Edwin P.

In SC1 if you control all the Allies against the AI or all the Axis powers against the AI you can easily win. As Blashy says having AI controlled Allies will make for a much more interesting game. Imagine being the Western Allies and watching the Russian AI being pushed back to the brink of defeat. Or being the Germans and being forced to attack Russia without the support of Italian troops as the Italian AI has decided to adopt a purely defensive strategy. If I could only add this feature for one country it would be for the USSR. There would be a tabbed Allied Communications Panel where the Human Russian player would see the preprogrammed requests he can send to his AI allies. For Russia this would be rather simple: 01. To USA: President Roosevelt, we need lend lease support now! ----------USA AI may increase lead lease support to USSR 02. To USA: President Roosevelt, the USSR does not require any aid from Capitalists to fight the Axis. ----------USA AI stops Lend Lease support to Russia. This provides a realtively simple way for the Human play to assist the AI in making a decision on how much lend lease support to send to Russia. For Germany this tab would be equally simple when dealing with the Italians: 01. To Italy: The German High Commands orders you to keep your forces out of Eastern Europe. -------- The AI would not send any units into Russia, Bulgaria, Romania, Hungary or Germany. Any Italian units in this area would be withdrawn. 02. To Italy: The German High Command orders you to keep your forces out of Europe and Russia. Germany will defend Europe. -------- The Italian AI would not send any units into France, Germany, Low Countries, Denmark, Romania, Hungary, Russia, or Bulgaria. Any Italian units in these countries would be withdrawn. These two rules effectively restrict the Italian AI's area of operations and forces it to concentrate its forces. [ April 27, 2005, 02:16 PM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

A clarification, In SC2 you can play as Russia and have an ally be AI controlled. I thought it would be interesting if you could request your AI controlled ally to follow a particular strategy, of course it could choose not to do so. Example: If Russia tells the USA AI that it does not need any Lend Lease support then the USA AI should stop sending it MPPs and use it to build up its own forces. If Russia tells the USA AI that it needs MPPs, then the AI may accept or decline this request. Its, like bargaining with a human player on your side. As a human player if the Russians asked my to stop sending them MPPs I would. If they asked me to send them more MPPS, I might decline. Especially if I have other priorities or my war readiness is above 80%. [ April 25, 2005, 01:16 PM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

1. I agree that if Turkey joins the Axis Russian readiness should increase. 2. I agree that it should be hard for the Axis to convince Turkey to join them, especially if the Allies are working to convince them to join their side. 2. Moving through the mountains of the Causcaus range is very expensive and slow moving now. 3. Agreed that the cooler heads of the Turkish government wanted to remain neutral, but game is a what if, and what if the hot-heads had prevailed? How do I see it? a. In most games Turkey will remain neutral b. If the Axis can take Egypt then Turkey will become more pro Axis as they will be surrounded by Axis controlled territory. c. If Allies liberate France and Low Countries then Turkey will become more pro-Allied d. If Russia conquers Iraq then Turkey will become more pro-Axis as they have been natural rivals for centuries. e. If Axis conquers London then Turkey more likely to join Axis, to be on the winning side. f. If Axis is the only country attempting to influence Turkey then Turkey could join the Axis.

Blashy, I like the idea of a list of ideas, but what would they be? Russia: 1. To USA: Do Not Send Me Lend Lease Aid 2. To USA: Send me more Lend Lease Aid 3. ? 4. ? UK: 1. To USA: Send Me More Lend Lease Aid 2. To USA: Lets Invade France 3. To USA: Lets Invade Norway 4. To USA: Send Reinforcements to Egypt 5. To USA: Lets Protect the Convoy Routes 6. To USA: Lets Invade Spain Germany: 1. To Italy: Keep your forces out of Russia 2. To Italy: Keep your forces out of Northern Europe

Example of a simple but effective implementation that gives the human player limited influence on the actions of AI controlled allies. Human Russian Player, AI USA and AI UK player: The Human Russian player can send a message to the Western Allies telling them: 1. Do not send lend lease support. This will cause the AI to cease lend lease support to Russia and it will spend the MPPs on preparing its own forces for an invasion. 2. Send more lend lease support. The AI may agree to or deny the request from the human player. Human German Player, AI controlled Italy The human German player can send a message to the AI controlled Italian player telling it: 1. Germany does not need the assistance of Italy to conquer Russia. This tells the Italian AI not to send Italian units into Russia and causes any Italian units in Russia to be withdrawn from Russia. 2. Prepare to Defend France from an Allied Invasion. This tells the Italian AI to focus its forces on the defense of France. 3. Germany will take care of the battle for Europe and Russia. This tells the Italian AI not to send any units into Europe or Russia, thus restricting its activities to the Mediterrean and North Africa. As Blashy says below,a limited set of instructions for the AI would be much appreciated in a game with AI players. Thes instructions don't have to be complex, they would just tell the AI that it can't move its units into specific geographic areas or it would request more Lend Lease Assistance, and the AI would not always listen. Of course, if you are a Human Russian Player, and another Player is the Human UK player, it would be interesting to see which player the AI USA listens to. [ April 24, 2005, 02:04 PM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

