AI Comments

[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. ]

[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. ]

[Hubert Cater]

Originally posted by Edwin P.:

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.

Yes, the trick is that the AI WILL perform better if it knows how many units you have... problem is under FoW it is really not much better off than you without it "cheating" or knowing some extra info. This is why one proposal for SC2 is to give the AI the option to play it's side without FoW. Will it make the AI world class? Will everyone settle think this is a good compromose? Probably not, but it will at least in the worst case scenario add some variety in terms of options and overal gameplay when playing the AI

[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. ]

[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. ]

[Edwin P.]

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. ]

[Exel]

Making the AI play without FOW would totally destroy any chance for even tactical scale surprise moves by the human player. The war would be degraded into a simple set-piece battle, though one-sided as such.

[Roosevelt45(the 2nd)]

It would be a nice challenge. I can imagine it's very hard to play against an all-knowing AI.

P.S.: I hate being a junior again. I don't know why but the feeling of it really pisses me off :mad: .

[ June 24, 2004, 05:24 AM: Message edited by: Roosevelt45(the 2nd) ]