Edwin P.

Prior to WWII the Russia had issues primarily with with Japan and Finland, while the US had issues primarily with Japan. 1. Russia and Finland Russia: Declares War on Neutral Finland with Diplomatic Chit a. Opposed by German Chit = No effect b. Not Opposed = 50% Soviet Annexation of Finland and Finish Partisans Activated and Japan Russia: Negotiates Understanding with Japan using a Diplomatic Chit a. Opposed by German Chit = No Effect b. Not Opposed by German Chit = Successful Negotiations and 50% Early Siberian Transfer 2. USA and Japan a. USA Protests Japanese Aggression = No Change in Game b. Accept Japanese Sphere of Influence in the Far East = No Siberian Transfer, Greater US Production, until Japan Attacks US, US War Readiness Reduced c. Prepare for War with Japan = Siberian Transfer and reduce US production until Japan surrenders [ August 25, 2004, 09:15 PM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

RE: Sweden Sweden and SC2 Perhaps, an event in SC2 where a neutral Sweden receives an extra Corps in 1941, 1942 and 1943. This would reflect the continual buildup of Swedish defense forces during WWII and may deter an Allied, Russian, or Axis invasion of Sweden.

Excellent points Excel, perhaps a simple way of creating this is a series of events suing diplomatic chits for the Russians : Option 1: No action, Finland Remain Neutral during ensuing war with Germany. Option 2: Diplomatic Chit = Winter War and if countered by Germany with their own Diplomatic Chit then history recreates itself. Soviets gain 1 Tech chit and Finland survives. Option 3: Soviet Diplomatic Chit Not countered by Germany = Finland Capitulates = Sweden Aligns with Germany, Finish Army Units Removed From Map (ie Germany Gains Swedish 5 Swedish Units + Swedish Production, Soviets secure Northern Flank). Soviets gain 1 tech chit. or Option 3: Soviet Diplomatic Chit Not countered by Germany = Finland Capitulates = USSR Annexes Finland = Finish Partisans Activated AND Sweden 10% More Axis Friendly. Now the Russians have to garrison Finland with 5 units to prevent Partisan units from appearing. Key: There were reasons why the USSR did not conquer Finland and these should be reflected in the game. [ August 25, 2004, 02:29 PM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

The fact is that for 300 years Spanish Kings and Governments have sought the return of Gibraltar. As photonred says, if Spain decides to Annex Gibraltar, and it probably would if London surrendered, the garrison therein would likely be forced to surrender, if not by the prospect of 10,000 Spanish tropps but by the fact that the nearest source of supply would be across the Atlantic Ocean and the only alternative to Spanish control would be German control of the Rock. By surrendering to the Spanish the British troops could deprive Germany of control over the Rock. [ August 24, 2004, 10:31 AM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

I think that having the US and Canada on the map was a good design decision. The only time that the Axis can invade them with a realistic chance of success is after Russia surrenders and its more fun with it in. As for the Japan options, it adds an amount of unpredicatability to the game, and in my view this is the one area where diplomatic actions had a decisive influence on the course of WWII. Without US pressure on Japan, the Japanese would not have attacked Pearl Harbor, and the US might not have entered the War in Europe.

