jshandorf Posted October 18, 2000 Share Posted October 18, 2000 Hey, BTS. I was just wondering if when you use computer selection of units in a QB that the computer uses the same thinking when selecting its units in a single player game. If that is so then that logic DEFINITELY needs some improvement. It seems that the computer hardly EVER buys AT units. I have had a few QBs now where I let the computer pick my units and I have ATMOST gotten 1 Panzerschreck, no AT-Guns, and maybe 1 tank if I am lucky. What is up with that? You would think that if the computer doesn't buy armor it should at least buy a few AT units and AT-Guns. It only makes sense to me. It is no wonder that the computer loses so handidly to human opponents. Jeff [This message has been edited by jshandorf (edited 10-18-2000).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Viceroy Posted October 18, 2000 Share Posted October 18, 2000 Jeff, how many points does the AI have available? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jshandorf Posted October 18, 2000 Author Share Posted October 18, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Viceroy: Jeff, how many points does the AI have available? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I have noticed this problem most often when I play a game of 1500 points, but even when I am attacking which means I get 2250 points. It just seems like Panzerschrecks are last on the list when the computer selects units and because of this you usually get short changed. Jeff Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Croda Posted October 18, 2000 Share Posted October 18, 2000 well Jeff, let me add this. In a QB I recently set up, I was set as the Axis, and in a defensive role. I used auto-select because I didn't feel like picking my units. The AI selected me roughly 2 large AT guns, 6 anti-inf guns, and 2 20mm flak cannons, as well as 2 panzerschrecks. I was pleased with this selection. Now, I don't know what criteria or OOB the AI uses to select it's units, but it done well in this case, though I have seen other instances where I shook my head quite a bit. ------------------ "Nuts!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jshandorf Posted October 18, 2000 Author Share Posted October 18, 2000 I agree. It doesn't screw up ALL the time but it does enough, to varying degrees, where you just have to wonder what is up with the unit selection logic. I have noticed the computer almost always buys a good chunk of arty, it doesn't have a problem with giving you enough infantry to get the job done. It is just the support units I feel the computer screws up on. Jeff Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrapGame Posted October 18, 2000 Share Posted October 18, 2000 Jeff, I used to think the same thing. I say "used to" because Monday night I decided to play a 500 point "Armored" qb with me as the allies and the AI as Axis. April 45, small map, day, overcast, small hills, moderate trees with Axis as attacker and computer force selection for the Axis. I picked a sherman 76, two M8 HMCs, a bazooka, 2 .30 cals, a mortar and 1 platoon of infantry. When I saw what I was facing, I couldn't believe it. The computer had picked: two JpzIV 70's, two mkIVH's, one hetzer, a 250/8 halftrack, and a StuGIIIG. They killed my forces so fast, I never got to see if there was any infantry in the axis force. My bazooka KO'd the StuGIII, the JPZ's killed my Sherman and the m8's, and then the PZIV's stood off and decimated my hidden infantry. I couldn't believe it. It still seems to me that they had way more points than an attack scenario would give. Never again will I assume that the AI will have a low-AT capability infantry heavy force. ------------------ CrapGame Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jshandorf Posted October 18, 2000 Author Share Posted October 18, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by CrapGame: Jeff, I used to think the same thing. I say "used to" because Monday night I decided to play a 500 point "Armored" qb with me as the allies and the AI as Axis. April 45, small map, day, overcast, small hills, moderate trees with Axis as attacker and computer force selection for the Axis. I picked a sherman 76, two M8 HMCs, a bazooka, 2 .30 cals, a mortar and 1 platoon of infantry. When I saw what I was facing, I couldn't believe it. The computer had picked: two JpzIV 70's, two mkIVH's, one hetzer, a 250/8 halftrack, and a StuGIIIG. They killed my forces so fast, I never got to see if there was any infantry in the axis force. My bazooka KO'd the StuGIII, the JPZ's killed my Sherman and the m8's, and then the PZIV's stood off and decimated my hidden infantry. I couldn't believe it. It still seems to me that they had way more points than an attack scenario would give. Never again will I assume that the AI will have a low-AT capability infantry heavy force. