AI issues: Playing against the computer

[radcliffe]

I have wanted for some time to ask for advice about how to get the most out of playing one-on-one against the computer AI in CMBB. My problem is that I consistently beat the computer when playing as the defender (with the computer attacking or assaulting), or in meeting engagements, even when I give the opposing army experience points and a +25 handicap. To be more specific, in the former case all I have to do is dig in on the high ground (or occupy the top floors of buildings) with machine guns to bring attacking squads to a crawl. In the latter case, I pile my troops into trucks or halftracks and race to the victory locations at top speed, with plenty of time to take key positions for fire support, while the computer opponent advances slowly up the road taking his own sweet time. It would be great if there were a way to jack up the computer's aggressiveness so that it rammed home its attacks with a sense of urgency. Does anyone else see this problem in the game? And if so, are there any ways to go about playing the game to work around it? :confused:

[Doghouse Reily]

Try searching for Nippys QB rules.

Try that and I think you will get a challenge.

[Dave H]

Sounds to me like you're ready to graduate to playing against another person instead of the AI. Is there a particular reason why you're only interested in jazzing up the attacking AI instead of playing someone else? Once you try it, there's no going back.

[Cabron66]

Honestly, the AI is the AI. Depending on the steepness of the learning curve it shouldn't take the experienced wargamer too long to apply sound tactics and "beat the snot out of the punk ass computer", for lack of a more suitable expression.

Myself, I'm happy being the king of my own little universe (where I could be the best if I wanted to be), but if you're not the type to be satisfied with a hermetic, isolated existence barren of the joys of social activity (except for the virtual kind) you don't have many choices.

The first choice is crank up all the difficulties to insane levels, play and replay everything, save and resave every turn until you have 5 possible outcomes for any conceivable tactic, watch your forces get decimated time and time again waiting to find weaknesses in the AI that will let you do the impossible, develop an elaborate theory of the game's undeniable conflict with "real life" and become disenchanted with both, or waste away waiting to see what the AI will do when faced with new and exciting variables like sand and dust devils.

Another choice is to spend a lot of time sifting through the the mounds of loose scenarios piled high in websites looking for a "good challenge".

You could even become a playtester, write excellent reviews for Scenario Depot, hang around the forum, design your own scenarios, immerse yourself in other aspects of the game

or even write briefings for Rune (if you have a degree in Middle English, are able to recite Beowulf by heart and can read Aramaic fluently).

OR...you could play against another human being.

[MrSpkr]

Play as the defender, give the AI a point bonus, and let the computer pick all forces.

You'll have some fun, even if you still win. The real challenge is to see how lopsided you can make it.

Steve

[Pyewacket]

Where do I find Nippys QB rules ?

[Monty]

Here:

web page

Monty

[Jack Carr]

You mentioned a +25% bonus to the AI attacker. Ever try +50%? I play that way all the time. I pick my forces, attempting to be historically accurate and let the AI pick the attackers forces.

Because of the overwhelming numerical superiority that +50% gives the AI, more often that not, I have my hands full trying to stem the tide.

I like to play late 1944 as a German defender, armor vs armor. With a 1250 point start, I end up with something like this:

3 platoons of infantry with 3 heavy MG42's for support. I like to select trenches for my men.

1 or 2 Pak 75mm

1 or 2 Panzers (Panther, PZIVH, STUGIV, STUGIII, Hetzer, Marder III)

Light artillery support (81mm Mortar or 75mm howitzer. Usually spotters.)

1 or 2 tank hunter teams for recon.

The Soviet AI usually ends up with:

10 to 15 T-34/85, JS-2, SU-76 mix. Heavy emphasis on T-34/85.

3 to 5 times the number of infantry units I have.

Heavy artillery support

Plenty of supporting MG's

Plenty of tank hunting teams/anti-tank rifle teams

3 to 5 armored cars BA64 or M3A1

Sometimes a Sturmovik

I like to have a mix of regular and veteran troops and the attacker gets the same mix.

This is a hard battle. Place one of your PAK's in the wrong spot and your in trouble. Lose a panzer early in the battle and your in trouble. If a few Soviet infantry squads infiltrate into your perimiter early on and give your boys in the trenches a hard time, your in trouble. If a Russian tank successfully finds a spot to shell your trenches and you are unable to knock him out, drive him off or blind him with smoke, your in trouble.

Give it a shot sometime.

[Vergeltungswaffe]

The most fun and challenge to be had against the AI lies in playing by Franko's True Combat rules.

You can print out the map in one of the overhead views prior to setup, but once play begins, you are restricted to level 1 only, unless the unit getting orders is on the 2nd floor of a building, in which case, you can use level 2, or on the 2nd floor of a church, you may use level 3 to simulate being in the steeple.

