Which Ai Stance is the most realistic?

General discussion related to the game goes here.

Moderators: Balthagor, Legend, Moderators

Rosalis
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 232
Joined: Sep 07 2019
Human: Yes

Re: Which Ai Stance is the most realistic?

Post by Rosalis »

Again having access to a military complex cloose by is key. AI is programmed to defend them so thats why you see units there. If a unit gets attacked ai send reinforces, if it get kills it send more reinforces if a barrack gets captures it sends alot of reinforces.

playeragenda 0
playeraistance 0

Thats .CVP values of US in W2020.

playeragenda: Default 'Agenda' for initial default priorities & stance Default is ‘Opportunistic’ Agenda, ie No Pre-Defined Agenda

playeraistance (0-4) AI Stance
0=Normal; 1=Passive; 2=Defensive; 3=Aggressive; 4=Unpredictable
Modified by game setup if not 'normal/default' in setup

On very high volatility you dont care as much about your allies so yeah.

Some more examples from the W2020 .CVP files.
Germany
playeragenda 3
playeraistance 3
France
playeragenda 3
playeraistance 3

Not sure what playeragenda means. They got a new wiki and this isnt explained very well. I thought 3 ment conquer the world or something. But if you can use your imagination, you can see why other regions would react to this behaviour. US got settings like 90% of the ignored regions in the game. Not enough to cover the range. This wasnt the problem so much in SR2020, but i also think one of the reasons of that is because more regions have something in either one. Compare World2020.CVP of SR2020 and SRU with eachother and you can see what i mean. Now alot of regions just have 0/0 so you get less dynamic.
dax1
Brigadier Gen.
Posts: 508
Joined: Apr 05 2012
Human: Yes
Location: Italy

Re: Which Ai Stance is the most realistic?

Post by dax1 »

playeragenda {0:Opportunistic, 1:Vengeance, 2:Conquest, 3:Intimidation, 4:Profit, 5:Status Quo, 6:Submission, 7:Reunification, 8:Enlightenment}

viewtopic.php?t=21205
Con forza ed ardimento
User avatar
milivoje02
Colonel
Posts: 288
Joined: Oct 22 2018
Human: Yes

Re: Which Ai Stance is the most realistic?

Post by milivoje02 »

Rosalis wrote:
Feb 07 2020

Claiming that US doesnt send units doesnt help the discussion since i can actually hand over save games where AI of USA defend or annex Europe, Middle East or Asia for that mather.

Could you tell me in which scenario and what were the game settings?
Or can he give you to me a save game If it is not a problem.
Rosalis
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 232
Joined: Sep 07 2019
Human: Yes

Re: Which Ai Stance is the most realistic?

Post by Rosalis »

I looked thru hundreds of save games, but only came across mods where US sends units outside america. Ill keep looking for a vanilla game. In mod modern world from Fistalis US have playeragenda 2. Couple of save games in this where US declare war on me and send units. This setting you cant change without modding the game. The thing with volatility is that relations drop on very high, seems reations mather when it comes to allies sending troops. In my own mod US got 7 oversea bases, but personally i think you will still need agressive AI stance. Thing is you cant see this setting in a save game so im not sure.

I can send you the save games if you want, but modern world mod got some bugs where units dissapear when landing 'illegally' in no sea port for example. My own mod works good and i can post save game if you want.
Pashahlis
Corporal
Posts: 4
Joined: Feb 09 2020
Human: Yes

Re: Which Ai Stance is the most realistic?

Post by Pashahlis »

I know what world volatility does, but what does the Global AI stance do?

More precisely, what is the difference between "Defensive" and "Passive"?

Basically, contrary to most people in this community (from what I have observed) I want a game with a lot fewer wars for a more realistic game. So I put world volatility on low, but what do I put the global AI stance on then? Defensive or passive?
Rosalis
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 232
Joined: Sep 07 2019
Human: Yes

Re: Which Ai Stance is the most realistic?

Post by Rosalis »

Agressive. You can see AI stance as range on how far they will send their units. On defensive, well i already told that in this topic, AI uses stacks to fight you and is very carefull to send units too far from their loyal hexes. Passive means units just sit at the military complex alot (in loyal territory). You have to kill a region before their ally send units... Unpredictable, im not sure, but i think it loads a value every (save?)game for each region and thats it. Im sure if im wrong there will be a dev here defending the game.

Volatility give the CB, if there is not much volatility there are not much wars. Im pretty sure everyone like realistic gameplay, but there were patches where nothing happened even on the most aggressive settings.

And i wasnt kidding about the embassies. Without modding, there is no way you will get realistic gameplay. Very easy diplomacy helps making allies, but after a while you need to put it on normal or everyone gonna be an ally you fight. Plus it doesnt change the fact that you will just turn blue sphere stronger in vanilla. Alot of people think US sphere is OP in RL, but in Asia that isnt the case. There are a couple of strong regions left, but alot changed over the last years under influence of Russia and China. If RL isnt balanced you will get a world war, simple as that.
User avatar
milivoje02
Colonel
Posts: 288
Joined: Oct 22 2018
Human: Yes

Re: Which Ai Stance is the most realistic?

Post by milivoje02 »

Rosalis wrote:
Feb 13 2020
I looked thru hundreds of save games, but only came across mods where US sends units outside america. Ill keep looking for a vanilla game. In mod modern world from Fistalis US have playeragenda 2. Couple of save games in this where US declare war on me and send units. This setting you cant change without modding the game. The thing with volatility is that relations drop on very high, seems reations mather when it comes to allies sending troops. In my own mod US got 7 oversea bases, but personally i think you will still need agressive AI stance. Thing is you cant see this setting in a save game so im not sure.

