Edwin P.

Bomber/Fighter a) SA= Soft Attack ..... 1 / 2 TA= Armor Attack .... 1 / 2 c) NA= Naval Attack ... 1 / 3 d) RA= Strategic Attack ... 4 / 1 e) CA= Carrier Attack ... 1 / 2 f) UA= Sub Attack ... 4 / 2 (1?) Naval Attack - During WWII fighters were very effective against naval targets and as JJ pointed out Bombers much less so. Carrier Attack - in my view carriers would have a better chance of being warned about incoming attacks due to their air patrols, thus fighters should have a lower rating vs carrier groups than other surface naval fleets as they would be less likely to surprise them. Strategic Attack: I tend to agree with the current strategic attack ratings as attacks by bombers were several orders of magnitude more effective than fighter attacks due to the amount and size of ordenance they could drop. The difference between 4 and 1 illustrates this best. Submarine Attacks: I would make Bombers more effective (4) against Subs as they carried bombs in quantities that could blanket a large area. In reality, fighters were only effective against subs if they are on the surface. The question that I have is should fighters be ranked 2 or 1 vs subs. If 1 it would increase the need for building Strategic Bombers if the Axis launched a battle for the Atlantic with wolf packs. [ December 10, 2005, 11:14 AM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

Some time ago it was discussed by several on this forum (or was it in the SC1 forum?) giving the Axis player the option to plunder or not the Ukraine when 3 cities and 1 mine in souther Russia are conquered. - Yes - Axis decision to plunder the Ukraine means that it gets full production from the conquered cities in the Ukraine, but also the problem of partisans. (Standard Game Option) - No - Axis decision not to plunder the Ukraine causes the Axis to receive no production from these conquered cities, but also no partisans appear in this area. (or perhaps the chance for partisans in this area is reduced) A similar option was also proposed for Conquering France; Does the Axis player 1) plunder France or 2) allow it to join the Axis - Plunder France - the standard game option where the conquerer receives plunder, conquers France and allows for the creation of Vichy France. Popup: "France surrenders" - France Joins the Axis - The Axis does not receive any plunder for conquering France but French units in France and its overseas possessions join the Axis. French units in the Uk become Free French. France remains an independent country, but one controlled by the Axis player. Popup: "France joins the Axis." In my view, allowing the Axis player a choice of how to handle the surrender of France would add variablity to the game while preserving play balance and allowng players to experiment with another "What If" situation. So it would be: When Paris is captured: Popup: "Do we plunder France or welcome them into the Axis Alliance." Player selects option. Selection Option 1 = Popup: "France surrenders" Selection Option 2 = Popup: "France joins the Axis" The good part about this idea is that HC has already programmed much of the mechanics. Just expand Vichy France to include all of France if the Axis player selects option 2 and have Vichy France join the Axis as an Axis Minor Nation. [ December 10, 2005, 11:28 AM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

The key problem the Sc1 AI has at Expert level is that it never obtains the same production base that a human player obtains by conmquering most of the minor nations. This could have been resolved by giving the AI a random bonus at Expert level: Example for Axis AI: 30% Turkey & Iraq joins Axis AI - thats an extra 4 cities, 1 port, and 2 resource hexes in addition to a front on the Caucaus Mountain area of Russia - that forces the Human Russian player to weaken his line facing Germany. 30% Spain and Vichy France joins the Axis AI - thats an extra 6 cities, 2 ports and 1 resource hex, in addition to 2 more naval ships and several combat units. (30% x 30% = 9%) Alas, there will not be a patch to the Sc1 AI. Perhaps the best way to resolve this is to create a custom campaign that gives the Axis AI Sweden, Finland, Bulgaria, Greece, Turkey, Iraq from Turn 1. [ December 10, 2005, 06:50 AM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

Idea 03: If Axis builds Subs then Western Allies build Bomber with goal of targeting subs in North Atlantic by basing the Bomber in Halifax, Nova Scotia or Northern Ireland.

Email me your first turn as Axis (Fog of War On, Siberian War Off) at edwinfager1@msn.com if you are interested.

