at 57,107, Range 10,000 Yards

Japanese Ships
CL Natori
DD Satsuki
DD Minazuki
DD Fumizuki
DD Nagatsuki
DD Harukaze
DD Akikaze
DMS W-2
DMS W-3
PC Ch 7
PC Ch 8
PC Ch 9
AMC Akagi Maru
xAK Ayatosan Maru
xAK Kansai Maru
AMC Kiyosumi Maru
xAK Goyo Maru
xAK Nankai Maru
xAK Tokai Maru
xAK Aobasan Maru
xAK Asosan Maru
xAK Asakasan Maru
xAK Atutasan Maru
AMC Nosiro Maru
AMC Bankok Maru
LSD Shinshu Maru
xAP Asama Maru
xAP Brazil Maru
xAP Buenos Aires Maru
xAP Huzi Maru
xAP Yoshino Maru
xAP Taizan Maru
xAP Keihuku Maru
xAP Ussuri Maru
xAP Tango Maru
xAP Naminoue Maru

Allied Ships
PT TM-7



Maximum visibility in Clear Conditions and 7% moonlight: 8,000 yards
Range closes to 4,000 yards...
Range closes to 2,000 yards...
Range increases to 4,000 yards...
CONTACT: Japanese lookouts spot Allied task force at 4,000 yards
CONTACT: Allied lookouts spot Japanese task force at 4,000 yards
Both TF attempt to withdraw!
Range increases to 10,000 yards...
AMC Nosiro Maru , LSD Shinshu Maru , xAP Naminoue Maru ,
xAP Tango Maru , xAP Ussuri Maru , xAP Keihuku Maru ,
xAP Taizan Maru , xAP Yoshino Maru , xAP Huzi Maru ,
xAP Buenos Aires Maru , xAP Brazil Maru , xAP Asama Maru ,
xAK Atutasan Maru , xAK Asakasan Maru , xAK Asosan Maru ,
xAK Aobasan Maru , xAK Tokai Maru , xAK Nankai Maru ,
xAK Goyo Maru , xAK Kansai Maru screened from combat
- escorted by DD Akikaze , DD Harukaze , DD Nagatsuki ,
DD Fumizuki , DD Minazuki , DD Satsuki
CL Natori engages PT TM-7 at 10,000 yards
Task forces break off...

(in reply to m10bob)
Post #: 266
RE: Tidbit - 1/5/2009 6:35:17 PM   
Yamato hugger

 

Posts: 5475
Joined: 10/5/2004
Status: offline 		Jap commander: EEK!
PT Skipper: EEK!

_____________________________


(in reply to Don Bowen)
Post #: 267
RE: Tidbit - 1/5/2009 6:38:58 PM   
m10bob


Posts: 8622
Joined: 11/3/2002
From: Dismal Seepage Indiana
Status: offline 		Well....the Jap warships stayed with the troopships to defend them. For all they knew, the PT might have been a "draw".

_____________________________




(in reply to Yamato hugger)
Post #: 268
Page:   <<   < prev  7 8 [9] 10 11   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread II Page: <<   < prev  7 8 [9] 10 11   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

3.453