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I think this wierd selection logic only really happens when you do a combined arms QB. You selected "Armored" and therefore the computer went armored. Jeff Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrapGame Posted October 18, 2000 Share Posted October 18, 2000 Jeff, You might be right, but I would have put money on that not happening to me in armored battles before. I have noticed the unusual penchant for the computer to pick roadblocks and minefields. But, anyway, on the bright side, I learned a little bit about what not to do when faced with an overwhelming enemy armored force. ------------------ CrapGame Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Olle Petersson Posted October 19, 2000 Share Posted October 19, 2000 Well I've seen a few odd selections too, especially for an "armoured" force; - Allied with 2 full rifle companies, an engineer platoon, a couple of halftracks and scout cars, a few arty spotters... Oh almost forgot the armoured part: Two (2) regular Shermans! - Axis all armoured crack force. KT, 2 Hetzers, Panther, StuGIII. Cheers Olle Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikeadams Posted October 19, 2000 Share Posted October 19, 2000 Whether the results are intentional from BTS or not, I realy don't have a problem with the computer picks. My thought is that in 'real' life a commander can't choose which forces will be at his disposal. In the game I know this is a battle with certain characteristics in terms of the opponent, terrain and weather, so I can artificially give myself an advantage my hand-picking units (i.e. mortatrs are not much use at night since by the time you can see the enemy he is closer than the minimum range). In reality you have to make do with what you have: if that means facing armor with no long-range AT, then you have to deal with it. I actually find this makes for a more interesting challenge Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrapGame Posted October 19, 2000 Share Posted October 19, 2000 mikeadams said: <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Whether the results are intentional from BTS or not, I realy don't have a problem with the computer picks. My thought is that in 'real' life a commander can't choose which forces will be at his disposal. In the game I know this is a battle with certain characteristics in terms of the opponent, terrain and weather, so I can artificially give myself an advantage my hand-picking units (i.e. mortatrs are not much use at night since by the time you can see the enemy he is closer than the minimum range). In reality you have to make do with what you have: if that means facing armor with no long-range AT, then you have to deal with it. I actually find this makes for a more interesting challenge<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I agree completely. Last night I played a 1500 pt qb meeting engagement against the AI, both combined arms. I was axis, and for a change of pace (as I usually like a Panther or two) used up my armor points on three PzIVJ's. Boy was I surprised as I stumbled into a Challenger, a Daimler AC, and two Churchill VIII's that WOULD NOT DIE! I really think the randomness adds to the appeal of CM as you really can't rely on the same old strategy for every time you fire it up. I really enjoy that aspect. ------------------ CrapGame Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Triggerhappy Posted October 19, 2000 Share Posted October 19, 2000 I have to agree with Jeff that the AI's selections are often strange to say at least. When I select "Armor" for the AI general I don't want to see him coming along with a few halftracks, one tank and tons of infantry units which won't stand a chance against my hand picked elite tanks. Of course I also understand Mike Adam's arguments. It's much more fun when you don't know what you're up to and have to complete your mission with the less than perfect equipment the computer chose for you. Maybe BTS could implement two different AI behaviours in CM2? One that selects its units in a realistic manner (that means also buying an obviously useless jeep platoon in an armor vs. armor engagement) and one that buys the "best" units available (whatever "best" means depends mainly on your enemies force and your mission). ------------------ laid to rest alive waiting in a shallow grave mines have learned patience - Kurtz Rührt euch! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jshandorf Posted October 19, 2000 Author Share Posted October 19, 2000 I am not at all bother by the "weird" selections. It is when the computer selects like an idiot. For instance in one 1500 point battle I had at my disposal no less then 5 arty spotters but my only AT was a STuGIII and one panzerschreck. All I am saying is that it seems you hardly ever get panzerschrecks when you play the Germans. It seems they are at the bottom of the list and by the time the computer get to picking them it has run out of points. Jeff Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest kking199 Posted October 19, 2000 Share Posted October 19, 2000 My $.02... It seems that designed randomness is the answer here, and I like that. My experience in battle is a great deal of randomess occurs, lucky shot versus I can't hit a thing today and so on. Hmm.. sounds like reality to me, and it makes CM more fun and more realistic. It appears to me this same logic is applied to QBs, make it random. Also, by doing this it makes the QBs unpredictable, which makes them more challenging, interesting, and should mean you play CM for a longer period of time. Just my thoughts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Callmeyer Posted October 20, 2000 Share Posted October 20, 2000 Too Many Halftracks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts