pzgndr

SC3 should include the Random History Generator feature to spice things up! LOL

IMHO the current series does pretty good for WWII ETO with the variability of events and such. Are you just making an observation or have you got any suggestions for improving the game experience?

I hit 50 a month ago. :eek:

There are a lot of shortcomings with AIs because most developers cannot afford to spend the time needed to create a competent and challenging computer opponent. It's a lot of work. A generalized licensable AI system that can continued to be improved upon over time would be great!

Sounds like Brit is decoupling the AI code as-is so it can be a stand-alone dll, for others to mess with as-is. If he does more than this pro bono then great.

Brit has asked you to chill out. So chill out already. And your stupid little challenge is over. You don't tell me or anyone else here to "put up or shut up" or anything else. Stop it.

For an interesting twist, why not Spain and Turkey??

Rich, chill out already. And BTW, if I want to comment to you I'll do it without an alias.

Do what you can, Brit. Thank you.

This would be an appropriate flaw to fix.

USSR is not intended to be knocked out easily even at beginner level, and certainly not at the recommended Expert +1.5 difficulty. At best perhaps a good crippling if you can take Leningrad, Moscow and Stalingrad? Playing a beat-the-AI game can be fun for a little while but for me the challenge is playing the tough game and trying to beat history. As Allies, try to defeat Axis before Spring 1945. As Axis, try to hold out past Summer 1945. The most interesting point in a game is when the initiative shifts from Axis to Allies, and the timing of that shift varies. Kinda dull otherwise?

As promised, I have completed my update to Advanced Third Reich. It's taken a little while longer than expected, but Desert Dave has been helping and provided several good suggestions. Below are the final version notes for the files I just uploaded to the Global Conflict repository: I like the improvements in this update. The economics are better with the slightly increased reinforcement costs; diplomacy is more interesting; Axis and Allied computer opponents are tougher; and the revised scorched earth settings slow down the Allied advances in Russia and Italy just enough. Enjoy! P.S. My long standing intent was to make this mod competitive and challenging at the Intermediate +1 difficulty settings. Alas, the AI although much improved still has its limitations. Despite my efforts to toughen things up, I am now recommending play against the AI at the Expert +1.5 level for a challenging game experience with more historical results.

The original boardgame ended in Winter 1945 and that's what my mod does. What really is the point of continuing beyond?? You could edit the end dates in the victory event scripts, but there are various other event scripts with failsafe dates of 1/1/46 that would kick in after 12/21/45 and produce odd results. I have been playing at the Expert +1.5 difficulty level and getting a challenging game. If you're kicking the AI around as you are, you might want to consider bumping up the difficulty a notch or two.

Like I said, it's for the generic AI. You could let the computer opponent do its thing without ANY AI scripting and see how it goes, and then add scripting as necessary to 'force' it to do what you think it should be doing. The exclusion lists help 'force' the AI to NOT do certain things. But be careful, it does apply for everything. In my previous example, you could exclude something that helps the German AI in the 1940 offensives, but later it may not consider defending those excluded resources unless you provide garrison scripts.

It excludes specified resources from generic (non-scripted) AI planning. Good example is German offensive to take Paris, but not waste time pounding against Maginot Line fortress tiles; so exclude those fortress locations. Scripted plans to attack/defend an excluded resource will override the exclusion. Make sense?

This is something Brit should carefully consider before spending too much time breaking out the AI into a DLL. If nobody is going to pick it up and run with it without wasting any more of Brit's time asking him to explain in further detail how his dll works, then why bother? Personally, I'd like to see it and maybe get into it myself, but like Magitek I also have other projects taking up my limited free time and probably won't do much with it. It may be best if Brit spends his limited free time making a few modest AI adjustments here and there to improve some specific behaviors. And if possible add some AI-related parameters to the ruleset editor to allow players to experiment on their own with making some adjustments?

huhr, the AI isn't brilliant! It's pretty good and I've scripted what I can, but execution is still driven by fuzzy logic and I cannot control that. If you're crushing the AI, then my recommendation is to crank up the difficulty setting a notch or two. I've been using Expert +1.5 lately and still smacking the AI around, but seeing more historical results. Not sure what's happening in Caucusus for you. There are no morale effects I know of, but if Russians lose Grozny as a supply center then readiness levels would drop. Regarding research, I was very selective in what areas to allow research and restricted the levels in most cases. The land unit OOBs are virtually identical to the boardgame and meant to remain constant, without tech upgrades since the reasoning way back when was that all nations would be upgrading along the way and staying relatively constant. The only exception I made was for Russian armor since there was no good way to have both 3-5 and 4-5 tanks. Germany should have two 5-6 tanks, but to allow them to upgrade at all means allowing all their tank units to be upgradeable and that upsets play balance. Chasing after tech isn't the point of the game. Focus on the grand strategy and game tactics.

Overall the AI improvements for air units in Global Conflict are pretty good. The AI does a better job of redeploying air units around to where the action is. Strategic bombing appears to be more effective. Etc. But I've also seen air units moved recklessly into harms way, or not moved out of harms way soon enough. Maybe just another tweak or two in the AI code would be helpful for air unit movements. And perhaps some of the AI work in the upcoming WWI release could be retrofitted into another GC patch?

Sorry no, not for PDE, only GC. GC provides a couple of really nice enhancements that improve A3R performance. Plus the AI enhancements Hubert has made to GC help a lot. Consider an upgrade to GC??

Well, my A3R time scale is monthly turns, specifically 4-week (28-day) simultaneous turns which gives each player 13 turns per year. You could edit the Turn/Economic Data and set it to alternating seasonal turns as in the default SC campaigns. This gives each player about 14-15 turns per year, slightly more so not sure how the economics might be affected. You could give it a go and let everyone know? One of these days I might give it a try myself. FYI, if you hold off a couple more weeks I'll be posting an update.

This is pretty much what Joel Billings said about the WITE AI; it operates under its own "FOW" and even though it knows where everything is it still isn't smart enough to think ahead too far like a human player. Yeah it very well might. It might cause a whole lot of unforeseen effects, which require time to playtest and assess. I'm a firm believer in the Law of Unintended Consequences. Rich, it's not like anyone is arguing against having a great non-cheating AI that plays by all the rules a human player does, but the bottom line is what the overall gameplay is like. Is the computer opponent competent and challenging, despite the cheats? That's in the eye of the beholder.

I suspect there's more that could be done using the editor to create mods optimizing AI gameplay. If specific suggestions are made for improving or enhancing the editor and/or scripting AI behavior, Brit may be able to accomodate if the code adjustments are easy enough. That may be the way to proceed...

Final victory determination is as of 12/21/45. Pyrhic victory for Axis if they hold out that long. You should get some countdown messages 5-6 turns out.

From one of my earlier posts: Maybe Brit can do something along these lines or adjust the ROEs, or maybe not. Or if he releases the AI dll as open source, maybe others could do something. It is likely not trivial. Whatever changes could be made would also have to be assessed to see if they actually improve the computer opponent performance or not. Again, not trivial. We'll have to see what Brit says, since he knows best.

Roger that. Thank you Brit.