You must use Tab and + or - to rotate through your units until you have given them all movement orders, covered arcs, etc. You may rotate the view from any unit to look all around them, but you may not look from a viewpoint other than the unit itself. You may never give them fire orders, the AI will handle that, and you may never click on an enemy unit. Some people use the n key to change targets if a unit is already firing.

It takes a lot of discipline not to cheat, but it makes for a rewarding experience when all you have time or circumstances for is a game against the AI. Attacking becomes very challenging, and defending against the AI can actually be worthwhile as long as the terrain isn't completely wide open to see everything coming.

The first time you try to figure out where a routed unit is, after it has gone into thick trees as you wonder which way to move them when they recover is priceless. Also, night and fog make things very tense and interesting.

Anyway, try it, you'll be amazed. Its best for commanding two companies or less, but it will work for anything if you have the patience.

[Scheer]

Dear radcliffe,

any halfway competent human will grill the AI after a short time. So I´d like to suggest to play ...

[ drumroll ]

humans.

They´re evil. Nothing compares to loosing a game against another human.

Winning is also cool.

[Firefly]

As with most computer wargames, the AI doesn't attack well, find a good attack scenario and let the computer defend with the set-up left to default. If you start winning those consistently then start increasing the AI's bonuses.

[Sgt Joch]

The AI is not a babbling idiot. It's not as good as a competent human player, but then again the AI is always ready to play when you are and will not mysteriously disappear from a PBEM game when it starts to lose or get bored. To get the most out of your AI opponent, you have to be aware of his/it's limitations and put him (or it) in a favorable position. These are my observations on improving the AI experience:

1. Find the right scenario - the AI performs better in a scenario which was specifically designed as player vs. AI. Usually, the designer notes will state that and which side you should play;

2. Use the default setup - the AI has problems deciding where to put his units, he/it is usually better off with the default setup;

3. Play as attacker - the AI is better at defence where it does not have to move much and only has to shoot at your units.

4. Make it easy for the attacking AI - The AI is better at attacking where it has obvious attack routes/numerical superiority.

For example, I just finished "Tovarishch Mysh" from the Stalingrad Pack and am now playing "Luga Gateway". Both scenarios were designed as player vs. AI scenarios and in both games, the AI is giving me competent, historically accurate gameplay which often keeps me on the edge of my seat and is fun! What more can you ask for :cool:

[JAT]

Try ROQC Campaign Rules. Latest rules are v.096. v.097 is in the works and makes setting up a game much easier as the Battle Sheet is now fully automated. You don't have to play the entire war, as you can just do an extension or short campaign. Very, very challenging. Excel spreadsheets is the way to go.

Here is where you can get it: http://www.roqc.cdgroup.org/

[radcliffe]

Wow, what a mine of great suggestions! Thanks a lot, everyone. My problem is that I travel a lot and don't have many opportunities to set up a head-to-head against a human opponent, so anything that muscles up the computer AI makes a huge difference to me. One thing I've found is that if you set up a battle with flat (or nearly flat) terrain and moderate to heavy tree cover, it takes your ability to set up decimating fire lanes at the start of the game out of play, and makes you a lot more susceptible to the "mass rush" of enemy assault forces when the AI finally gets them deployed.

A follow-up question: Does anyone know why rivers and bridges were left out of the Quick Battle setup options for CMBB? I would love to simulate a battle (like that at Arnhem) where the victory positions were on both sides of a humungous bridge, with each side present in force at one end, and an impassible river (with a couple of other available crossings upstream or downstream) in between.

[Seanachai]

Originally posted by radcliffe:

A follow-up question: Does anyone know why rivers and bridges were left out of the Quick Battle setup options for CMBB? I would love to simulate a battle (like that at Arnhem) where the victory positions were on both sides of a humungous bridge, with each side present in force at one end, and an impassible river (with a couple of other available crossings upstream or downstream) in between.

The QB generator doesn't do a good job with rivers and bridges. You get some extremely anomalous results. For this same reason you couldn't get QBs in CMBO that had bocage. So they simply didn't put them in as a possible 'terrain' feature that the engine would use when generating maps.

But you can have the QB engine generate you a random map, and then go in and edit it, placing your river and your bridge as you need them, and then bring them back into a QB, I believe.

[JasonC]

Try giving the AI truly gonzo odds, like +100%, as attacker or in MEs. Don't give it any experience bonuses. Be sure you don't give yourself any AFVs that can't be killed from the front by typical enemy ATGs (37mm-45mm in 1941, 75mm-76mm after that e.g.) Don't give yourself huge numbers of TRPs (1-2 are ok), or lots of wire (it doesn't get around it well).