Les, I agree. US policy was the dominate factor in Japan deciding to attack the US and not Russia. The question is how to show this. The discussion above gives the Allies and Axis input into this decision for a cost in MPPs. Another option that I posted a while ago presents a simpler way of showing this: USA Military Policy Towards Japan, US Player Picks One of three options: 1. Japan First = Early Siberian Transfer, Reduced US Production until Japan is defeated. With the US focused on the defeat of Japan reduced resources are available for Amerian's European allies until Japan surrenders. At the same time, US pressure on Japan has removed the possibility of a Japanese invasion of Siberian and allows the Soviet High Command to safely transfer units from Siberia to Western Russia. </font> 1946 - 100% Japan Defeated & US Production Increases to Normal</font>1945 - 90% Japan Defeated & ""</font>1944 - 50% Japan Defeated & ""</font>Note: US Production returns to normal after Japan surrenders. This occurs in a random month during the the year in which Japan is defeated. Historically Japan surrendered in 1946 and Germany in 1945. In my opinion, the USA if focused solely on war against Japan could have defeated Japan as early as 1944. 2. Historical Europe First Strategy = No Effect on game 3. Peace with Japan = No Siberian Transfer, Greater US Production until Japan attacks. USA accepts Japan's domination of China, Indo-China (Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia), and the Dutch East Indies (Malaysia). This allows the Japanese armed forces to build their strength for a campaign to seize Siberia followed by; perhaps, a surprise attack on the US. </font>1945 - 30% Japan Attacks US & US Production Reduced to Normal</font>1944 - 30% Japan Attacks US & ""</font>1943 - 15% Japan Attacks US & ""</font>This chart reflects that fact that although the US may pursue good relations with Japan, their government may decide to launch a surprise attack on the USA to secure its dominance in the Pacific. It also adds variability into the selection of the appeasement strategy. Perhaps the Axis can expend diplomatic chits to increase the chance of a Japanese attack on the US if the Allied player selects the appeasement strategy. [ August 23, 2004, 01:00 PM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

SeaMonkey, Excellent refinements. It will be interesting to hear comments from other members of the forum about this concept. Retributor, as for where Japan would get resources from: French Indo-China, which it took over with the permission of the Vichy Government soon after France surrendered; Dutch East Indies (Malaysia) which it invaded; Manchuko and Siberia. The key in this scenario is that Japan would avoid attacking US (Phillipines) or British Territories (Singapore, Australia) in order to maintain peace with the Americans.

Some more thoughts, I propose that once Japan attacks the United States, the US enters the war regardless of its level of war readiness. Japan, although a non-power would have its own war readiness rating that would be influenced by Allied and Axis diplomatic events. Example: If US war readiness in Dec 1941 is 70% and Japan's war readiness reaches 100%, Japan attacks the US and US war readiness jumps to 100% immediately. Thus both sides have an incentive to influence the actions of Japan, the allies to incite Japanese Anger and bring the USA into the war against Germany and the Axis to encourage Japan to attack Russia and perhaps delay any Japanese attack on the US. The USA player by inciting Japanese anger with the six diplomatic actions listed above can ensure that the Japanese attacks the US no later than December 1941 and possibly accelerate the US entry into the war. Of course, the US player may not need to incite Japanese anger if Germany attacks every country in Europe. Futhermore, in addition to diplomatic events influencing Japanese war readiness, German success on the battlefield in Europe would also have its effect. ----------------------------------- Base Japanese War Readiness = 50% +/- 10% due to war in China. France Surrenders (EVENT) = Japanese War Readiness increases by 10% as Japanese forces move into French Indo-China. United Kingdom Surrenders (EVENT) = Japanese War Readiness increases by 20% as Japanese forces take British colonies in the Far East. US Sends Military Aid to China (Diplomatic Action) = +5% Japanese War Readiness US Embargoes Sales of Oil to Japan (Diplomatic Action) = +10 Japanese War Readiness US Seizes Japanese Assets in the US (Diplomatic Action) = +5% Japanese War Readiness US Embargoes sale of scrap metal and steel to Japan (Diplomatic Action)= +5% Japanese War Readiness. US Demands that Japan withdraw its forces from Indo-China (Diplomatic Action) = +2 to 6% Japanese War Readiness. US Demands that Japan withdraw its forces from China (Diplomatic Action) = + 3% to 7% Japanese War Readiness. -------------------------------------- All in all, an interesting set of opportunities for both the Allied and Axis players. They can ignore Japan and focus on building units for the war in Europe or spend resources to influence the actions of this Asian power. If the Axis ignores US provocations of Japan then they may face an early US entry into the war. If the Allies ignore Axis diplomatic activity in Japan then Russia may be forced into fighting a two front war when Japan invades Siberia. Perhaps the most realistic use of diplomatic chits? -------------------------------------- Summary of Possible Results 1. Japanese Attacks USA - 100% Japanese War Readiness ------ Siberian Transfer Possible ------ USA enters war against Axis Powers. 2. Japan at Peace ------ Siberian Transfer Possible ------ Normal US entry into war. 3. Japan Attacks Russia not USA ------ War in Siberia = No Siberian Transfer ------ US War Effort 100% to Europe = USA Receives Bonus # of IT Tech Chits --------------------------------------- In thinking about this - Why not 2 War Readiness Ratings for Japan: ----- War Readiness for War vs USA ----- War Readiness for War vs Russia USA incitement of Japanese Anger would increase Japanese Readiness for War vs US while reducing readiness for War vs Russia. USA peace offers to Japan would increase Japanese War Readiness for Action against Russia while decreasing readiness for war against the USA. Axis encouragement of Japanese actions against the USSR would increase War Readiness vs Russia while decreasing it vs the USA. Axis encouragement of Japanese expansion in the Pacific would increase Japanese War Readiness vs the US while decreasing it vs Russia. Any thoughts or comments? Or is this so far outside the scope of SC that its not worth considering? Any comments HC? [ August 21, 2004, 04:08 PM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

