Edwin P.

AI Nordic Liberation Strategy Explained (Operation Cold Feet) Goal: % of the Time after Axis DOW Russia Allied AI will launch a campaign to liberate Norway and Sweden while waiting for US buildup to allow for a successful D-Day. At the least it will draw Axis forces away from the Russian and French fronts. At the best it will deprive the Axis of MPP production. The AI will be programmed to withdraw its forces if the Axis response is overwhelming. The AI will only consider executing this strategy if Norway and Sweden are weakly defended. Phase 1: Ground Pounding - ie Building Experience IF 1 or fewer Axis Air Units in Norway Allied Airfleets, Battleships, and Carriers will Bombard Bergan to Gain Experience. The UK Based Airfleets will strike first to draw off any Interceptors and clear the way for carrier strikes. Phase 2: Norwegian Invasion - Operation Cold Feet When: After Axis DOW Russia Condition: 7 Land Units and HQ unit in UK, 2 Carriers, 2 Air fleets and 4 Navy Ships in UK The chart below determines whether the AI will even consider liberating the Nordic Countries based on the strength of the Axis forces in the region. It assumes that the Allied AI knows how many units are in Norway and Sweden. -------- 90% One or Two Axis unit in Norway and Sweden -------- 80% Three Axis Units in Norway and Sweden -------- 60% Four Axis Units in Norway and Sweden -------- 30% Five Axis Units in Norway and Sweden -------- 10% Six Axis Units in Norway and Sweden -------- 0% Seven or more Axis Units in Norway and Sweden Objective 1: Bergan - Taking Bergan First allows the AI to operate or fly in Air Support Objective 2: Oslo Objective 3: Stockholm - The AI will only move on Stockholm after liberating Bergan and Oslo and only if there are 3 or fewer Axis units in Sweden. After achieving its objectives and depriving the Axis of 100+ MPP per turn the AI will leave 4 land units in the Nordic Countries and withdraw excess forces to the UK to prepare for D-Day. [ June 26, 2004, 11:43 AM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

S1 has this and SC2 will too. Its Soft Attack, Soft Defense, Armor Attack and Armor Defense. I am confident that HC & company will see that these values are throughly play tested to ensure the most realistic results overall. I find it hard to comment on the realative values without playtesting as the game system has changed substantially from SC1 with the switch from hexes to tiles and the affects of adjacent enemy units on supply. As Pzgndr said, I think that the new ability of HQs to select the units they will support will as you say - allow players to concentrate their offensive power at a selected point in the enemy line.

Don't know if the new engine will allow for scipted AI files or what commands will be available if it does. We just have to wait and see. IN my view their are 5 Areas suitable for scripting: 1. Research - Priorities 2. Production - Priorities and Goals 3. General Strategy - where you as the script writer select from predefined strategies and strategic stances. 4. New Strategy 5. Movement Priority Of course any strategy scripts will require commands for quantifying the strength of enemy units in a zone/city. [ June 26, 2004, 12:21 PM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

Will it take 4 units (N,S,E,W) or 8 (N,S,W,E plus the corners) units to surround a unit in a city and prevent it from being reinforced to a strength of 8 or moving?

