Modify Operations AI

Show us how intelligent you are by discussing the AI in this forum.

Moderators: Balthagor, Legend, Moderators

Post Reply
felinis
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 229
Joined: Jan 10 2006
Location: Baltimore

Modify Operations AI

Post by felinis »

Operations AI, when given 100% control will entrench impotant units all over my country, protecting bridges and cities. This is not a desirable strategy, since it wastes many units and directs them away from the fight.
User avatar
Balthagor
Supreme Ruler
Posts: 22072
Joined: Jun 04 2002
Human: Yes
Location: BattleGoat Studios

Post by Balthagor »

The AI actions are not scripted, they are not something that can be modified by the user, what are you suggesting that the AI do instead? Entrenching seems a reasonable strategy to me...
Chris Latour
BattleGoat Studios
chris@battlegoat.com
User avatar
tkobo
Supreme Ruler
Posts: 12397
Joined: Jun 04 2002
Location: In a vast zionist plot ...RIGHT BEHIND YOU ! Oh Noes !

Post by tkobo »

Lessen the mount of units entrenched and limit those to type of units.

Make the AI use "formations" instead of placing a unit in every city.

In othe words,have the AI place units in a triangle that allows them to offer fast protection for an area of hexs ,instead of having them place a unit in every hex they wish to protect.

Also, limit the types of units the will be entrenched to those that are high close combat and those that are air defense.

Over all the AI needs to use more of its units to attack,while still providing a reasonable at home defense.

This would help in that direction.
This post approved by Tkobo:Official Rabble Rouser of the United Yahoos
Chuckle TM
red
General
Posts: 1092
Joined: Feb 14 2004
Location: New York

Post by red »

It's really a waste of forces because lone units scattered throughout a region don't pose any threat. I would think the AI would be better off only garrisoning very important cities, bases, and bridges. The only real threat I can think of for the places the AI garrisons which aren't already on the front (and so should be covered otherwise) is air assault, and for such places they would, against a serious attack, be good only as a speedbump to let other forces to arrive (if they do..) anyway. Better used in a front, you know.
felinis
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 229
Joined: Jan 10 2006
Location: Baltimore

Post by felinis »

These other guys have pretty much said it all.

Perhaps you mis-understood my complaint. It is not that the Operations AI entrenches units - it is that it employs an overly-conservative strategy of entrenching units far from the theatre of operations.

I am NE U.S. and I have carefully marshalled all of my units along my Southern border because the silly Southerners have decided to attack me.

I line up all available troops along the border and tell the Operations AI to "Go get 'em". There is a horrendious battle, after which I discover that the AI has diverted about 20 percent on my units to guard bridges and towns in Michigan and New England. My whole country is checkered with yellow chevrons of entrenched units "on leave" from the battle-front.

Who knows what they do under those bridges....
User avatar
Balthagor
Supreme Ruler
Posts: 22072
Joined: Jun 04 2002
Human: Yes
Location: BattleGoat Studios

Post by Balthagor »

The AI's love affair with bridges aside :roll: , the idea of the units on garrison in the region is not necessarily a bad idea. After all, 1 unit entrenched to 100% in a city will survive for a while and force opposing units to waste time "taking them out". Agreed, this does not apply to situations where mass forces are being brought to bare, but we've already admitted that the AI simply isn't equiped (atm) to handle this sort of thing. These units are not intended as a threat, they are intended to keep other players from blitzing you with a tank rush (hard with the supply model, but not impossible.

Maybe I can move this in a better direction;

- Under what circumstances should the AI send a unit into garrison of a hex (city or otherwise)?
- What types of units should it use for garrison?
Chris Latour
BattleGoat Studios
chris@battlegoat.com
felinis
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 229
Joined: Jan 10 2006
Location: Baltimore

Bridge guards

Post by felinis »

Clearly, I think that the strategy is overly conservative and you don't.
That is fine - we agree to disagree.
User avatar
Balthagor
Supreme Ruler
Posts: 22072
Joined: Jun 04 2002
Human: Yes
Location: BattleGoat Studios

Post by Balthagor »

...

Do you think the AI should never send units to entrench? :o

I know that you think it's being excessive but isn't there any case where you think the AI should send a unit to garrison? What about at peace? Surrounded by allies?
Chris Latour
BattleGoat Studios
chris@battlegoat.com
Seydlitz
Major
Posts: 194
Joined: Oct 09 2005
Location: UConn
Contact:

Post by Seydlitz »

In my opinion:
Balthagor wrote: - Under what circumstances should the AI send a unit into garrison of a hex (city or otherwise)?
- What types of units should it use for garrison?
1) The AI should always garrison military facilities, major cities, and, if it has enough units, factories and other industries. If there is another region that it shares a border with and has poor relations with, it should garrison any strongpoints along the border. If it can do so along major roads, even better.

2) Mostly leg infantry, though AA battalions are important as well. If we want to make it complicated (I'd rather leave the AI with as little complexity as possible, but...) entrenching major urban areas with infantry around the perimeter and artillery and AA in the interior would be optimal. Plus, it would give it something to do with those big stacks of artillery that build up around bases :-) .
felinis
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 229
Joined: Jan 10 2006
Location: Baltimore

Post by felinis »

I think that during a battle the AI should send all units into combat.
In peace-time the AI should send most units into reserve.

This is another aspect of the game that makes me suspect that both sides do not play by the same rules - the opposing AI never seems to send units into reserve - yet they always have enough funds fo support massive numbers of standing units. If I tried to do that, I would go broke.

Another weak point that I have observed (to my relief) is that the opposing AI usually doesn't utilize its units that are not near a conflict.
My ASWACS planes observe vast enemy fleets and armies that my AI opponet never deploys until my invasion forces threaten them.
Seydlitz
Major
Posts: 194
Joined: Oct 09 2005
Location: UConn
Contact:

Post by Seydlitz »

felinis wrote:This is another aspect of the game that makes me suspect that both sides do not play by the same rules - the opposing AI never seems to send units into reserve - yet they always have enough funds fo support massive numbers of standing units. If I tried to do that, I would go broke.
If you look at the type of units that the AI has spewing out of the base, they are all very low maintenance. I usually encounter a mix of towed howitzers, AA guns, and light infantry/engineer units. An M56 howitzer, which is a common design for the WM to hand out, costs a mere $6.54M a year in maintenance. A light infantry battalion costs around $25M, and the AA guns have similar costs to the howitzers. It's a very cheap system, and, besides, the AI always gets plunged into the red anyway...
User avatar
Balthagor
Supreme Ruler
Posts: 22072
Joined: Jun 04 2002
Human: Yes
Location: BattleGoat Studios

Post by Balthagor »

felinis wrote:...the opposing AI never seems to send units into reserve - yet they always have enough funds fo support massive numbers of standing units...
I rarely send units into reserve, I often have 60-95% of my army deployed. Really depends on which scenario you're in and as which region.
Chris Latour
BattleGoat Studios
chris@battlegoat.com
Post Reply

Return to “AI - Artificial Intelligence”