New AI...Good Lord.

[Veers]

korea 50-51 End of Turn 3, Old AI:
http://img237.imageshack.us/img237/3458/korea5051old5ku.jpg

Korea 50-51 End of Turn 3, New AI:
http://img280.imageshack.us/img280/7191/korea50512qq.jpg

As you can see Seoul is near the middle of the Old AI pic, and almost out of view at the top in the new AI pick...
God help us all. :shock:

And, Kudos to Ralph? and any others who made this demon of an AI.

[Arthur Currie]

Played a few rounds of CFNA, and was slaughtered at Gazala!!! It was as if Rommel himself was commanding the axis. This is going to take some getting used to.
:nuts:

[Veers]

It sure is. I think that for the first time ever the Ai is goign to beat me...:cry:

[Menschenfresser]

That looks damned nasty! I'm looking forward to firing up some old PO favorites.

[Arthur Currie]

Well, I'm not much of a general, but I used to do fairly well against ACOW PO. So far, at least when it attacks, I'm doing very badly against TOAW3 PO.
:rolleyes:

[Veers]

This is the first time I have ever played the AI in Korea and it has looked anything like what really happened.

http://img193.imageshack.us/img193/1962/korea5051end61hz.jpg

With such a thin RoK line in the west, it is likely that they will breakthrough and I'll only retain that small pocket that was historically retained, before, of course, I land at In'chon. :devious:

EDIT:
And the only reason that line in the west even had time to form up is because the Commies were busy eating up the few regiments I had left north of there.

[Okimaw]

This is the first time I have ever played the AI in Korea and it has looked anything like what really happened.
With such a thin RoK line in the west, it is likely that they will breakthrough and I'll only retain that small pocket that was historically retained, before, of course, I land at In'chon. :devious:

EDIT:
And the only reason that line in the west even had time to form up is because the Commies were busy eating up the few regiments I had left north of there.
It looks to me as though Elmo has gone rogue :ar15: Did we ask for and get a moster here> :nuts:

[L`zard]

As I play entirely against the PO, all I can say is....

OUTSTANDING!!!

and that I can't wait to get the cd ver next week!

Looks like an excellent training tool for all the sp players and fng's, eh?

Hope it rains alot, I'm gonna need some sort of excuse for not leaving the 'puter, lol!

[liuzg150181]

When the TOAW III developers announce they have boost up the AI,you know they arent joking~~~:freak:
btw,you can adjust both the AI and handicap options seperately using the advanced rules options.

[Veers]

btw,you can adjust both the AI and handicap options seperately using the advanced rules options.

Yes, I know, but I could never bring myself to play the AI on anythign but strong with anything but even handicap.

[liuzg150181]

Yes, I know, but I could never bring myself to play the AI on anythign but strong with anything but even handicap.
Same for me,oh my ego......:D

[Secadegas]

From my side i can report that PO is much more agressive.

I don't know if it will be enough to deafeat humans (at least in balanced scenarios) but i think you can get a better fight now :yummy:

[Karri]

Well, I have to wait until I get my hands on the game. but until then I have my doubts. If I recall correctly, the AI receives some sort of bonuses(even if not set so in)...? Anyways, good if it's more agressive, but there's always ways to balance that(ie, finding the stupid things AI does and taking advatnage of that).

[Secadegas]

From my side i can report that PO is much more agressive.

I don't know if it will be enough to deafeat humans (at least in balanced scenarios) but i think you can get a better fight now :yummy:

I can see the AI/PO is (a bit) less stupid.
As an example now it retreats once we try to surround it and that's an improvement.

But with none handicap selected (and strong intelligence) the battle results are somewhat strange... most of the "human" units while attacking go to reorganizing status if the attack is not successful. And they stay like that for 1 or more turns (which is normal).
What isn't normal is to have most of your OOB reorganizing (units not formations) without having the chance to move or attack... :angry: more if you have a positive shock (as it is the case..)

I think the PO battle results were boosted in TOAW 3 and that's fine but probably it was too much just because it can generate awkard situations.

[ralphtrickey]

I can see the AI/PO is (a bit) less stupid.
As an example now it retreats once we try to surround it and that's an improvement.