Free French to Egypt UK Strategy Explained Summary: The goal is to build up a force of seven units in Egypt that can be used to 1. Defend the Middle east or 2. Conquer Iraq and liberate North Africa from the Axis. Details Turn 1: France Disbands two ships in the Atlantic to build a corps in southern France. UK Sends Corps in Canada to Egypt via the Horn of Africa. Turn 2: France transports corps in southern France to Egypt. After Italy Enters the War Action 1. French Unit in Beruit moves to Egyptian Controlled Egypt to Become Free French when Paris surrenders Action 2. UK Corps in Gibraltar moves to Egypt via the Horn of Africa and the French Corps in Algiers moves to Gibraltar to become Free French when Paris surrenders. Objective: 3 or 4 Free French Corps, 1 Canadian Corps, 1 Canadian Army and 1 UK Corps in Egypt. Possiblity of UK HQs. If the Allied Navys destroy the Italian Fleet then the Allied AI will use this force to take Iraq and then liberate North Africa from the Axis powers. If the Allied Navys do not destroy the Italian Fleet then this force will be used to defend Egypt until Axis forces are diverted to the war against Russia, then this force will attack Iraq and then turn to liberate Africa from the Italians or used to reinforce Russian lines. Note: In my proposal, as outlined in the posts above, the AI will decide on one of three strategies for waging war in Europe with the Western Allies 1) Strong D-Day, 2)Liberate Middle East & Africa coupled with a weaker D-Day, or 3) Liberate Nordic Countries Coupled with a Weaker D-Day. Troops sent to Egypt will not be available to directly reinforce a D-Day invasion, although they may draw off Axis units from France to defend Italy from an Allied threat. Simarly, units occupying a liberated Norway and Sweden will not be able to directly support a D-Day invasion, although they will reduce the Axis production capacity. Any thoughts as to whether the AI can be programmed to expertly select from and implement these strategies? And are these good ideas? [ June 25, 2004, 04:30 PM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

There are two points of view - one group wants a so called "realistic game" that duplicates WWII history while the the other group (including me) wants a game with a ruthless and exploitative AI. Why not a simple setting that prevents players or the AI from attacking countries that were neutral in WWII - Sweden, Ireland, Spain, Switzerland and Turkey. Additionaly, the Allies could not attack Italy, Denmark, the Low Countries, Finland or Norway. The historical players could play their type of game and the exploitive players could play their type of game. My guess is that most players will prefer the free form abusive and exploitative game over the politically correct game with its inherent limitations. Or one could simple write an event that has all of the historical neutral countries join the other side if one of them is attacked. [ June 24, 2004, 11:41 PM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

Allied Opening Game Sink Italian Navy Strategy Explained Executed % of the Time Summary: Most Allied UK and French Naval Forces move to Med in order to sink the Italian Navy when Italy enters the war. The aim is to engage the Italian fleet with a 2:1 advantage in naval forces. Following this engagement most of the Allied fleet will withdraw to the Atlantic while a small fleet will be sent to the Eastern Med to prevent any Axis invasion in that Theater of Operations. Details Turn 1: UK AI directs 70% of the UK Atlantic Fleet and 100% of the French Fleet to the Med south of Sicily. Italy Enters War Turn X: UK AI Attacks Italian Naval Units, first with the French fleet units, then with the UK Naval Units. Italy Enters War Turn X+1: UK Completes Attack on Italian Naval Units. French Naval Units Attack first, followed by UK Naval Units. UK Naval Units with Strength <=3 recalled to England and Units exceeding 3x the number of Italian ships recalled to defend the Brish Islands. For Example: If in Turn 1 10 Allied Ships engage 5 Italian Ships and sink 3 Ships the AI will keep only 6 ships in the Med to engage the remaining 2 Italian ships. Italy Enters War Turn X+2: Most of UK Navy returns to Atlantic, 3 or 4 Fleets sent to Eastern Med to Defend Egypt. This is done to evade any Axis Air units that may be sent down to Italy to engage the Allied Naval Forces. Note: Once Paris falls the Allied AI will be inclined to break off the attack and return to the Altantic and Eastern Med rather than risk being destroyed by German Air units operated to Sicily. Simple and elegant, this strategy has the potential to destroy a human's players ability to conquer the middle east and provides an aegis to support an AI conquest of North Africa. Example: IF Allied AI destroys 80% of Italian Fleet THEN Allied Navy Blockades Eastern Med SO THEN Allies Invade and Conquer Iraq IF NO SEALION AND AXIS UNITS in North Africa < X THEN Allied forces return to Egypt and launch campaign to liberate North Africa while Allied Naval Units limit Axis Reinforcements to North Africa. Perhaps, this is the Allied AI rountine that could make the Mediterrean a contested theater of operations. [ June 25, 2004, 12:09 PM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