I can send you the save games if you want, but modern world mod got some bugs where units dissapear when landing 'illegally' in no sea port for example. My own mod works good and i can post save game if you want.
Thanks for the effort.
Pashahlis
Corporal
Posts: 4
Joined: Feb 09 2020
Human: Yes

Re: Which Ai Stance is the most realistic?

Post by Pashahlis »

Alright, Ill try "Agressive" and "Low Volatility" then. I want fewer wars but also have the AI actually engage when it is in a war or defending an ally.
User avatar
Uriens
Brigadier Gen.
Posts: 516
Joined: Oct 05 2005

Re: Which Ai Stance is the most realistic?

Post by Uriens »

Do note that Aggressive AI will tend to declare wars anywhere in its region (mostly randomly) so if you are playing scenarios like shattered world you may end up with, for example, Texas AI that declares 10 wars, all of them on the other side of NA and all of those regions unreachable. Opportunistic AI seems to favor wars with immediate neighbors. Just my observation.
Rosalis
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 232
Joined: Sep 07 2019
Human: Yes

Re: Which Ai Stance is the most realistic?

Post by Rosalis »

On agressive thats prolly a right observation, on the other hand that will give the build up of a world war, so other regions have the opportunity to prepare.

Not sure what you mean with opportunistic thats agenda. If you mean unpredictable, yeah there is a 75% change its not agressive. But whats more realistic, US annexing middle america or US targeting specific nations like Venezuela.

You see those wars as random because China and Russia lack alot of embassies. Same with your example Texas, they lack alot of embassies in SW. At the same time that will keep it active. Personally i think the ranges need to be increased, loyalty is too important on defensive for example. Once you put units like not connected to your home region by land they will prolly stay there and listen to battlezone orders, so thats pretty good, but you cant change AI stance in a running save game, so yeah your units gonna be a mess on agressive, easier to control on defensive.
User avatar
Uriens
Brigadier Gen.
Posts: 516
Joined: Oct 05 2005

Re: Which Ai Stance is the most realistic?

Post by Uriens »

Aggressive/Conquest = Lots of wars that AI declares randomly across the whole continent.
Normal/Opportunistic = Less wars with preference to DoW-ing its neighbors.
Both cases on medium volatility.
Frankly, i prefer Normal(Default)/Opportunistic as it seems to produce regions that expand more logically. Like i had a Poland that DoW-ed Czech, then Kaliningrad, then Belarus that was already at war with Moscow and ended up taking half of it, then it took East Germany and finally it DoW-ed Slovakia. If i was playing Poland, i doubt i would expand better.
Aggressive/Conquest is more like if you want regions to go psycho on everyone and they also tend to declare too many wars to handle which gets them either bankrupt or overrun by many enemies.
Going Aggressive/Conquest on very high volatility is the craziest scenario that ends up in complete chaos. I prefer seeing regions rise up gradually, picking their wars instead constantly being in war with half the continent and ending up with good economy and strong military with plenty of experienced units. Fighting such nations can be quite challenging too. For example, i had West Germany that unified all Germany regions and reformed Democratic Germany (its in my mod). Then they went for Austria and Poland and finally it DoW-ed me (I had Balkans all the way to Turkey). Germany at that point had big military and economy that allowed it to maximize unit efficiency (very important factor in combat). I actually had them break through my defensive front at the Poland/Slovakia borders, which almost never happened. I underestimated AI and didn't max my combat efficiency so i ended up with a single veteran Leopard2 A7 standing against full stack of my tanks, tanking shots from me and with each shot that it would do it would send one of my units into retreat. Quite badass moment i may add.
You don't get that on Conquest/Aggressive, just chaos that rarely results with a single nation getting that strong and more frequently with nearly everyone exhausting their resources and going bankrupt which brings their wars to a standstill. For me Normal/Opportunistic seems to do it best, but you may find settings that do it better to your liking.

Ideal way for AI to expand is to have a single war with the nation that it can reach and actually defeat, after which it would take a brief peace time to rebuild economy and military. I never found random DoW's against unreachable enemies to have ANY sense, it just costs a lot and usually antagonizes other regions (and wastes time).
Rosalis
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 232
Joined: Sep 07 2019
Human: Yes

Re: Which Ai Stance is the most realistic?

Post by Rosalis »

Yes, putting US on conquest agenda and agressive ai stance is another modify you could try to answer most of the questions asked here. But still need to mod you cant choose agenda in the starting options. But then again there are plenty of smaller regions helping in international operations so not sure if thats enough. Personally i was surprised how much impact embassies had when i started adding them to China, but yeah up to you if you wanna check that out.

Just a reminder for others, this topic is called "Which Ai Stance is the most realistic?" not which AI stance is the best for the AI, or whats best to pick of regions 1 by 1. You got any feedback about oportunistic agenda and agressive stance? Nobody was talking about conquest agressive till now.

As we already established US doesnt send troops on 0/0 outside america. Its mostly a US vs Russia game in 2020, so the answer seems to be clear. 0/0 is not enough.

From SR2020 alot of smaller regions got their defensive ai stance removed for normal. I definetely think they are better represented defensive. Especially since they have a harder time too with unit designs.
Post Reply

Return to “General Discussion - SRUltimate”