But with none handicap selected (and strong intelligence) the battle results are somewhat strange... most of the "human" units while attacking go to reorganizing status if the attack is not successful. And they stay like that for 1 or more turns (which is normal).
What isn't normal is to have most of your OOB reorganizing (units not formations) without having the chance to move or attack... :angry: more if you have a positive shock (as it is the case..)

I think the PO battle results were boosted in TOAW 3 and that's fine but probably it was too much just because it can generate awkard situations.
There was no change between COW and TOAW III for the battle results. The PO does have some slight advantages, but nothing really major.

I think that you're mainly hitting up against the more aggressive PO.

Ralph Trickey
TOAW III Programmer

[Secadegas]

There was no change between COW and TOAW III for the battle results. The PO does have some slight advantages, but nothing really major.

I think that you're mainly hitting up against the more aggressive PO.

Ralph Trickey
TOAW III Programmer

OK... if you say so...

But i don't have my units reorganizing by beenig hit by the PO. When I attack the results of combat are making my most units reorganize... and that´s nothing to due with PO aggressiveness but with battle results effects.

[Double Deuce]

There was no change between COW and TOAW III for the battle results. The PO does have some slight advantages, but nothing really major.

I think that you're mainly hitting up against the more aggressive PO.

Ralph Trickey
TOAW III ProgrammerWhy should we believe anything coming from a guy with the last name "Trickey". :laugh:

I am budgeted for a new game for this coming Father's Day. Jury is still out on the decision but this one is in the top 5 to get list ATM.

[ralphtrickey]

Why should we believe anything coming from a guy with the last name "Trickey". :laugh:

I am budgeted for a new game for this coming Father's Day. Jury is still out on the decision but this one is in the top 5 to get list ATM.
Hey, if you can't trust a Trickey, who can you trust. :bandit:

Actually, it looks like I was partly wrong. The PO does have a slight advantage in quality checks, which determine reorganizing. You can set a human advantage to eliminate these. He doesn't have any strength bonuses though, which is what I was thinking of, so combat losses should be the same. I'll evaluate feedback, and look at getting rid of the advantages as the AI improves.

This was a legacy thing, it was on my list of things to look at, but it seemd a bit too much hubris to simply yank the PO advantages without making sure that the new PO was actually better.:-) The Beta testers are too good to honestly evaluate the AI against mere mortals like us.

Ralph

[JMS]

Hey, if you can't trust a Trickey, who can you trust. :bandit:

Actually, it looks like I was partly wrong. The PO does have a slight advantage in quality checks, which determine reorganizing. You can set a human advantage to eliminate these. He doesn't have any strength bonuses though, which is what I was thinking of, so combat losses should be the same. I'll evaluate feedback, and look at getting rid of the advantages as the AI improves.

This was a legacy thing, it was on my list of things to look at, but it seemd a bit too much hubris to simply yank the PO advantages without making sure that the new PO was actually better.:-) The Beta testers are too good to honestly evaluate the AI against mere mortals like us.

Ralph

The way to wisdom is cobbled with the hard stones of defeat in the hands of Elmer...

I have tried the one scenario that I have where the PO should shine, and the bastard does shine. I am able to stop it but barely. I´ll bring it up to scratch and release it this summer.

[Secadegas]

The PO does have a slight advantage in quality checks, which determine reorganizing. You can set a human advantage to eliminate these.

No way... i like it difficult :bite:

[ralphtrickey]

No way... i like it difficult :bite:
Stick around. It will take a while, but I hope to make it very challenging. I'm also thinking that some of the designers may revise their scenarios for PO play, now that Elmer is more competent. WIth the multiple PO tracks, I'm thinking that it should be possible to make a very fun and challenging scenario.

AI design is one area that's always fascinated me, so I really want to see what I can do with TOAW III.

Ralph

[ralphtrickey]

No way... i like it difficult :bite:
It looks like the increased chances or re-organization were done by the mythical COW 1.06 patch anyway, so I hope that you like them. :laugh:

I kind of lost track of that in answering about the PO. :blab:

For those people that don't follow TOAW, my understanding is that Norm Koger actually had created a 1.06 patch that had several improvements to the combat engine, but wasn't allowed to release it. These changes are included in TOAW III.