Opening Allied Strategy Decision Tree Proposal French Strategy 50% Option 1: Standard 25% Option 2: Disband French Navy If the AI selects this option it gains MPPs with which to increase the size of the French Army. With this option selected the AI will be least likely to select the Sink the Italian Navy Option or the Sink the German Navy Option as the French naval units will not be available to absorb the initial loses. 10% Option 3: Free French - to UK If the AI selects this strategy it attempts to send a few French units to the UK. After Paris surrenders it will hold these in reserve to either liberate Norway after Germany declares war on Russia or support a D-Day Invasion. 10% Option 4: Free French - to Egypt If the AI selects this strategy it attempts to send 3 French Corps to Egypt before France Surrenders to the Axis, sends the French Corps in Beruit to Egypt after after Italy enters the war, sends the UK corps in Gibraltar to Egypt after Italy enters the war replacing it with the French Corps from Algiers. It also sends a HQ and Army from the UK to Egypt via the Cape. These units can be used to support a future conquest of Iraq or to defend Egypt. If the AI selects this option it will be much more likely to deploy allied naval forces to sink the Italian Navy when Italy enters the war. 5% Option 5: Full French Defense If the AI selects this strategy it expends every effort to defend France with the strongest possible army. It disbands the French navy, sends reinforcements from Canada and the UK to France and may disband the UK Bomber Fleet for more MPPs. THUS 50% Standard Defense of France Strategy leads to: --------20% Sink Italian Navy Strategy --------20% Preserve UK Naval Forces Strategy --------20% Sink German Navy in Baltic Strategy --------40% Naval Support Defense of France 25% Disband French Navy leads to: -------- 0% Sink Italian Navy Strategy --------50% Preserve UK Naval Forces Strategy -------- 0% Sink German Navy in Baltic Strategy --------50% Naval Support Defense of France Strategy 10% Free French to Egypt leads to: --------70% Sink Italian Navy xxxxxxxxxxxxxx If successful then Allies adopt Conquer Iraq Strategy --------20% Preserve UK Naval Forces --------5% Sink German Navy in Baltic --------5% Naval Support Defense of France 10% Free French to UK leads to: ------- 5% Sink Italian Navy --------20% Preserve UK Naval Forces --------50% Sink German Navay in Baltic --------25% Naval Support Defense of France 5% Full French Defense -------- 0 % Sink Italian Navy --------20% Preserve UK Naval Forces --------10% Sink German Navy in Baltic --------70% Naval Supports Defense of France In summary, this decision tree presents the Axis Human player with a variety of Allied opening game strategies to contend with. In one game the Axis play might find his Italian fleet decimated by the Allied Navies, in another he might find the French army reinforced by corps dragooned from scuttled French naval fleets. [ June 24, 2004, 11:23 PM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

For the Allies. 1. Improved D-Day Invasion 2. Varied Naval Strategies for the Opening Game ----- Option 1: Preserve the Navy, Especially Carriers to support D-Day. ----- Option 2: Sink German Navy - Send Fleets to the Baltic Straits to Sink Germany Navy ----- Option 3: Sink Italian Navy - Send Fleets to Med to Sink Italian Navy when they enter the war. ----- Option 4: Support the Defense of France 3. Better Research 4. Nordic Liberation Option ----- What better way to reduce Axis production before D-Day, especially if norway is lightly defended. 5. Iraq Conquest Option 6. Italy Invasion Option 7. Variable French Defenses ---- Option 1: Standard ---- Option 2: Disband French Navy (Decreases chance for Sink Italian Navy and Sink German Navy Options) ---- Option 3: Free French - to UK (increases chance for Nordic Liberation) ---- Option 4: Free French - to Egypt (increases chance for execution of Iraq Conquest Option) 8. Variable Russian Defense Strategy ---- Option 1: Standard ---- Option 2: River Line For the Axis 1. Conquest of Norway and Sweden 2. Bigger Buildup and More Focused Attack on Russia 3. Concentration of AirFleets for Battle 4. Sea Lion Option 5. Middle East Conquest Option 6. Italian Naval Strategy ---- No more will the Italian Navy lie idle in port. 7. Conquer the World Strategy - where the AI attempts to conquer every nation except for Turkey, a standard human strategy. 8. Rambo's RACK Strategy - Always interesting (Rambo's Axis Carrier Kracker) [ June 27, 2004, 11:01 AM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

With Monthly Turns a Legion can cover a good deal of territory and a Roman legion would probably move 1 hex faster than its oppossition.