It gets hard simply to make the ammo last to stop them. You can still win by giving it lumps and getting away, and if you use every weapon just right can stop all of them. But it is challenging. It also helps if the terrain gives the AI something to work with, if it has to attack. It is at its worst attacking across open steppe.

Humans are still much more fun and much tougher, naturally. But trying to "attack" in a meeting engagement against 2-1 is not easy.

[kunstler]

The AI is generally good on the defense, with a few caveats. It doesn't always use artillery very well. Sometimes it doesn't use it at all, sometimes it fires at nothing.

It's not as bang on as a human opponent, so rather than giving the AI lots of artillery, a little and air support will probably be more effective, especially if the map has lots of cover.

Flag set up matters a lot. The AI abandons positions to counter attack you if you take a flag, which means they generally shouldn't be placed far forward on the map. I tend to put only 1 or 2 flags on a map, close to the rear. Most positions are in front of the flags to avoid the AI counter-rush.

Scenarios are great with default set-ups, especially against fixed positions like pill boxes and bunkers, minefields and barb wire.

(AI Quick battle placement is often haphazard but it can still take a chunk out of you.)

On the attack, the AI leaves alot to be desired, but you can improve things for QBs. Use the +100 or even +200 bonus. Give the AI supertanks and/or take no tanks yourself and try and stop them with AT guns.

The AI infantry follow 'rivers' of cover from it's positions to yours. You can design a scenario map with trees behind a ridge winding towards you to give the AI troops cover while advancing. It will follow the tree route. It's terrible advancing infantry across open terrain and will do badly every time.

It also does better on wide fronts than deep maps, although you can't specify this in quick battles as in CMBO. On really deep maps, it seems to abandon position and advance if it has had no contact with your forces for several turns. (so it seems at any rate).

You can also channel AI troops using the flags. I've found the AI will go after one flag at a time, one after another. Once it takes a flag, it will move everything on, not leave an effective garrison. You often see AI troops in streams moving from flag to flag.

I've tried to make a few scenarios meant for single player AI attack with mediocre success. The map makes a huge difference for the AI (difference between mediocre and awful).

There are kick arse scenarios by very good players (with their setups) that can give you a heck of a run for your money.

cheers,

kunstler

[Andrew H.]

I play QB MEs a lot, type Armor, with the following parameters:

600 pts.

Armor.

Random date; Central

Axis quality High/Allied quality Med or Low (low is harder).

Both sides fit; maps random.

Computer picks.

This usually gives you about a platoon of infantry and a platoon of tanks, plus one or two armored cars, vs. 2-3 platoons of infantry and 5-15 tanks, varying wildly.

Sometimes these games are really nail-biters, as when you get 5 Pz II Fs to face off against something like 10 T-26s, and three T-34s.

You can switch sides and play Allied, too: I usually make the Allies Medium quality and play a 500 point game in that case, just to keep down the number of troops I have to command.

I really enjoy having the computer pick - but if you get something that you know you won't enjoy playing (i.e., 5 PzIIs in 3/43), just surrender and start again.

[von Lucke]

Originally posted by Andrew Hedges:

I play QB MEs a lot, type Armor, with the following parameters:

600 pts.

Armor.

Random date; Central

Axis quality High/Allied quality Med or Low (low is harder).

Both sides fit; maps random.

Computer picks.

This usually gives you about a platoon of infantry and a platoon of tanks, plus one or two armored cars, vs. 2-3 platoons of infantry and 5-15 tanks, varying wildly.

Sometimes these games are really nail-biters, as when you get 5 Pz II Fs to face off against something like 10 T-26s, and three T-34s.

You can switch sides and play Allied, too: I usually make the Allies Medium quality and play a 500 point game in that case, just to keep down the number of troops I have to command.

I really enjoy having the computer pick - but if you get something that you know you won't enjoy playing (i.e., 5 PzIIs in 3/43), just surrender and start again.

Amazingly enough, these are almost exactly the parameters I use when QB against the AI!

I agree, these lend themselves to a rather enjoyable match-up: Fairly well balanced, small enough forces to be managable, but with enough variety to keep it interesting --- at 600 pts, you sometimes even get a little off-board arty thrown in.

I usually go for Region All Combined, a large or medium map, Village, Moderate Trees, Modest Hills, Light Damage.

What do you say Andrew --- we should do a little PBEM, eh?

[Louie the Toad]

A second vote for Franko's Rules. Follow what was said above by Vergeltungswaffe.

You will most likely lose to the AI. Don't cheat by going above level 3 (church steeples only). Ok to use level 5 but ONLY for the tight spaces type of moves in houses and behind walls. No scrolling at this level. Fight a small battle first. Be the attacker as was stated by many.

Really, I mean it, you will probably lose.

Get in the dirt........... Toad