Perhaps, the US can invest in Diplomacy with the Japanese to improve or worsen US-Japanese Relations. If they act to improve relations then the Japanese do not attack the US and the US can focus its efforts on Europe (ie its production increases via it receiving a chit in IT tech), but at the same time Russia does not receive the Siberian transfer as those forces are required to prevent a Japanese invasion of Siberia. So you have it: 1. US Improves Relation with Japan (ie no embargo) = Peace with Japan = Greater US production & No Siberian Transfer 2. US Incites War with Japan = Normal US Production and Siberian Transfer, Increase in US War Readiness Now building on VVEEDD's comments: The Axis can invest in diplomacy with Japan to do two things: 1. Encourage them to not attack the Americans, and to instead focus on China and Russia, decrease in US War Readiness, and triggers War in Siberia, ie eliminates Siberian Transfer, increases US Production as resources are not devoted to the Pacific. 2. Encourage them to attack the Americans. This cancels US attempt at brokering peace with the Japanese. Thus for every action your opponent has a counter action. Now Imagine the Pop-ups that inform players of what is going on: 1> USA Signs Trade Agreement with Japan (if relations improve) 2) American Congress passes trade embargo against the Japan (if relations deteriorate) 3) German officers staff Military training center in Manchuko. (ie Germany encourages Japan to attack Russia) 4) Axis alliance signs agreement recognizing primacy of Japan in the Eastern hemisphere. (if Germany encourages Japan to attack the Americans) ----------------------------------------------- USA Popups - US Incites War with Japan US Congress embargoes the sale of oil to Japan US Congress embargoes the sales of scrap metal and steel to Japan US Congress approves military aid to the government of China US government freezes Japanese assets US demands that Japan withdraw its forces from French Indo-China. US demands that Japan withdraw its forces from China. US provocations of Japan increase the chance for a Russian Siberian transfer as Japan prepares for a war with the USA and counters German efforts to incite the Japanese into attacking the Soviet Union. Undertaking all 6 diplomatic actions will cost the US about 300MPPs. USA Popups - US Improves Relations with Japan US signs trade agreement with Japan US declines to provide China with military aid. US declines Chinese loan request US recognizes Japanese control over Indo-China. US sends ambassador to the government of Manchuko. US efforts to secure peace with Japan reduce US war readiness and the chance for a Russian Siberian transfer but also increase the amount of US production available for the war in Europe. Selecting this diplomatic option will cost the US about 500MPPs while it is at peace. German Popups - Germany encourages Japanese Aggression against Russia Germany opens military training center in Manchuko for Japanese Army officers. Japan begins production of German designed tanks. Germany shares intelligence on Soviet equipment and tactics with Japanese military officials. Germany shares military technology with Japan. Germany's encouragement of Japanese aggression towards Russia decreases the chance for a Siberian Transfer as Russian intelligence indicates that Japanese forces intend to invade Siberia. Pursuing this diplomatic option will cost Germany about 800MPPs for several chits in this area and can be countered by US actions, at a lower cost, aimed at inciting war with the Japanese. German Popups - Germany encourages Japan to attack the United States If Japan attacks the United States then American military production will be divided among two fronts. ------------------------------------------------ Germany Encourages Japan to Attack Russia <> Countered by <> US Incites Japanese Anger The Allied player can counter a German campaign to persuade Japan to attack Russia by inciting Japanese anger against the USA. US Improves Relations with Japan <> Countered by <> Germany Encourages Japan to Attack US A US player aiming to devote 100% of his war resources to Europe by securing peace in the Pacific may find his work undown by the actions of German diplomats portraying the US as a paper tiger. ----------------------------------------------- Historically, the Japanese angered by US economic sanctions and political demands attacked the US at Pearl Harbor. The war with the US in the Pacific meant that Japan did not have the resources to attack Russia in Siberia as desired by Germany. [ August 21, 2004, 08:15 AM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