Why would they? Historically they did not for several reasons: 1. The president and his supporters did not want to take a risk of losing more territory, like they did in WWI. 2. The Western Allies and Axis were both offering Turkey financial aide to remain join their side. They effectively played off one side against the other to maximize the financial aid that Turkey received. 3. They did not feel threatened by Russia, which has been their historical enemy. Why would they join the Axis? 1. A number of senior officers and politicians wanted to join the Axis and reclaim the lands of the Ottoman empire lost to the Allies after WWI. 2. If Russia threatened to encircle them by attacking Iraq. 3. If the Axis offered them financial aid and the allies ignored them. 4. If they thought the Axis was going to win.

Good point. I believe that you can reflect this in SC2 with an event script that would make Turkey and Spain less pro axis if Greece, Vichy France or Switzerland was attacked by the Axis. Another event script could make Spain more pro Axis if the British declared war on neutral Ireland, Italy, Norway, Belgium or Denmark. Also, re: Turkey. This nation stayed out of the war partially because BOTH Germany and the Allies exerted diplomatic pressure on it. If the Allies in SC2 fail to expend diplomatic chits on Turkey then it will be more likely to join the Axis. [ April 23, 2005, 03:16 PM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

Agreed. Thats why I suggest that the Human player beable to tell the AI what to do from a limited number of available strategies. Essentially, you would tell the Italian AI that it could only move units within a radius of X tiles from Rome OR that it should not move its units into Specific Regions - ie Russia, that in turn would force it to concentrate its forces elsewhere.

Can the Axis affect the strategies of Allied AI controlled players? Perhaps by telling them what their strategy should be but letting the AI execute it. Example: Italy Strategy: Defend Italy or Defend Western Europe or Conquer Egypt or Conquer Vichy France

I will bomb ports to prevent enemy forces from retreating or to clear a path through the straits of Gibralator for my Italian fleet if I have not taken Spain.

Jersey John and Retributor, Leaving the licensing issues aside, although much of this should be in the public domain , I too would like to view photos of or play audio or video footage for key events, provided that it did not happen every time (say it happens 1 in every 5 games, 20% per game). Or perhaps it could be included as an option button (Play Audio or Play Video) in the Pop-up box related to that event. Example: France Surrenders: Perhaps you hear the radio broadcast of the French surrender in the railway car. OR you see a photo of the railway car where the French surrender was signed included in the pop-up that announces the French surrender. OR you see short B&W footage of the surrender ceremony. Paris is liberated: Perhaps you see B&W footage or a Photo of the crowds cheering US Troops entering Paris. Or perhaps you hear the radio broadcast of the event. ------------------------------ Adding a jpeg image to the event popups would probably be the easiest to implement. The hard part would be ensuring that you have the right to use those images in the game. [ April 20, 2005, 06:59 AM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

I suggested the additional difficulty settings because I feel that 1) it is easier and faster to adjust them through a menu instead of going through the editor. and 2) I like the idea of facing an AI with a random but unknown advantage - ie the Random selection under difficulty settings - be it in spotting range, diplomacy chits, research or units. ----------------------------------------------- AS for SC-3; great topic Perhaps an American Civil War Game, It fits in nicely with the SC Scale and HQ units. You would need only a few changes such as; 01. Railroads - operational movement can occur only along rail roads. Cutting a railroad line would prevent the operational movement of units along that rail line. 02. Railroad Transport Points - Each side would have only a limited amount of Rail Transport points to use. 03. Random selection of HQ units for Union Player, which tended to field the less capable commanders early in the war. 04. Spotting Range reduced to 1 Tile for all units. 05. Research areas limited to Intel, Ironclads, Rail Transport capability and ? 06. Merchant Shipping from Europe to CSA. 07. [ April 16, 2005, 11:38 AM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

SC1 had settings for adjusting the plunder and experience for AI opponents. What settings will SC2 have? Any chance for: A. FOW bonus for AI units (for all AI units) Beginner = +0 Intermediate = +1 spotting range bonus Expert = +2 spotting range bonus Genius = No FOW for AI RANDOM (selected bonus is unknown to player) I suggest this as it seems to me to be a fair compromise between giving the AI no Spotting Bonus and allowing it to see everything all the time. B. Diplomacy Chit bonus for AI (for German and UK AI) Beginner = +0 chit Intermediate = +1 chit Expert = +2 diplomacy chits Genius = +4 diplomacy chits RANDOM (selected bonus is unknown to player) This variable would allow players to play a game against an AI where diplomacy is more important. I suggested this as I fear that the AI may too often ignore diplomacy, much as it ignores research in SC1. C. Research Chit Bonus for AI (for German and US AI) Beginner = +0 Intermediate = +1 chit Expert = +2 chits Genius = +4 chits RANDOM (selected bonus is unknown to player) To counter the tendency of the AI in SC1 to under invest in research as compared to the Human player. D. Random Unit Bonus for AI (for Germany and US) Beginner = +0 Intermediate = +1 unit ----(Germany gets 1 sub, 1 rocket, or 1 bomber) ----(US gets 1 cruiser or 1 bomber or 1 HQ) Expert = +2 units ----(Germany gets 2 subs, 2 rockets or 2 bomber units) ----(US gets 2 cruisers or 2 bombers or 1 carrier) Genius = +3 units ----(Germany gets 3 subs, 3 rockets or 3 bomber units) -----(US gets 2 carriers, or 3 bombers) RANDOM Giving the AI a bonus number of seldom built built units has the ability to change the character of the game. -------------------------------------------- This would allow players to easily adjust the difficulty of each game. Players wanting to play against a more unpredictable opponent could select RANDOM and the selected bonus would be unknown to the human player. [ April 16, 2005, 08:37 AM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