[Secadegas]

It looks like the increased chances or re-organization were done by the mythical COW 1.06 patch anyway, so I hope that you like them. :laugh:

I played Arracourt 44 as a test (hot-seatted) and i'm finding the same re-organization problem as when playing against PO... if it's the same (as it look like) with PBEM you'll face a lot of claims...
After making some attacks it isn't reasonable to have most of attacking units in reorganizing status (and God knows when they'll be ready again) :crosseye:

I'm imagining playing EA as the germans and having more than half of the OOB reorganizing (at EA scale - during weeks...) :nuts:

Ralph... i'm not a newcomer to the game. I already spend a lot of hours (too much??) playing TOAW, WOTY & COW (never installed COW 1.06 patch), hot seat, PO and PBEM. IMO something isn't right about this behavior. That's the reason i'm insisting on this matter...

Please ask someone experienced with the game to run some tests.

I be happy to know i'm wrong :hush:

[ralphtrickey]

I played Arracourt 44 as a test (hot-seatted) and i'm finding the same re-organization problem as when playing against PO... if it's the same (as it look like) with PBEM you'll face a lot of claims...
After making some attacks it isn't reasonable to have most of attacking units in reorganizing status (and God knows when they'll be ready again) :crosseye:

I'm imagining playing EA as the germans and having more than half of the OOB reorganizing (at EA scale - during weeks...) :nuts:

Ralph... i'm not a newcomer to the game. I already spend a lot of hours (too much??) playing TOAW, WOTY & COW (never installed COW 1.06 patch), hot seat, PO and PBEM. IMO something isn't right about this behavior. That's the reason i'm insisting on this matter...

Please ask someone experienced with the game to run some tests.

I be happy to know i'm wrong :hush:
The consensus is that it is different from COW. It's a subtle change and it's going to take a while for people to figure out whether they like it or not. I've seen some speculation that it helps to stop the 'ant' attacks.

[Secadegas]

I've seen some speculation that it helps to stop the 'ant' attacks.

That might be true

[a white rabbit]

..no complaints here about Elmer, apart from getting a good kicking at Imphal, the shame of it...

..maybe i'l just stick to human/human play

[ralphtrickey]

..no complaints here about Elmer, apart from getting a good kicking at Imphal, the shame of it...

..maybe i'l just stick to human/human play
But everyone keeps saying that they want challenging AI....

I'm really waiting to see what the designers come up with.

[Veers]

We're all extatic that you upped the AI, Ralph, its great. If we have trouble we can just tone him down to moderate. :)

[ralphtrickey]

We're all extatic that you upped the AI, Ralph, its great. If we have trouble we can just tone him down to moderate. :)
You're probably better off giving a human advantage. Putting him to moderate cuts his intelligence pretty drastically.

If you're still loosing at +2 human advantage, you need to seek some advice:crosseye:

[a white rabbit]

But everyone keeps saying that they want challenging AI....

I'm really waiting to see what the designers come up with.

..mmmm, given his skill in a pre-Elmer scen...

..2 suggested Elmer tweaks tho, not using unaccompanied bombers against fighter occupied airfields,
..and a memory, say past two turns against which he can make a current move assessement

[ralphtrickey]

..mmmm, given his skill in a pre-Elmer scen...

..2 suggested Elmer tweaks tho, not using unaccompanied bombers against fighter occupied airfields,
..and a memory, say past two turns against which he can make a current move assessement
Thanks. Ensuring fighter cover should be fairly easy.
The move assessment piece is pretty difficult. He can't even reliably assess his current situation yet.

[Brevet]

I just drew against Elmer in Jam's Annonymous Heroics scenario. My goal was to not use any of the TO's, but I chickened out and brought in the armored division on the last turn to keep from losing. Well played Elmer! :TRUCE:

[ralphtrickey]

I just drew against Elmer in Jam's Annonymous Heroics scenario. My goal was to not use any of the TO's, but I chickened out and brought in the armored division on the last turn to keep from losing. Well played Elmer! :TRUCE:
Thanks. I'll have to see about giving him a raise:D