Although it is hard to make relevant AI suggestions without having played the game, here it goes; I would like to see the Russian AI able to launch a campaign to take Finland early in the game if the initial Axis assault is weak and poorly organized. This duplicates the strategy followed by many players when similar circumstances present themsevles. Of course the key is how to quantatively identify a weak Axis assault. What is a weak Axis Attack? Perhaps Number of Units in Russian front < X or Combat Strength of Attacking Units in Russian Front < XXX or a comparative ratio of Axis vs Russian units assigned to the Russian front. Initial Axis Russian Assault Weak + Beginner AI + No German Units in Finland = 5% Take Finland Early Strategy. The beginner will rarely see the Russian AI go after Finland early in the game. Initial Axis Russian Assault Weak + Intermediate AI + No German Units in Finland = 25% Take Finland Early Strategy. An intermediate player with a poorly executed attack will sometimes see the AI take Finland early in the game. Initial Axis Russian Assault Weak + Expert AI + No German Units in Finland = 50% Take Finland Early Strategy. An Axis human player that launches a poorly executed attack against the Expert AI will often see it take Finland early in the game so it can focus its units on one front. Simarlily I would like the see the Russian AI have a varied selection of production and related research strategies. [ August 20, 2004, 09:06 AM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

I am assuming that the Spanish government, with the conquest of Britain by the Axis powers, may attempt to seize control of the Rock, a publicly stated goal of the Spanish government for over 300 years, a piece of land that was historically part of Spain until the Treaty of Utrecht. In my view, Franco would calculate that he could safely reclaim Gibraltar after the UK surrendered as long as his forces did not hinder passage to any Axis ships transiting the straits. As for the British Garrison on Gibraltar continuing the fight, I believe that to be wishful thinking. They country has surrendered and probably ordered all their soldiers to also surrender. They are isolated with no source of supply readily available and no means to pay for it. [ August 19, 2004, 04:21 AM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

I really like this idea, so long as the AI comments are infrequent and not repetitive. Example: When the the AI takes an undefended city:[Cairo] it may (20% - 1 in 5 events) make a random comment: 1) Human, you left [Cairo] undefended. 2) Foolish Human, you left [Cairo] undefended. 3) You should really guard your cities, you left [Cairo] undefended. 4) Have I not taught you anything, you left [Cairo] undefended. 5) Your forces are streatched too thin, you left[Cairo] undefended. 6) Pay more attention, you left [Cairo] ungarded and my troops took it. 7) Careless human, my armies have seized [Cairo]. Note: These sample comments use templated scripts with the name of the captured city the ony variable. Perhaps, 10 templated AI comments for each of the following events: 1. AI captures ungarded city 2. AI destroys enemy HQ unit 3. AI caputures capital of major nation (Paris, London, Moscow, Rome, Washington, Berlin) 4. AI sinks carrier 5. AI destroys air unit [ August 18, 2004, 12:58 PM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

Jersey John, many thanks for your insightful and most relevant comments.