The script I proposed is designed to recreate for the AI the "standard human strategy" of conquering Sweden in order to give it that "Decisive factor" required for victory outlined in the Strategy Guide. Question for: Excel, Roosevelt45(the 2nd) and Afrika31: How often do you as the Axis in SC conquer Sweden - Never, Sometimes, Often, Always?

Just a quick note, While I understand the importance of focusing on invading France for the UK and Brits there is a strong case for including routines for invading the Norway, if it is weakly defended and no axis air units are in Denmark. The chance of such an invasion occuring will force the human Axis player to weaken his lines elsewhere and contribute towards a more competitive game vs the AI. How would I do it? First, I would grade the strength of the Axis Defending forces to determine if it should be considered 1 to 2 Units in Norway/Swden and Allies Control Bergan = 90% Nordic Invasion 1 to 2 Units in Norway/Sweden = 70% Nordic Invasion, the AI should definitely invade. 3 to 4 Units in Norway/Sweden and 1 or fewer AIR units in Denmark = 20% Nordic Invasion 3 to 4 Units in Norway/Sweden and 2 Air Units in Denmark = 10% Nordic Invasion 5 Units or More in Norway/Sweden = No Norwegian Invasion Considered. In this case it would take too many forces away from the more important invasion of France. Of course it would be cool if these parameters could be edited to allow players to fine tune them for the most optimal AI decision. Then I would consider whether it would interfere with the invasion of France. If Not Then do I have enough units to execute it? Ideally you want to use twice as many units as your opponent has. So if the Axis has 2 land units in the region then the Allied AI needs to assign 4 land units to the invasion force. Then the question arises of how to execute it. My first guess would be to have the Allies take Bergan and operate in air and land units. Then the Allies can attempt either an overland move on Oslo or an amphibious assault supported by carriers, land based air, and a naval unit to seal the straits from Axis naval units so that the Amphibious units can make their assault. The key is that the AI has to be prepared to withdraw its forces if the Axis moves in an overwhelming counter force. Once it takes Norway it then needs to decide if it wants to move onto Sweden or just hold the position and send units back to the UK to prepare for the invasion of France. [ June 24, 2004, 12:53 AM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

Another item that the AI ignores, even with FOW off, is risk free naval bombardment to gain experience. For example - take Bergan. Assume there is an Axis corps in Bergan and Oslo and no air units in Norway. The Allies will never bombard the corps in Bergan with Naval and Carriers to gain experience. A human player will always do this. For example - the Italian Sub in the Med will never interdicat Merchant Shipping even if the Allies do not have an air unit in Malta. I guess what I am asking for here is AI logic that will cause it to use its naval forces for risk free bombardment or merchant ship interdiction if they are not assigned to another mission. [ June 24, 2004, 12:18 AM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

I agree; the option for the AI to play without FOW is a good one; however, in my experience it does not improve the AI by much. For example - If I, as a human player spotted most UK ships in the Med by correlating the number spotted with the number of ships in the Reports screen and determined that the Allies have few (land and naval) units in the area of the UK I am more inclined to launch a Sea Lion. The AI never makes the same link, even with FOW turned OFF. Likewise if the the Axis AI spots all UK units in other locations it will never invade an undefended Cairo or UK even with FOW turned OFF, even if there are no land or naval units in the area to stop an invasion. Simarly, in one game I spotted all Italian units in France or Russia (units spotted vs units in report) and took a chance by sending a corps from Gibraltar to invade Italy. By golly, I took Italy in one turn and my opponent was most surprised. The AI would never try something like this, even with the FOW turned OFF. The problem with the AI not taking advantage of these undefended areas is that it leaves the Human player free to strip countries (such as the UK, Italy, Egypt, even France for awhile) of all garrison troops in order to concentrate units elsewhere. [ June 23, 2004, 11:38 PM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

Will players be able to see to what degree a neutral nation is leaning towards the axis or allies? Perhaps on the world map by color coding the neutal nations? - light yellow: slightly pro Axis, dark yellow: strongly pro Axis, light green: slightly pro Allies, and dark green: strongly pro Allies.