Any chance of posting this screen shot in the screen shots area of the web site?

One of the biggest advantages of the Bomber in SC2 as opposed to Sc1, is going to be its range which increases at a much faster rate (as compared to air fleets or carrier fleets) with each increase in LR tech. Example: LR3 (with hypothetical numbers) Air Fleet Range = 6 (3 + 3x1) Bomber Range = 14 (5 + 3x3) Just this one change gives the allies a much wider range of strategic targets and complicates the Axis player's defensive planning. The allies may also find that a bomber fleet is just what the doctor ordered to safeguard convoy routes between the US and UK as bombers, especially if one is based in Northern Ireland and another in Newfoundland. [ December 09, 2005, 04:25 PM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

pzgndr Many thanks for the detailed info on the combat target values tables. It really helps to clarify the mechanics of the game. It will be interesting to see what happens to play balance as you test(?) reducing naval and carrier attack value of bombers from 4 to 2, while keeping its sub attack value at 4. I think that submarine attack values of 4 for bombers & carriers and 2 for air fleets is correct. This is especially true since carrier based air units were configured for naval warfare and their sub spotting was enhanced by the radar and visual sightings from their accompanying naval vessels.

So you are saying, that Bombers should be effective vs subs and not effective vs surface ships. Could this adjustment be made in the editor? ie Naval Attack = 0, Carrier Attack = 0, Sub Attack = 4 Of course, given the limited spotting range of bombers in SC2 you would need to spot the sub with another naval or air unit before calling in the bombers. PS: Great photos. [ December 09, 2005, 01:04 PM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

Any chance of adding a few more screen shots? Perhaps showing the diplomacy and intel screens.

HC is probably now fine tuning the AI. Although we don't have a game to play with, perhaps we can offer some ideas on how the Allied AI can use strategic bombers? Idea 01: What if SOMETIMES the UK/USA adopted a strategic bombing strategy and built several Bombers along with researching Strategic Bombing and Long Range? Would this be a viable stratefgy for the AI? Does it have the potential to deny the Axis enough MPPs so it can't win on the Eastern Front? Especially if the AI held off bombing Axis Europe (and kept the bombers out of sight of the Axis) until it had 2-3 bombers and Long Range Tech so the human would be inclined not to research AA tech and would be surprised by their sudden appearance. Idea 02: If Bomber takes Flak Damage it changes trargets in an effort to find a target tile not protected by flak. [ December 09, 2005, 04:58 AM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

Desert Dave, many thanks for the update re: Bombers. Reducing the cost of a bomber will certainly have a big impact on its use, by both sides. In Sc1 it was just too expensive to justify buying, except if you were winning. Occassionally the SC1 AI did purchase a bomber but it never knew how to use it properly. [ December 08, 2005, 05:35 PM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

About 4-6 weeks before the demo is released.

Delay the relase of the game - oh no! Just another idea. PS: This is a really simple one that could (?) be added with the existing editor or incorporated into the standard Genius Level AI. UPDATE Change B TO: % Spain AND Vichy Join the AXIS after France Surrenders. Why - Having Spain and Vichy France join the Axis would really give the Human player a good contest along with giving the Axis an extra 2 Naval units. I changed this to have Vichy join, as I felt that if Spain joined the AXIS Vichy France would likely join the Axis too. It also changes the game as the Axis position in North Africa is strengthened. [ December 07, 2005, 12:25 PM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

1. Writing a learning AI is very time consuming. 2. Though it could be done in a simplified fashing by having the AI track which combination of strategies lead to the fastest surrender of France, for example. It would then be more likely to select these strategies in the future. Example: Strategy 1: AI attacks Low countries and takes Paris in 12 turns in 3 games Strategy 2: AI attacks Denmark then Low Countries and takes Paris in 7 turns in 3 games. The AI would thus be more likely to choose Strategy 2 in future games. If over time the success of this strategy declined it would increase its chances of selecting another strategy. The key issue with a game like SC2 is that there are so many variables to track. Does one only track the countries one conquers before taking France or does one also track which units one produces or how many units defend France. 3. It is even simpler to give the AI a range of strategies to select from without progamming the AI to learn from its actions (and for most game oriented AI's their learning ability is quite limited) and to update this over time as new patches are released and players write new AI scripts. 4. HC has said that the AI should be able to do a few things well. I agree, if it can do so in an unpredictable fashion. [ December 06, 2005, 01:11 PM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