If neutral Spain annexes Gibraltar due a scripted event (ie if the UK surrenders or fails to garrison the port) will Allied and Axis ships be free to transit the straits of Gibraltar? Or could an event be written to reduce the value of this port to zero so ships of both sides can transit this tile? I ask because it seems most unrealistic to me that neutral Spain could bar warships of either major alliance from transiting the straits. Note: The events I an considering include: 1. IF UK Surrenders then Neutral Spain Annexes UK Controlled Gibraltar. (50%) 2. IF UK Controlled Gibraltar AND its port hex are not garrisoned then Neutral Spain Annexes Gibraltar (1% - 1 in 100 turns, a rare but most surprising event) and allows Allied and Axis warships to transit the straits. For those who think this option (Option 2) is not realistic I refer you to the Falklands War. The UK withdrew their garrison and naval patrol from the Island. Argentina then, most unexpectedly, invaded this overseas British territory. [ August 19, 2004, 04:31 AM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

When I play a human in SC, they may ask me if I want to surrender if I am hopelessly outplayed and my opponents will sometimes surrender when they have made a grave error, even though it be early in the game. More to the point, I was thinking of the system being able to maintain a win/loss record vs the various AI levels and the upcoming player Mods, similar to the feature offered in Civ3 and other strategic games. The surrender option would allow the AI to record a win where the human player would normally quit the game. Naturally, it would be best if Rambo and some other players recorded the appropiate audio comments for the AI's surrender demand and the system selected one of these randomly to play. [ August 16, 2004, 12:28 PM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

Liam, nice refinement, giving them percentages and difficulty levels to perfrom each action. I agree with your comments on the AI and playing against real unpredictable human opponents, but I travel a lot and then play SC or CivIII vs the AI when I have time, especially as SC does not require a CD! One of the changes I really like about SC2 is the new event triggers, which means that I can play a more unpredictable AI, instead of playing a MOD where I know with 100% certainty what benefits the AI has received. In looking at the major powers, Russia probably has the fewest number of strategic options to consider. Why? As a land based power it has the fewer strategic options when compared to other Allied or Axis powers. A more powerful Russian AI will also make for a more interesting game for the Axis player. With the new system players can easily prevent the Russian AI from investing MPPs in none critical areas such as Naval Research or purchasing Naval ships. The key though for Russia is to duplicate the key strategies of the top players - where they aim to preserve their forces until the Allies invade in the west and often times attempt to quickly take Finland. [ August 16, 2004, 12:06 PM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

During a game vs the AI there may come a time when the AI has overwhelming strength. It would be interesting at this point in time if the AI could ask the human player to surrender, in a variety of different popups: 1) Do the Allies yield to the superiority of the Axis alliance? Do you surrender? Yes/NO 2) The Axis alliance warns the Allies the should they fail to lay down their arms and surrrender that their people will face the the consequences. Do you surrender? Yes/No 3) The Allies demand the unconditional surrender of the Axis powers. Do you surrender? Yes/No 4) You cause is hopeless, your armies defeated. Do you surrender? Yes/NO If the Human player surrenders then the game ends. If the human player declines to surrender then the AI will not make this offer again and will continue the war with great vigor. When should this be activated? 1.When Germany surrenders to the Allied AI 2.When Russia or the UK surrenders to the Axis AI. [ August 16, 2004, 03:58 AM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