From what I read into this HC is working on the AI, though I could be wrong.

Sometimes I get a lot of untis with the Siberian transfer, other times just a few. I assume that the numbers are influenced by the relative strengths of the two sides.

Ah, the Battle for Egypt. Defending the Egypt against a determined Axis player is hard but not undoable and a strong Axis push on this front means that he is weak elsewhere. Once I faced a player making a strong push for Cairo supported by the entire Italian navy and several Axis air units when I sailed through Gibraltar to the west and took Sicily while foiling his plans to force Vichy France to surrender. In another time I took advantage of his preoccupation here to liberate Norway and then Sweden. And yet another time I used bombers to great effect and sank a transport carrying a HQ unit to the coast of Syria. PS: If you are lucky and get early tech advances in Air Defense and defend Cairo with an Armor unit then defending Egypt is a walk in the park. In fact, as the UK I often select AD as one of my early research investments (as opposed to Jets or LR) for this very reason. Of course, I also base a Bomber in the Sinai to pounce on any transports that venture within range

1. You can fully repair ships in the Egyptian ports if you conquered Iraq and established an overland link to Moscow. 2. I too am looking forward to improvements in the AIs use of its fleets and would not mind if HC tested it in a new update for SC1. [ April 10, 2005, 11:17 AM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

Where is the St. Lawrence River that defines the border between Canada and the USA? I did not see it on the SC2 North America map.

Cool, now the allies are forced to guard the Straits else the Italian fleet may gain entry into the Atlantic. This change will have a big impact upon the battle for the Atlantic as the UK navy will be forced to divide its forces. [ April 09, 2005, 01:24 PM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

Buried in this post is the following idea: I like it. It would allow the Russian or German engineers to build a defensive line towards which their forward units could make a fighting withdrawal. It would also make holding a defensive line easier as units in such a position would always start a combat turn with a specific level of entrenchment. I wonder though, if the AI will properly use engineers to build fortifications? Alas, this will take some game testing to see if there are any key chokepoints where fortifications would be most helpful. Will engineer built fortifications give units in them an air defense and naval bombardment defense bonus? I think they should as WWII air and naval bombardments were largely uneffective against units in fortifications, despite the large amounts of ordenance expended. Why? Unlike the precision guided weapons of today the bombs of WWII were quite inaccurate. [ April 09, 2005, 12:43 PM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

JerseyJohn, Great history lesson. Perhaps if subs can't attack other subs in SC2 they should be allowed to pass through, but not stop in tiles occupied by submarine units of an opposing side. Just another crazy idea. I brought this up as once in SC1 I controlled the US and purchased subs to sink the approaching German fleet. My opponent used subs as an invulnerable screen to spot my subs since they would not receive any damage in a surprise encounter with my submarines. I did not realize this until I tried to attack them with my 3 submarine fleets.

In SC2 can Submarines attack Submarines?

In SC1 the AI never conquered Vichy France. In Sc2 I would like to see the Axis AI sometimes execute the classic 1 turn conquest of Vichy France if the Allies have minimal or no naval units in the area by attacking Vichy France and Vichy Algeria and sinking the Vichy Navy. [ April 08, 2005, 11:04 AM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

A few notes on AI: In SC1 Terms you could apply this to the Italian Defense of Sicily. At Novice Level the AI has an Intelligence of 30 for certain scripts. A transport moves next to an Italian city, at Novice AI the AI would see this only 30% of the time and take action - ie move a corps to the city. At Intermediate level (intelligence 90) the AI would see this 90% of the time and take action. Simiarly, in Sc2 terms at Beginner Level the AI would never consider invading England. At Expert level the devilish AI would have the access to a script where 2 amphibious transports could move in capture London and Edinbourgh if they are not guarded and England lacks defending units.

Just a side note, I think that overall it would be easier to improve the Naval AI. Why? Fewer units, easier coordination and you don't have to worry about terrain factors. One way to do this is to give the AI access to a few scripted routines. Take the subs in the 1942 scenario. They always go in the same direction. [ April 06, 2005, 08:56 PM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]