Pzgnder, I agree that if needed an event script could be written that changes Norway and Sweden to Axis after Denmark surrenders. A simple solution to a more difficult project - improving the AI. This would give the Axis AI the same MPP boost that humans players get from conquering these two countries. Example: IF Denmark Surrenders then 70% Norway Surrenders to Axis (90% at Expert Level AI) and Axis Bomber Appears in Norway. IF Norway Surrendered to Axis then 50%(90% at Expert Level AI) Sweden Surrenders to Axis and 2nd Axis Bomber Appears in Norway. AND CONDITION: Allies DOW Ireland AND Allies DOW Low Countries Then TRIGGER: 50% EFFECT: Sweden Joins Axis OR with each attack on Ireland and the Low Countries Sweden becomes 1-25% more pro-Axis. [ June 23, 2004, 09:44 PM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

The question arises is how the AI should decide to launch a Sea Lion invasion of the UK. First it has to Conquer France, Denmark and Norway. Then it has to make a decision as to where the British Fleet is and how strong it is. Using my idea from the Italian Naval AI post the AI should know how many Allied Naval Combat Ships are in the Med and North Atlantic. It should also know; how many units are in England but not their location unless rereveled with the new intelligence tech. In addition, it will know the number of servicable ports available to it and move an aircraft into range of London to spot any enemy units. With these numbers it can adjust its fuzzy logic to decide if a sea lion should be attempted. Example: IF Axis Controls France, Denmark, Norway AND UK Ships in North Atlantic Less than 2x German Navy in North Atlantic AND Baltic Sea. AND Combat UNITS In England Less than X THEN 25% to Execute Operation SeaLion. Note that I assume that the AI will know how many units (land and air) that the Allies have in the UK and how many allied ships are in the North Atlantic Sea Zone. Knowing just the relative number of enemy units in a zone/territory will allow the AI to play a more competitive game and make better decisions as to the deployment of its forces. [ June 23, 2004, 09:32 PM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

There are two elements of a good AI: 1. As HC says making sure that what it does it does very well. 2. Making it unpredictable to a certain degree so that every game against it does not play out the same way. Point two is probably best illustred by the old SSI Game Clash of Steel. In this game the Axis AI would adopt one of three strategies to guide its actions - Conquer Russia, Sea Lion or Conquer the Mediterrean and because of this the game played differently each time, to a certain extent. In SC1 the Axis game was so focused on the Eastern Front that Allied players could confidently ignore the battle for the Atlantic and strip the Middle East and England of all troops knowing that the AI would never invade England or Egypt. Point one, is aimed more towards fine tuning the AI to adopt the Best Principles of SC1 Warfighting as presented in that ancient text the "SC Strategy Guide". For example, the Axis AI frequently declares war on Russia too soon whereas many humans players wait until Russia is readying for war before declaring war on Russia. Perhaps the AI can be programmed to delay DOW Russia until it begins to mobilize, say 95% at Expert AI, 80% at intermediate AI and 60% at Beginner AI. [ June 23, 2004, 08:03 PM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

That was probably me and thanks for the links. My initial thoughts were: First - Armor becomes Cavalry Armies become Legions Cruisers become Galleys, no battleships, subs or Carriers. No Air Units Spotting Range for all units is 1. Each Turn is 1 Month. Movement for transports is reduced with greater readiness reduction for each turn at sea. No operating units. North America, Norway and Sweden will not be included in the Map.