Liam, many thanks for your comments. I find Civ3 especially good at the higher where the AI becomes much more agressive, in addition to receiving the Hyper Bonuses. Although, a "hyperAI" is easier to program I believe that as you say a less linear AI makes for greater replayability and a much more interesting game. The question is what is the best and easiest way to do this? Perhaps for the Allied AI's opening moves this means giving it a selection of core strategies: 1. Standard Defense (50%) 2. Corps Defense (25%) 3. Sink the Italian Navy (20%) 4. Invade Germany (2%) 5. Belgium Gambit (2%) 6. Italian Gambit (1%) With FOW on, the Axis player is sure to be tested with this wide and unpredictable variety of operational strategies. HC, thanks for the most informative comments. [ August 15, 2004, 08:43 PM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

Here are some notes about the AI in the game GALCIV: Most of all, I guess that I want to see the strategies of the best players incorporated into the game. [ August 15, 2004, 05:37 PM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

Many thanks for your most erudite feedback on an issue I find of most ponderable thought. There are many ways to construct an AI of varing difficulty. Some give the AI advantages at higher levels - such as more plunder and more experience. While others provide the AI with more time for thought. Others give the AI access to more statigic and tactical options at higher levels. Some programmers make the AI more aggressive at higher level. As you said, there are many roads to success, and a thought provoking AI.

The case for an AI_Flag in Moddable Scripts "Where the AI flag allows the script to run if the AI level is greater or equal to the AI_Flag value." 1. Allows the designer & modder to differentiate scripts by AI level. At higher AI levels more scripts would be activated. 2. Relatively easy to implement. 3. Easier to design AI level specific scripts and events. 4. Game difficulty gradually increases as players are exposed to a wider range of scripts and possible events at higher AI levels. Example: AI_Flag = 3, Script only runs at Beginner and higher AI levels. AI_Flag = 4, Script only runs at Intermediate and higher AI levels. AI_Flag = 5, Script only runs at Expert AI level. [ August 15, 2004, 09:35 AM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

Since there will be no AI triggers, I guess that this also applies to AI flags : #AI_Flag=4 (Only occurs at AI Level 4 or higher) With the proposed AI flag you can limit the script to a particular AI Level or higher. And will there be a way to restrict the event to only benefiting the AI player? Example; a unit event that only occurs when the country is controlled by the AI, so I don't have a human player benefiting from specific unit scripts. Example: USA AI, and only the USA AI, has a chance to receive 2 Carriers, a cruiser and a sub from the US Pacific Fleet if the UK surrenders. Example: German AI, and only the German AI, has a chance to receive 1 to 2 extra submarine units. (ideally only at AI level 4 or higher ) Example: At Axis AI Expert Level Turkey has a 10% to join the Axis after France and Denmark Surrender to the Axis. Example: At Allied AI Expert Level Turkey has a 10% to join the Allies after the US enters the war. [ August 14, 2004, 02:37 PM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

Interesting, could I write a script to say disband/remove 4 French fleets and their air unit to give the French a varied starting OB - say 1 HQ, OR 1 Armor and 1 additional Corps OR 3 Corps? This would reflect the varied strategies that players use to defend France.

Will there be movement scripts in the system that allow you to link unit movements to specific events. For example, in SC1 it always annoyed me that the French Corps in Beruit would not move to UK territory after Italy entered the war, a standard human strategy. I would like to write a script that would Trigger after Italy entered the war to move this unit to Tile xx,yy so that it would become Free French after France surrenders. In addition, I would like to see an AI trigger added to the scripts that would influence the chance of a script being activated depending on the AI level. For example: AI(0,0,0,80,100). Thus at Beginner AI the movement script would have a 0% to activate while at Expert level a 100%. Once activated it would still require a second trigger check to determine if the scripting event occurs. [ August 13, 2004, 02:21 PM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

I like the supply scripts, easy to understand. Question: Is the supply hit always in the range of 1 to 5, as I did not see in the supply scripts presented where this was set. Question: The Malta script as presented seems to occur for both land and air units occupying Malta (and for only UK units), I assume the in an area not shown that the Malta effect is limited to an Air unit occupying Malta and that there are several Malta scripts, one for a UK units, another for US units, one for USSR units, and another for a French air unit stationed in Malta.