Do not forget as I recall that a bomber's range increases by 3 to 1 for each level in Long Range tech. Thus the Brits can bomb not only Brussels but also Frankfurt, Berlin and Munich. --------------------------------------------- I do wonder if the game's AI will include instructions on what to bomb and when and whether to change targets. Will it bomb a port to prevent infantry from embarking (or disembarking), and stop the bombardment prior to D-Day? Will it seek out targets within range not protected by flak or will it continually attack well protected cities and mines? If Russia has a bomber will it be used to keep occupied cities from serving as a source of supply to the Axis invaders? [ December 06, 2005, 12:30 PM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

Question: Have any of the beta testers tried a Strategic Bombing campaign against the Axis or allies?

Strategic Bombers will affect the resources in a tile even if it is occupied by a unit.

Going a step futher...an experienced player will be able to beat the AI on a consistent basis. To keep the game interesting the human player must be presented with unexpected events - via scripting. Perhaps, the following "easy to implement" idea could add some variability to the game vs the AI at Genius level. Example: At Genius Level AI Axis & Human Allied ------- A. % that Turkey & Iraq joins AI Axis a few turns after Russia is at war; so the Human player knows not if he must guard the Caucaus mountain area. ------- B. % that Spain AND Vichy FRANCE join the AI Axis after France surrenders. ------- C. % that Sweden and Norway and Finland join the AI Axis after France and the Benelux countries surrender. ------- D. % that Yugoslavia and Greece join the AI Axis, thus freeing up Axis units from fighting Yugoslavian partisans and giving the Axis AI a small economic boost. Thus at Genius level an Allied game player may experience eleven possible variations; 1+(4+3+2+1) = 11, during a campaign and Genius Level. 1. None of these events occur. 2. A 3. A and B 4. A and C 5. A and D 6. A and B and C 7. A and B and D 8. A and C and D 7. A and B and C and D 7. B 8. B and C 9. B and D 9. B and C and D 10. C 11. C and D [ December 07, 2005, 12:28 PM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

I would be interested in seeing Scripts for the Allied AI to Liberate the Nordic Countries, and Defend Egypt. For the AXIS I would like to see event scripts for Conquering Vichy France, launching a Sea Lion, Conquest of the Nordic Countries and Conquest of the Middle East, Conquer Vichy (including Algeria) and Sicily. [ December 04, 2005, 09:42 AM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

A few comments on the Fuzzy Logic in SC1; a. It was good at the tactical level, with the exception of not concentrating air units on destroying a front line unit. (it would often attack units behind the front line) b. At the operational level it tended to use operation movement too often and concentrate HQ units where they would be cut off and not utilized. In a recent game vs the AI, the Axis AI located 2 Italian and 3 German HQ units in Greece along with one Italian corps. In another game it allowed 3 German HQ and 1 Italian HQ to but cut off along the Northern Russian cost. The withdrawal strategy and placement of HQ units needs to be fine tuned. Additionally, it did not know how to conduct an offensive action on one front while conducting an holding action on another front. c.At the strategic level the Fuzzy AI tended to always follow the same strategy, without looking at the map or being willing to explore or at an elementary level learning from its actions. Example for the Opening Game Axis AI; Attack Options: France, Low Countries, Denmark Key Objective: French Surrender In SC1 the AI would only choose France and/or Low Countries. Often time wasting too much time attacking the Maginot line before switching to the Maginot Line. It would never attack Denmark before France surrendered. I would like to see the Fuzzy Logic track how long it takes to accomplish its first Key Objective (French Surrender) and use this to adjust the chance for the various attack options. Example: Attack Denmark then Low Countries then France Attack Denmark and Low Countries then France Attack Low Countries then France Attack France Maginor Line Attack France Maginot Line and Low Countries then Denmark [ December 04, 2005, 09:41 AM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

