AI Request - Axis Knows of Undefended UK

[Edwin P.]

A simple request, I think, in SC2 I would like the Axis AI to know if the UK is undefended and few surface ships are in the area and act on this information a percentage of the time if forces are not needed elsewhere.

Example: Human Allied player launches D-Day, all UK and USA forces are in France, while no forces have been kept in England besides a lone Bomber. The AI may, 50%, decide to act on this and conduct an amphibious invasion of England with 2 corps that it can spare. Then enusing threat may cause the Allied Human player to weaken his offensive in France, less the UK fall.

As for the Percentage chance for the AI to use this information: its 0% at Beginner AI, 75% at Intermediate AI and 90% at Expert AI.

Thus:

----- Is UK undefended?

--------At Beginner AI 0% AI knows this condition exists.

--------At Expert AI 90% AI knows this condition exisits.

------------Then it must decide what to do given that it knows this and its strategy.

------------------------------

In fact, relating a [%] to the AI level would allow one to easily configure the various AI's to consider specific scripted alternatives, thus making the AI smarter not just stronger at higher levels.

Example: For North Africa you might have a withdrawal script where the Allied AI would withdraw outnumbered units from Egypt via the Horn of Africa.

The Beginner AI would have a 0% to access this script and would never evacuate even it was outgunned.

The Intermediate AI would have a 75% to access this script.

The Expert AI would have a 90% to access this script and would evacuate at the last moment if it knew reinforcements were not going to arrive in time to change the tide of battle.

Thus the AI becomes smarter as the AI level increases.

[ July 05, 2005, 11:11 AM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

[Kuniworth]

Problem is amphibious is too easy in SC, I hope that will change to SC 2.

[Retributar]

Great ideas Edwin P.! ... and i also agree with Kuniworth about the Amphibious Landings being too-easy in SC1.

Some kind of an 'Organizational-Cost' (EG:Purchase Invasion Planning Unit 'ORG HQ'),...'Time-Cost' (Expend 3 to 9 months in waiting before and invasion can be launched! [MOBILIZING / Gathering the required Forces]...depending on the size of the invasion force) and of course...additional costs while waiting past the 3 to 9 month period for example...the weather to improve.

That's just my rough 'JIST on it,...now someone else can hone out the adjustments and the fine tuning.

For future invasions...a new 'ORG HQ' would be required for additional 'Amphibious Invasion Forces'...but, perhaps at less and less cost as they are re-created...in order to simulate INVASION PLANNING EXPERIENCE.

[Edwin P.]

I believe that in SC2;

Only the more expensive amphibious units can conduct invasions, normal transports must land at ports.

The longer a transport unit is at sea the weaker it becomes.

[Edwin P.]

Another complaint I have is that the German AI tends to build new units far from where they are needed. Then it needlessly spends MPPs to operate them elsewhere.

Example: In the Fall Blau campaign the AI continually build new units around Munich and then operated them elsewhere. Why not build units in Russia where they can be used to hold the line while also saving the cost of operating units to Russia.

[ July 06, 2005, 02:10 PM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

[hellraiser]

i have the feeling (in fact I HOPE) that new ideeas, suggestions are merely patch wish items at this stage

[Edwin P.]

AI Note: The AI in the Fall Blau campaign the AI always follows the same strategy, it would be more interesting if the AI would alter its strategy at times.

For example: It always operate 2 air unts west from Russia early in the game. Why not keep them in the East to aid the German assualt in Russia. Why not operate units guarding cities far behind the lines to Russia?

Perhaps a simple strategy selection such as;

50% Defense Strategy on Russian Front

50% Offense Stategy on Russian Front

Or perhaps breaking the game map into user definable strategic areas - aka Weather Zones - so that the AI can better function with user customized maps.

The AI can select a strategy to follow in each area.

Example:

Western Front - Offense/Defense/Minimal Garrison/Empty

Eastern Front - Offense/Defense/Minimal Garrison/Empty

Central Front - Offense/Defense/Minimal Garrison/Empty

Nordic Front - Offense/Defense/Minimal Garrison/Empty

Med Front - Offense/Defense/Minimal Garrison/Empty

Thus the AI might select a Offensive Strategy in the Eastern Front, a Defensive Strategy in the Western Front, and a Minimal Garrison Strategy in the Central Front.

It would track, via an internal counter, which combination of strategies had the most success over time.

With a minimal defensive strategy it would only garrison those cities that are critical to the defense of an area.

Example: With a minimal garrison strategy for Central EuropeThe AI would not garrison Munich or Budapest, but would garrison Berlin.

Example: With a mimimal garrison strategy for North Africa the AI would only garrison Tripoli and Tobruk while withdrawing excess units back to Europe.

Example: With a defensive strategy for North Africa the AI would maintain enough resources - ie 2 corps and a HQ unit(?) sufficient in size to halt any allied conquest, but not enough to defeat the allies in Egypt. Excess units would be withdrawn to Europe.

North Africa

1. Minimal Garrison - 2 Corps

2. Defensive Garrison - 2 Corps, 1 Army

3. Offensive Strategy - HQ, 3 Army, 3 Air Units, 3 Corps (to take Egypt and Beruit and Iraq).

4. Empty - Withdraw all units from North Africa

[ July 06, 2005, 04:24 PM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]