It appears that the Intelligence tech will allow one to see units in a City and surrounding it. Have the designers considered a Counter Intelligence tech to reduce the effect of an enemy's Intelligence tech? Much like Advanced Sub is countered by Anti Sub Warfare. In addition, each level of Counter Intelligence would allow the player to build (ie increase the build limit by 1) a Decoy Corps Unit - Cost 25MPP - that would not extert a zone of control , would not affect the generation of paritsan units and would have 1 str point, along with an attack and defense rating of zero. I suggest this because a nation like Russia might be more interested in concealing its actions than learning about the presence of German units in Bulgaria or France. [ June 23, 2004, 05:05 PM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

After Norway falls to the Axis create a Merchant ship route from Sweden to Germany that Allied naval forces could interdict - either Russian ships or British ships that make it into the Baltic - Originally proposed by JerseyJohn in the SC Forum

"What would compel a well-programmed AI to do this?" According to the the SC Srategy Guide authored by Bill Macon and Dan Fenton: If this will continue to be a critical factor in SC2 then the AI, if only at Expert level, needs to execute this via its own internal logic or scripted events. One issue I see is that if it does so it also needs its own logic to defend what it has taken and if necessary, return unneeded units to the main European Front. Some players take these countries and withdraw all but 3 corps to Europe. Others take these countries and maintain a HQ unit, 3 Corps, an army and an airfleet in the Nordic Countries to prevent any Allied attempt at liberation. While others maintain an Army next to a German port, in position to reinforce Oslo via seaborne transport in 1 turn or defend the Western Front. [ June 23, 2004, 10:27 AM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

Do you garrison Albania? If so, I would count that as four - 3 Corps in Yugoslavia and one in Albania. [ June 23, 2004, 10:01 AM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

Post surrender partisan units in SC1 did an excellent job of forcing the Axis to garrison a conquered Yugoslavia and tying down 4 Corps units in the process. In SC2 I would like to see the same basic formula used and expanded upon. In guerrilla warfare the more cities that a resistance movement controls the easier it is to recruit new members. To reflect this I would increase the chance of a partisan unit appearing by 15% (or some other editable number) for each city controlled by a partisan unit. The chance for Yugoslavian partisans would increase from 15%/75%(winter months) to 30%/90% if they control one city. In the most unlikely event that they control 2 cities the chance for partisan units would increase to 45%/105%. If the percentage exceeds 100% then the partisans should receive one unit automatically and have a chance to receive a second unit. For example: 105% = 1 Unit + 5% for a second unit. If this formula was extended to post-surrender partisans in Russia the Axis player would have a strong incentive to maintain a garrison in all Russian cities after Russia surrenders. [ June 23, 2004, 06:13 PM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

Question - Can an event be triggered based on whether there are no units; allied or axis, in an active country? or territory? Why? Turkey would never consider annexing Syria if there were allied or axis units present. The Egyptian military or Algerian guerrllias might stage a revolt if no foreign troops were in country. Spain would never occupy Gibraltar if British Troops were present. Partisan units in Norway or Sweden or Finland would be more likely to rise up if there were no occupying forces present. Example: Trigger: 1% Condition: Norway Surrendered, No Units in Norway and Norwegian Partisans Off. Effect: Norwegian Partisans Activated Trigger: 2% Condition: Finland Surrendered, No Units in Finland and Finish Partisans Off. Popup: Resistance fighters seize control of Helsinki. Effect: Partisan Unit Appears in Helsinki. Trigger: 1% Condition: Ireland Surrendered, No Units in Ireland and Irish Partisans Off. Popup: IRA seizes control of Dublin. Effect: Irish Partisan Unit appears in Dublin (Tile XX,YY) Note: In my opinion the chance for Irish partisans should be lower than the chance for partisans in countries like Yugoslavia or Russia. Trigger: 1% Condition: No Units in Egypt Popup: Egyptian Military Coup, Foreigners ordered to leave Egypt. Effect: Partisan Unit appears in Cairo [ June 22, 2004, 10:36 PM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]