For AI vs Human Games a. Human Allied Player at Genius Level 25% Pop-up on First Turn Russia is at War - Stalin Orders "No Retreat" Effect: Human controlled Soviet Units can't move on their first turn. In SC1 I found that not moving the Soviet units on the first turn vs the Axis AI gives the AI a needed boost and makes for a more interesting game.

A few more ideas; I look forward to seeing the Allies randomly select a strategy for the defending France; which is harder to do in SC2 than Sc1, 1. To the Front, To the Front (70%) 2. To Paris, To Paris (aka Blashy strategy)(10%) 3. To England, To England (10%) 4. To Egypt, To Egypt (10%) ----- In some games of Sc1 I have evacuated French units to Egypt from France (just a corps or two) to aid in the defense of Cairo and surprise my opponent. At the least the French unit in Beruit should move to Allied Egypt so that it becomes Free French and the French unit in Algiers should move to Gibraltar while the UK unit in Gibraltor sails around the Cape to Cairo. [ December 03, 2005, 03:57 PM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

I look forward to seeing the British Fleet randomly select a strategy for the opening game moves; Strategic Focus Summary: 55% Atlantic - 30% Med - 15% Baltic Strategic Focus Detail: a. Protect the Atlantic (30%) - The AI focuses its fleet on protecting the Merchant shipping routes and avoiding damage from German air power until the allies are ready to invade Europe. b. Destroy the Italian Fleet (10% - about 1 in 10 games) - Move most of the Allied fleets to Med in attempt to sink the Italian Fleet when Italy enters the war. If the Allies succeed then they execute a Conquer North Africa Strategy (ie Italian Libya). If the Allies are defeated they retreat to the Atlantic (via the Straits or the Red Sea), whichever is closer. c. Protect Egypt (10%: 1 in 10 games). A small but strong Naval force is assigned to guard the Eastern Med. d. Sink the German Baltic Fleet (10%:1 in 10 games) e. Defend France (25%: 1 in 4 games)- Allied ships move in to attack any Axis units along the coast of France. f. Egyptian Ambush (5%: 1 in 20 games) The Allies build a large fleet in the Red Sea and the Eastern Med east of Cyprus out of site of the Axis supported by air power. When Italian Navy approaches Cairo sally forth and destroy them in a surprise attack. If successful then support an Allied advance in North Africa. If not successful then withdraw the fleet back to the Atlantic via the Red Sea. g. Western Med Ambush (5%: 1 in 20 games) - The Allied build a large fleet outside of Gibraltar. When the Italian fleet approachs to invade Vichy they sail through the straits to attack and sink the Italian Fleet. If they fail the fleet retreats to the North Atlantic for repairs. If they suceed they Allies invade North Africa, in preparation for attacking Libya and then Sicily. h. Baltic Surprise (5%: 1 in 20 games) - The allied fleets attack the Baltic Fleet as cover for moving 3 ships to the Northern Baltic where they will wait to ambush any transports that attempt to invade Sweden or Russia OR SUPPORT INVASION OF NORWAY. Summary: 8 Different Strategies for unpredictable Allied Naval Actions [ December 03, 2005, 10:44 AM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

Great Idea on disrupting canals. How to do it within the current system? Perhaps; Engineer! Engineer! Build me a Fortress! Scuttle me a Canal! Clear the Canal! Allow the Engineer to; a. Build Fortifications b. Scuttle the Locks (Suez Canal, Panama Canal - 2 turns). c. Fix the Locks (8 turns). For the future: d. Airstrip in Jungle Tile (just an idea - if air units can't land in a jungle tile) e. Build Supply Depot (terrain with stacks of oil barrels - supplies units - can't move - destroyed if occupied). [ December 02, 2005, 02:41 PM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]